what do i buy?

[weepete]

So....eh...help!

I've selected some really good lenses and I have a little spare cash laying around and I'm going on another workshop next April. This is my shortlist and I really can not decide. I shoot with a 7Dmki, not going full frame any time soon but I like landscapes.

I'm wanting a really good lens, and am willing to pay for it. The Tilt shift lenses kinda excite me as I've never had one before and the creative possibilites are interesting. The 70-200 is in there because it pluggs a gap in my current setup though I do already carry a tamron 150-600. I will be out and about in wet weather, but I'm after a bisteringly sharp lens but dont know which yet.

I'd apprciate opinions, views and comments. I'm really torn between......

 

[tirediron]

Kind of a wide range; if the 70-200 fills a hole, that would get my vote. T/S lenses are neat, but they're (IMO) of limited used on the 35mm format.

 

[nerwin]

Save your money and just use your phone.

 

[Fred von den Berg]

Isn't it possible these days to carry out corrections with software that are very similar to the adjustments you could make with a tilt shift lens? I have an old Tessar 50mm lens that is used with both film and digital cameras and think the rendering is beautiful.

 

[weepete]

Kind of a wide range; if the 70-200 fills a hole, that would get my vote. T/S lenses are neat, but they're (IMO) of limited used on the 35mm format.

Thanks Tirediron, I've had an eye on the 70-200mm f4 L for a while now, it looks like a cracking lens. Like you say it does fill that gap in my lens collection.

Save your money and just use your phone.

eeerrm....no.

Isn't it possible these days to carry out corrections with software that are very similar to the adjustments you could make with a tilt shift lens? I have an old Tessar 50mm lens that is used with both film and digital cameras and think the rendering is beautiful.

Well, yes Fred. But I'd prefer to do it optically if possible, it gives a nicer result IMO. A tilt shift would allow me a bit more creativity and would let me get that front to back sharpness that can be achieved with one.

 

[Didereaux]

I agree with tired about those T/S's. I would definitely recommend that 70-200 because when you eventually do upgrade your body that lens will still perform at that level. (and right now I have seen some pretty nice prices on the F/4)

 

[weepete]

I agree with tired about those T/S's. I would definitely recommend that 70-200 because when you eventually do upgrade your body that lens will still perform at that level. (and right now I have seen some pretty nice prices on the F/4)

Thanks mate. It's one of those lenses that will be in my collection sooner or later. Seing as I don't need an f2.8 it's a pretty attractive proposition!

 

[Didereaux]

I agree with tired about those T/S's. I would definitely recommend that 70-200 because when you eventually do upgrade your body that lens will still perform at that level. (and right now I have seen some pretty nice prices on the F/4)

Thanks mate. It's one of those lenses that will be in my collection sooner or later. Seing as I don't need an f2.8 it's a pretty attractive proposition!

that lens is my 'workhorse' on the 7D, and now the 7DmkII. Simply the most versatile, high quality lens I have seen. It's IQ is way up there with the high$$$ boys.

 

[Derrel]

The 70-200mm Canon F4 L IS is a NEAT lens!!! Modern, smallish, compact, great balance on the 6D or other medium-sized body.

I dunno...for a landscape camera, I really think I'd rather have a higher-resolution FX body with somewhat better ultimate image quality, OR a consumer APS-C Canon with high MP count and more emphasis on resolution, and better, newer sensor than the original 7D offers.

The 6D is a pretty good camera for not too much money.

 

[Gary A.]

The 70-200 is a cracking lens.

 

[DarkShadow]

The 70-200 f/4 IS was superb on the 6D I had even made my 60D look so much better. focus was really quick and was a razor sharp Lens.

 

[photo1x1.com]

That one is really hard to answer without knowing what you already have.
You seem to be a well known guy here with 3.300 Messages, but may I humbly ask for a link to your work? Maybe that helps giving a suggestion about what lens might improve what you usually do, or give you new possibilities.
That said T&S has been on my list for ages. I too love the possibilities (during my education I worked with large format with bellows and loved it. I still own a sinar p that I bought used for practising back then, but it collects dust). I particully like the macro effect, that you can achieve with wideangle T&S on 35mm.
On the other hand I absolutely love the 70-200 f4. It is reasonably light, and sice I'm travelling a lot that is way more important for me, than the 2.8 aperture, that would not only come with a much bigger price tag, but also muuuuuuch more weight. I am totally happy with it wide open.
BUT: I own a 7D, 5DII and 5DIII. I NEVER use the 7D. So I'd vote for full frame, but perhaps not the 5DSR that never challenged me to upgrade.

 

[Overread]

Honestly I find the 70-200mm f2.8 quite a comfortable weight in the hand - it tends to be more an issue when it comes to packing a bag for the day and the weight of all the gear starts to quickly add up when you're using wide aperture lenses.

The focal range in itself is fantastic as a workhorse style of focal lengths. 70-200mm is one of the very few lenses which can go into nearly any photographers bag (f2.8 or f4) and find a use. So when one appears in a list of potential choices its very hard to not suggest getting it.

The others in your list are, as said, rather specialist choices and more niche interest items. Of course one persons niche is another staple; but they are a more focused choice where I'd expect the buyer to have a clearer idea of what they really want. You might also want to try them out if possible, to see how they really do work for you even if just in a show-room situation in a shop.






All that said you mention a fullframe camera body and my advice is typically glass before bodies; except when you want to change your sensor/film size then body before glass tends to be my advice. That way your getting the format you want and building your lens selection around that - rather than building your lens selection around a format always thinking of upgrading the format (its not just an ef/efs choice - its more about how it affects the focal lengths in general - a top end 50mm might be ideal on your crop camera; but when you go to fullframe you might suddenly hate that and want an 85mm - now suddenly your selling and buying and losing on the difference when if you'd gone for the fullframe first you'd also have aimed for the 85mm first)

 

[Superka]

If you love landscape photography, you'd better go with medium format film camera. Bronica SQ-AI, 6x17 panoramic, Pentax 6x7...
My 6x17 gives me 160 Mpx with beautiful colors and without demosaic artifacts.

 

[weepete]

The 70-200mm Canon F4 L IS is a NEAT lens!!! Modern, smallish, compact, great balance on the 6D or other medium-sized body.

I dunno...for a landscape camera, I really think I'd rather have a higher-resolution FX body with somewhat better ultimate image quality, OR a consumer APS-C Canon with high MP count and more emphasis on resolution, and better, newer sensor than the original 7D offers.

The 6D is a pretty good camera for not too much money.

Thanks Derrel. My utimate aim would be to get the 5DSR, or possibly the new 5D Mkiv but realistically that's a few years off yet.