L lens - which one to buy?

[Nevermore1]

I'm looking at slowly starting to upgrade my lenses and am considering finally investing in one of the L series lenses. I'm looking at a budget of approximately $2500 give or take. Currently I have a crop sensor (70D) camera but am going to get a full frame sometime next year. I figure since the EF lenses could be used on both that I would start with slowly upgrading my lenses. What would be a good recommendation if you could only purchase one? I primarily photograph animals (birds, cats, dogs, various wildlife) and nature/landscapes and have been wanting to start experimenting with long exsposure and night time photography. I take very few photos of people that aren't just the typical family snapshots. Below is what I believe I currently have (working from memory here, can't find my list) which is primarily EF-S lenses. I have also been wanting to get the new Tamron lens for long range shots.

EF-S 18-135 USM (kit lens that came with the 70D)

EF-S 55-250 IS

EF-S 75-300 (no IS and I keep getting "double" images if I zoom out with it, not sure if it's me or the lens, was found second-hand dirt cheap)

EF 50mm 1.8

Thanks in advance!

 

[Scatterbrained]

There is no one lens that meets the "birds, cats, dogs, nature, landscapes, starscapes, etc" requirements. If I could however recommend one lens it would be the 24-70.

 

[Nevermore1]

There is no one lens that meets the "birds, cats, dogs, nature, landscapes, starscapes, etc" requirements. If I could however recommend one lens it would be the 24-70.

Thanks, I know there isn't one lens that would do all of it. I am looking for a good one to start with and will be expanding the collection as I can afford it. Also, as I get the better lenses it looks like my daughter will be permanently "borrowing" my old ones. She's using my old 20D (which is supposed to be a spare for me) for a class in school and has pretty much staked claim on it!

 

[KenC]

The question to ask before you buy more lenses is what you can't do with the set you have and which lens would solve that problem. Since you weren't even sure what you have I doubt you've used them all enough to answer this question. Depending on the situation people use a wide variety of lenses for animals and landscapes so only you can decide what you need.

 

[Nevermore1]

The main thing I need is more zoom which I plan on getting the Tamron for. I am looking at the L-series since it has the lower f stops which is better for low light conditions which my current lenses do not have. Also, as I mentioned in my previous post - my old lenses are most likely going to my daughter so I will no longer have them (and I am not willing to spend $ on brand new lenses for her to take to school and possibly get stolen).

Also, my current won't work on a full frame camera which I am getting next year.

 

[Derrel]

How about the new Sigmas 24-105mm f/4 OS lens? Supposed to be better than Canon's 24-105 f/4 L IS USM, which by the way is available affordably on the used market. I had the Canon for a long time: its focal length range was ALWAYS really handy as a generalist zoom lens on full-frame. And on APS-C, it is also pretty handy as an outdoors generalist zoom.

When you move to full-frame, you will move substantially upward in low-light High-ISO performance with the 5D or 6D body series, so the f/4 limitation is not that critical, and besides, at longer lengths like 50 to 105mm, you NEED some depth of field. If you had a 6D, you'd be good to go at ISO 6,400 much of the time.

For sheer "speed" in low light on FF, the 50mm f/1.4 is hard to beat.

 

[JacaRanda]

I hate saying this only because you mentioned one; but I will anyway.

With a budget of $2500 you could have two: The 70-200 F4L IS II and the Tamron 150-600. A 2fer that would be really nice. IMO

 

[Vince.1551]

Agree with Jace


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nevermore1]

Thanks everyone for the replies and keep them coming. I jave about a month before I purchase anything. I've been looking for a few weeks but keep bouncing around between different things (my ADD kicking in, I get completely overwhelmed when I go into the camera store by my work). You guys really are helping me to narrow the options down!

 

[xzyragon]

replace a lens that you have in your current lineup (that you use a lot and or have faults wtih) with a FF equivalent. You have a lot of EF-S lenses, so when you do upgrade to FF, you'll need to dump them and/or have FF lenses to put on your camera.

Unless you plan on sticking with a crop sensor, which in that case I'd get a wide angle.

 

[Nevermore1]

replace a lens that you have in your current lineup (that you use a lot and or have faults wtih) with a FF equivalent. You have a lot of EF-S lenses, so when you do upgrade to FF, you'll need to dump them and/or have FF lenses to put on your camera.

Unless you plan on sticking with a crop sensor, which in that case I'd get a wide angle.

That's pretty much what I'm planning to do but am having a real hard time deciding what would be the best one/ones to get first or if there is something else that would be a better option. I plan on going full frame and keeping my current camera body as a backup. All my current lenses (with maybe the exception of the 50mm) will go to my daughter as I get the new ones to replace them. I'm waiting to get the camera after I have the lenses as I see no point in having a camera body and only one compatible lens.

 

[xzyragon]

replace a lens that you have in your current lineup (that you use a lot and or have faults wtih) with a FF equivalent. You have a lot of EF-S lenses, so when you do upgrade to FF, you'll need to dump them and/or have FF lenses to put on your camera.

