EF Holy Trinity

Moly

TPF Noob!
Joined
May 13, 2016
Messages
26
Reaction score
4
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
I'm guessing but for most Canon users the three must haves / wish I had lenses are:

16-35 IS L f/4 OR f/2.8
24-105 IS L f/4
70-200 IS L f/4 OR f2.8

While you can add in the odd prime or macro lens to supplement, these probably would cover 95% of all situations most of us would encounter.

My question is, based purely on image quality, is there anything in the Sigma, Tamron etc stables that could muscle in for full frame users?
 
I think of a trinity as being f2.8. Flexibility of aperture is just as important as zoom.

Sigma 24-105 f4 OS

Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC

Tamron 15-30 VC

Tamron 24-70 VC
 
Last edited:
holy trinities are a kind of internet marketing myth/traffic harvestor for search engine results. The classic ones tend to mostly be aimed at people photographers and thus tend to be all zooms with 200mm as the longest and don't tend to do anything specific .

In general its a nice idea to write a blog page about but in practical terms is a very limiteed buying concept. Instead you should identify what your limits are within your system then go out and find out what might fit your budget and your needs from the various companies.

3rd party can make some very good glass; heck the Sigma 50mm f1.4 is better than the Canon 50mm f1.4 L (partly because the sigma is far newer).

So lets identify your needs first and go from there
 
I don't think as many modern fullframe users need the f2.8 lenses as in the past. Low light ability and focussing ability have made them less vital.

As for canon fullframes, I think the kit 24-105L is excellent, others vary but I had it and liked it. If I was to add a wide to that the Tamron 15-30f2.8 vc looks nice, but I have seen really nice shots from the Tokina 16-28f2.8 and it's relatively inexpensive. You'll travel long and hard to beat canons own 70-200mm f4 L lenses (both IS and non-IS), they are superb, and again relatively cheap when compared to the big 2.8 brothers
 
The typical "Holy Trinity" in Canon lenses is:

16-35 f2.8
24-70 f2.8
20-200 f2.8

The poor mans version is with f4 glass.

As for primes, I prefer top quality primes as they are inheriantly sharper that zooms, even the above mentioned zooms.

Primes for the best quality. Zooms for convenience.
 
Gotta go with Overread on this one. I don't own a "Holy Trinity", more of a dyanmic duo. A tamron 28-75mm F2.8 and a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 with both a 1.4x and 2x teleconverter.

The 28-75 covers most of the wider focal lengths I want covered, the Sigma can go out to 200 mm at 2.8, add in the 1.4 and I've got 280mm at F4 and with the 2x 400mm at F5.6

Makes for an incredibly versatile setup and on the upside it didn't cost me my first born. So like Overread I wouldn't worry so much about having the "right" lenses according to some internet blog. I'd focus more on which lenses are right for you and what you shoot most often.
 
Some of the responses are missing the point of the OP. I wasn't asking which lens I should buy, rather how image sharpness in 3rd party lenses compares to Canon L lenses?
 
Some of the responses are missing the point of the OP. I wasn't asking which lens I should buy, rather how image sharpness in 3rd party lenses compares to Canon L lenses?

Varies widely based on the lens, I'm sure. I've always been extremely happy with the Tamrons I've owned, as well as the two different models of Sigma 70-200mm 2.8.

I guess if I really wanted to pixel peep I could probably find differences between them and the higher end Nikkor glass - but I don't pixel peep and I've always found them more than suitable for my needs.

This was shot with a Tamron 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VC. I don't really need anything much sharper than that.

20160618 406 by Todd Robbins, on Flickr
 
I'm guessing but for most Canon users the three must haves / wish I had lenses are:

16-35 IS L f/4 OR f/2.8
24-105 IS L f/4
70-200 IS L f/4 OR f2.8

While you can add in the odd prime or macro lens to supplement, these probably would cover 95% of all situations most of us would encounter.

My question is, based purely on image quality, is there anything in the Sigma, Tamron etc stables that could muscle in for full frame users?

Some of the responses are missing the point of the OP. I wasn't asking which lens I should buy, rather how image sharpness in 3rd party lenses compares to Canon L lenses?

See my post above. Your 24-105 is a lot of wasted overlap for a slower lens.
 
I would love to have 35mmL 85mmL and 135L

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-N910F met Tapatalk
 
I have two sigma art lenses (35 & 50) and I love them just as much as my L lenses. They are fast and sharp [emoji4]
 
I just completed my film FD trinity. 28f2.8, 50f1.4, and 135f2.8. All Canon of course. Probably set me back bout a hundred bucks! ;)
 
I normally hear Nikon shooters refer to "holy trinity". For Canon full-frame cameras bodies, the heavily sought after lenses tend to be:

1) Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
2) Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

And that's it.... there is no third. You could maybe try to make an argument for the 16-36mm f/2.8 but I only know a few people who own it. It isn't nearly as popular as the other two.

Canon professional photographers will sometimes use the term "bread 'n butter" lenses and regardless of how many actual lenses the photographer owns, these tend to be the ones that get the most use.

BTW, it has to be these specific lenses and not "equivalent" lenses. The Canon lenses have extremely low "breathing" meaning that if your 70-200 is zoomed to 200mm and you change focus from infinity all the way down to closest focusing distance the lens' true focal length actually stays very close to the 200mm end (It drops to about 190 - so it's within 5%). Most other lenses breath... heavily. So a 3rd party 70-200mm might only be 70-150mm depending on how you change focus.

For the longest time, if you compared a Canon lens (especially a Canon "L" series lens - which are their top lenses) to 3rd party lenses, the Canon lens almost always had better quality in many ways (build quality, image quality, and many other factors).

Today that's "mostly" still true.. with one notable exception. Sigma has been making a new generation of lenses lately that have been getting rave reviews. The Sigma "Art" lenses are usually worth careful consideration over Canon lenses because often these newer lenses are better -- especially if the lens you are comparing is a model that has been around for years and hasn't been revised recently.

It can be confusing because just because the lens is "currently" sold at camera stores doesn't mean it was designed this year... or even in the last 10 years! Some lenses sold as "current" models were designed many years ago and just haven't been updated. Lenses are not like cars... they don't come out with new models every year.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top