Peakoverload
Established Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2003
- Messages
- 927
- Reaction score
- 198
- Points
- 210
I found out the other day that I have been paying FAR too much tax for the past 5 years and am due a large tax rebate The majority of it is going to go on things for the house, maybe a new bathroom, but I also want to treat myself to a new 'toy' but not sure which to go for.
I currently have:
Canon 17-40 f/4 L
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L
Canon 2x TC
The kind of photography I do I suppose can best be described as anything and everything with City Landscapes, portraits, wildlife being my main subjects. What I would like to do is to either buy a new lens that will improve the gear I already have or buy a new lens that will allow me to take photographs I perhaps wouldnt be able to take as well with my existing kit.
The choices are:
Canon 300mm f/4 IS L USM
Reason For Buying:
I love my 70-200 f/2.8 but for some wildlife stuff 200mm isnt enough.
I'm thinking of building some things to attract the birds in our garden to get some birdie shots for which the 300mm would be superb
It has IS. My 70-200 doesnt have IS and there are times that I miss it.
Reason Not To Buy It:
I have a 2x TC which I use on the 70-200 to give me 140-400 with AF. If I use the 2x TC on the 300mm it will give me 600mm but will it still auto focus?
It's not that heavy but it is a big lens so it's not going to be a lens I lug around all the time and would restrict it's use to only wildlife/zoo days (plus any day where I know I will need a long reach) so it may spend a lot of time in the bag without seeing the light of day.
Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L USM
Reason For Buying:
I already have the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 and really like the lens and it has become my 'everyday lens'. However I'm not that big a fan of the zoom on the sigma which isnt anywhere near as smooth as on the Canon.
The AF on the Sigma is generally very good but it can get a little confused at times which is a bit annoying.
I would sell the Sigma to part fund the Canon which would mean I wouldnt have to spend as much.
Reason Not To Buy:
I already have the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM
Reason To Buy:
I already have the non IS version which I adore but there are times I miss not having IS
I would sell my non IS version to part fund it so it wouldnt cost as much
The non IS version is by far the best lens I have ever used so adding IS to it will just make it even better
Reason Not To Buy:
I already have the non IS version
The IS adds more weight to the lens
Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM
Reason To Buy:
This will give an equivalent of 50mm on my camera so a great everyday lens.
It will force me to use my feet rather than the zoom to get close to my subject
It's bloody sharp
It's f/1.4!
Reason Not To Buy:
I already own a 24-70 f/2.8 so have the 30mm focal range covered
How often am I really going to need f/1.4 considering the limited dof it will give
Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8 1-5x
Reason To Buy:
It's the dogs bo11ocks when it comes to Macro
My Sigma only gives me 1:1.5 magnification, this lens can give me 5x magnification!!
Reason Not To Buy:
It's an absolute sod of a lens to use well and may also require the purchase of other equipment like macro flash that will push the budget up quite a bit
How often am I really likely to use it? This isnt a lens you can really take with you into the field to do macro, instead you bring the field to your studio.
I'm never going to REALLY get into Macro so it will just be something I dabble at now and again. There again with this lens maybe I would?
Canon EF100mm f2.8 USM Macro
Reason To Buy:
My sigma only gives me 1:1.5 magnification whereas the Canon will give me 1:1
At 100mm I won't have to get as close to my subject as I do with the Sigma
The Canon is considered to be one of the best Macro lenses on the market.
Reason Not To Buy:
I would only use this lens for macro work so as such I either have to plan on doing macro photography on a day out, which I currently don't do, or it means lugging yet another lens around on the off chance that I might see something I want to use it for.
I don't do a lot of Macro work anyway but that's partly because I'm not that happy with the Sigma for macro work.
I'm never going to REALLY get into Macro so it will just be something I dabble at now and again.
Tamron AF 180mm f3.5 Di 1:1 Macro
Reason To Buy:
My sigma only gives me 1:1.5 magnification whereas the Tamron will give me 1:1
At 180mm I won't have to get as close to my subject as I do with the Sigma or as close as I would with the Canon
Reason Not To Buy:
I would only use this lens for macro work as such I either have to plan on doing macro photography on a day out, which I currently don't do, or it means lugging yet another lens around on the off chance that I might see something I want to use it for.
I don't do a lot of Macro work anyway but that's partly because I'm not that happy with the Sigma for macro work.
I'm never going to REALLY get into Macro so it will just be something I dabble at now and again.
Now for a complete curve ball!
Canon 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 L IS USM
Reason To Buy:
One of things that really irritates me is that I constantly have to change lenses or I have to lug two cameras with me. This lens would mean I could sell the 24-70 and 70-200 to part fund it.
It goes to 300mm, 100mm more than I currently can
It would mean a lot less gear to lug around with me which could be good for the old bad back
Reason Not To Buy:
It would mean selling my beloved 70-200 f/2.8
It's not f/2.8 straight through and is f/5.6 at the long end that said there haven't been many times I've needed f/2.8 at 200mm due to the limited dof
I probably couldnt use it with my 2x TC and even if I could it wouldnt auto focus
It's a heavy lens but the IS will help with that to a certain extent.