Unless you plan on sticking with a crop sensor, which in that case I'd get a wide angle.

That's pretty much what I'm planning to do but am having a real hard time deciding what would be the best one/ones to get first or if there is something else that would be a better option. I plan on going full frame and keeping my current camera body as a backup. All my current lenses (with maybe the exception of the 50mm) will go to my daughter as I get the new ones to replace them. I'm waiting to get the camera after I have the lenses as I see no point in having a camera body and only one compatible lens.

i'm in the same boat once i go from my 7D to FF, but my purchasing order is probably going to be:

35mm sigma 1.4
100mm f2.8L macro
Possibly an 85mm prime
*70-200 f2.8 IS
canon FF (5d mk3 or 6d) + 16-35 f4

I'm going to be gradually purchasing all these one by one before I upgrade to FF because they should complement my 7D really well. I already have a 50mm prime and 10-22 wide angle for my 7D.

 

[bratkinson]

Not long after I upgraded to a 60D, I knew I would one day go full frame, as I shot 35mm film for many years prior to going digital. Like the OP, I had an EF-S 18-135 and EF-S 55-250 that I knew would have to be replaced before I upgraded to full frame.

As I've had nothing but Canon gear for almost 40 years, I started with a 24-105 f4L. I liked the weight and feel of the lens on my gripped 60D, but the 24 end was too often not wide enough for indoor use and the 105 end sometimes not long enough for some outdoor work. As most of my work is indoors at church events (no weddings), the IS was useful as was a monopod for extra stability at 1/30th or so. I soon filled the 'wide end' with an EF 16-35 f2.8L ii. Later on, I filled my 'long end' with an EF 135 f2L and EF 200 f2.8L ii.

I was satisfied with that 'line up' on my 60D, but I've long been a zoom-lens type of shooter, and having to change lenses to 'go long' started to annoy me. So, I was thinking 70-200 f2.8L time when I found an older 80-200 f2.8L "magic drainpipe" on ebay, which I bought for less than 1/2 what the new 70-200 mark i was selling for. I also bought an EF 85 f1.8 as well more to see how I liked it than anything else. It wasn't long after I upgraded to a 5Diii that the 85 and 200 were sold leaving me with 4 lenses that cover everything I want to cover.

However, I've been contemplating the 70-300 f4-5.6L or the DO version for longer shots for some time now...but I really don't have a use for the 200-300mm range for my shooting. But when I do, I'll have to decide. For the OP, perhaps a 70-300 L or DO rather than a 70-200 would be a good 2nd lens to a 24-105.

One of several surprises I had in my upgrade history is that the 24-105 wasn't enough of a single-lens solution as much as the 18-135 that I had become accustomed to. It took a while to get 'comfortable' with that fact of life. Another surprise was that while the 16-35 was ideal for indoor work in tight spaces as well as 'wider' when doing street photography, it became almost 'too wide' for my work once I upgraded to the 5Diii. As a result, it now gets used only for those times I really need wider-than-24mm shots. On the 60D, the 18mm end had a field of view of a 28.8mm lens, so on a full frame, the 24mm end of the 24-105 is more than sufficient.

Lastly, many on this forum and elsewhere have poo-poo'd the 24-105 as being a 'kit' lens and not as sharp as the rest of the Ls. Mine was just a touch soft on the 60D, where MFA was not an option. But doing MFA on it with the 5Diii resulted in shots with that lens being surprisingly sharp.

 

[Lumens]

"For the OP, perhaps a 70-300 L or DO rather than a 70-200 would be a good 2nd lens to a 24-105."

I have to agree. I moved from the 7D to a 6D/24-105 kit. Picked up a 100-400 to cover the long range. But found the 100-400 a bit much for general use. It is much better suited to outdoor sports and wildlife when the extra range is needed, so I picked up the 70-200 f4 IS which works very well when the 105 is not enough.

I do think at times the 70-300 would have been a better choice for me than the two lenses 70-200 & 100-400. It would have given me the range I generally need without the size and weight of the 100-400. A teleconverter could cave made up the difference.

 

[bratkinson]

Being primarily a zoom lens shooter rather than 'all/mostly primes' shooter, my preference is to have overlapping zoom ranges to minimize the number of times I have to change lenses. Hence, my zooms are 16-35, 24-105, and 80-100, with the 135 reserved for the "knock 'em dead" shots. Many on this forum and others think 24-70 and 70-200 (or -300) would be ideal, but the non-overlap or ranges is a negative from my perspective.

Although I didn't have a preset list of lenses in mind before I started moving from EF-S to L glass. Instead, once I had the 24-105, I let my shooting needs determine what to get next. And who knows? Depending on your budget and needs, you may want to add in one of the apparently quite good super zooms from a 3rd party manufacturer for your birding and outdoor needs.