what do i buy?

[weepete]

The 70-200 is a cracking lens.

Thanks Gary

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.

Thanks Darkshadow

 

[weepete]

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.

Well my current lens lineup is:
Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5
Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 135mm f2.5 (with a hard conversion from an FD to an EOS mount)
Tamron 150-600mm f5-6.3.

Normally when I go out I just take my 10-22mm and my 150-600mm.

You can see my shots on flickr at wee_pete’s albums | Flickr

 

[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.

Well my current lens lineup is:
Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5
Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 135mm f2.5 (with a hard conversion from an FD to an EOS mount)
Tamron 150-600mm f5-6.3.

Normally when I go out I just take my 10-22mm and my 150-600mm.

You can see my shots on flickr at wee_pete’s albums | Flickr

Thanks for the insight .
I particularely like your scottland shots - really makes me want to go there one day!
Hmmm - having looked at your portfolio, I don´t see too much use for a T&S Lens unless you want to change your main subject. If you want one, you might rather think about a cheaper third party, like the Walimex 24mm f3.5. That one is much cheaper and for the few occasions you´d like to use it, I think you don´t need the utmost quality.

I think the 70-200mm would fill a gap somehow, especially since you say you only take two of your lenses with you. But may I suggest another lens? 24mm f1.4. The shallow depth gives some really nice options when getting rather close. I think that would fit your shooting subject and easily give you a new look. I don´t know if it is wide enough for your landscape use on a crop sensor.

Upgrading to fullframe doesn´t really make sense because you would have to get a wideangle and a standard zoom to replace the two lenses you have.

 

[weepete]

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)

Thanks Overread, I probably will go full frame at some point. It is in the back of my mind though I do shoot a lot of panoramas and can work around most of the limitations of my 7D. I don't really think it's old enough yet for me to justify and upgrade. I know it seems an odd choice for a lens selection but that's why I'm a bit stumped. I do fancy a tilt shift for that tiltable depth of field should introduce some interesting opertunities.

One thing I do know is that sharpness is important to me

 

[table1349]

I would have to concur with the 70-200. It is the most versatile of the group. I have the 24mm f3.5L TS-E. It is a fun lens to shoot but somewhat limited in its usage overall.

 

[minicoop1985]

70-200 2.8 for sure. The 1st version can be had for around $1000 US.

 

[weepete]

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.

Well my current lens lineup is:
Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5
Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 135mm f2.5 (with a hard conversion from an FD to an EOS mount)
Tamron 150-600mm f5-6.3.

Normally when I go out I just take my 10-22mm and my 150-600mm.

You can see my shots on flickr at wee_pete’s albums | Flickr

Thanks for the insight .
I particularely like your scottland shots - really makes me want to go there one day!
Hmmm - having looked at your portfolio, I don´t see too much use for a T&S Lens unless you want to change your main subject. If you want one, you might rather think about a cheaper third party, like the Walimex 24mm f3.5. That one is much cheaper and for the few occasions you´d like to use it, I think you don´t need the utmost quality.

I think the 70-200mm would fill a gap somehow, especially since you say you only take two of your lenses with you. But may I suggest another lens? 24mm f1.4. The shallow depth gives some really nice options when getting rather close. I think that would fit your shooting subject and easily give you a new look. I don´t know if it is wide enough for your landscape use on a crop sensor.

Upgrading to fullframe doesn´t really make sense because you would have to get a wideangle and a standard zoom to replace the two lenses you have.

Thanks mate. Aye, Scotland is a beautiful place and I've had the privalege of seeing some remarkable sights and places up here. You should make it over some day to visit us, just remember you can never rely on the weather and the Scottish midgie is the scourge of our island. Both are worth protecting against!

I'll consider that 24mm you suggest.

 

[weepete]

I would have to concur with the 70-200. It is the most versatile of the group. I have the 24mm f3.5L TS-E. It is a fun lens to shoot but somewhat limited in its usage overall.

Thanks Gryphonslair!

70-200 2.8 for sure. The 1st version can be had for around $1000 US.

Thanks Minicoop!

 

[weepete]

The group vote seems to go to the 70-200mm which was going to be my original purchace so that's what I'll go for. I might be able to get a good deal in the January sales. Thanks everyone!