In my home studio I use my 24-70 and sometimes I need the 24mm which I would loose with this lens. I do also have a 17-40 which I could use in these situations but it would mean changing lenses (or have two cameras set-up)
Decisions, Decisions. Like I say I don't NEED any of them but would like to buy myself a new toy. Which would you go for
I currently have:
Canon 17-40 f/4 L
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L
Canon 2x TC
The kind of photography I do I suppose can best be described as anything and everything with City Landscapes, portraits, wildlife being my main subjects. What I would like to do is to either buy a new lens that will improve the gear I already have or buy a new lens that will allow me to take photographs I perhaps wouldnt be able to take as well with my existing kit.
The choices are:
Canon 300mm f/4 IS L USM
Reason For Buying:
I love my 70-200 f/2.8 but for some wildlife stuff 200mm isnt enough.
I'm thinking of building some things to attract the birds in our garden to get some birdie shots for which the 300mm would be superb
It has IS. My 70-200 doesnt have IS and there are times that I miss it.
Reason Not To Buy It:
I have a 2x TC which I use on the 70-200 to give me 140-400 with AF. If I use the 2x TC on the 300mm it will give me 600mm but will it still auto focus?
It's not that heavy but it is a big lens so it's not going to be a lens I lug around all the time and would restrict it's use to only wildlife/zoo days (plus any day where I know I will need a long reach) so it may spend a lot of time in the bag without seeing the light of day.
Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L USM
Reason For Buying:
I already have the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 and really like the lens and it has become my 'everyday lens'. However I'm not that big a fan of the zoom on the sigma which isnt anywhere near as smooth as on the Canon.
The AF on the Sigma is generally very good but it can get a little confused at times which is a bit annoying.
I would sell the Sigma to part fund the Canon which would mean I wouldnt have to spend as much.
Reason Not To Buy:
I already have the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM
Reason To Buy:
I already have the non IS version which I adore but there are times I miss not having IS
I would sell my non IS version to part fund it so it wouldnt cost as much
The non IS version is by far the best lens I have ever used so adding IS to it will just make it even better
Reason Not To Buy:
I already have the non IS version
The IS adds more weight to the lens
Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM
Reason To Buy:
This will give an equivalent of 50mm on my camera so a great everyday lens.
It will force me to use my feet rather than the zoom to get close to my subject
It's bloody sharp
It's f/1.4!
Reason Not To Buy:
I already own a 24-70 f/2.8 so have the 30mm focal range covered
How often am I really going to need f/1.4 considering the limited dof it will give
Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8 1-5x
Reason To Buy:
It's the dogs bo11ocks when it comes to Macro
My Sigma only gives me 1:1.5 magnification, this lens can give me 5x magnification!!
Reason Not To Buy:
It's an absolute sod of a lens to use well and may also require the purchase of other equipment like macro flash that will push the budget up quite a bit
How often am I really likely to use it? This isnt a lens you can really take with you into the field to do macro, instead you bring the field to your studio.
I'm never going to REALLY get into Macro so it will just be something I dabble at now and again. There again with this lens maybe I would?
Canon EF100mm f2.8 USM Macro
Reason To Buy:
My sigma only gives me 1:1.5 magnification whereas the Canon will give me 1:1
At 100mm I won't have to get as close to my subject as I do with the Sigma
The Canon is considered to be one of the best Macro lenses on the market.
Reason Not To Buy:
I would only use this lens for macro work so as such I either have to plan on doing macro photography on a day out, which I currently don't do, or it means lugging yet another lens around on the off chance that I might see something I want to use it for.
I don't do a lot of Macro work anyway but that's partly because I'm not that happy with the Sigma for macro work.
I'm never going to REALLY get into Macro so it will just be something I dabble at now and again.
Tamron AF 180mm f3.5 Di 1:1 Macro
Reason To Buy:
My sigma only gives me 1:1.5 magnification whereas the Tamron will give me 1:1
At 180mm I won't have to get as close to my subject as I do with the Sigma or as close as I would with the Canon
Reason Not To Buy:
I would only use this lens for macro work as such I either have to plan on doing macro photography on a day out, which I currently don't do, or it means lugging yet another lens around on the off chance that I might see something I want to use it for.
I don't do a lot of Macro work anyway but that's partly because I'm not that happy with the Sigma for macro work.
I'm never going to REALLY get into Macro so it will just be something I dabble at now and again.
Now for a complete curve ball!
Canon 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 L IS USM
Reason To Buy:
One of things that really irritates me is that I constantly have to change lenses or I have to lug two cameras with me. This lens would mean I could sell the 24-70 and 70-200 to part fund it.
It goes to 300mm, 100mm more than I currently can
It would mean a lot less gear to lug around with me which could be good for the old bad back
Reason Not To Buy:
It would mean selling my beloved 70-200 f/2.8
It's not f/2.8 straight through and is f/5.6 at the long end that said there haven't been many times I've needed f/2.8 at 200mm due to the limited dof
I probably couldnt use it with my 2x TC and even if I could it wouldnt auto focus
It's a heavy lens but the IS will help with that to a certain extent.
In my home studio I use my 24-70 and sometimes I need the 24mm which I would loose with this lens. I do also have a 17-40 which I could use in these situations but it would mean changing lenses (or have two cameras set-up)
Decisions, Decisions. Like I say I don't NEED any of them but would like to buy myself a new toy. Which would you go for