# Which lens for my new 6D (my first DSLR)?



## fluidmania (May 20, 2013)

well am buying 6D, my first DSLR, and am on a very tight budget. As this is my first DSLR, obviously, i dont have any lenses either.

I was planning to get *EF 50mm f/1.4 USM* to use if for everything and when i know the cam inside out then i will hunt for other lenses and by that time i will have some $$ also.

Guys i need your help for lens. Which one should i go for? I dont have much $$. Suggestions? 

EDIT: i fotgot to mention, i will be doing lot of landscapes and low light photography


----------



## J.R. (May 20, 2013)

Get the 6D + 24-105mm L f/4 kit. 

As a part of the kit, the 24-105 L is probably the best bargain Canon gives you in its entire lineup of L lenses. 

While you say the budget is very tight but everything is relative. The difference in pricing (kit lens Vs. the 50mm f/1.4) is likely to be in the range of $ 200 or less so I'd say, go for the kit lens.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 20, 2013)

fluidmania said:


> well am buying 6D, my first DSLR, and am on a very tight budget. As this is my first DSLR, obviously, i dont have any lenses either.



Sorry, I just have to mention this: You are aware of the fact that the lens takes the pictures, and that buying an expensive camera body (that quickly looses value) in combination with a cheap lens is the wrong way around- unless cash is coming in shortly and you're able to purchase more lenses & flashes?

Imho the 6d as a "first" dslr is only a good choice if you shoot in very low light often or need top quality in lower light - or of course if you really need the wifi function (you can get better gps via an external tagger). If you just want a full frame camera you could also get a used 5d2, for everything else look at the 60d and buy better lenses (sorry if I have given unasked advice, just couldn't help it ).



J.R. said:


> As a part of the kit, the 24-105 L is probably the best bargain Canon gives you in its entire lineup of L lenses.



+1 - another cheap but good option would be the 40mm pancake lens, it's wider but at least you'll have an unbeatable iq-size package.


----------



## barracuda (May 20, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Get the 6D + 24-105mm L f/4 kit.
> 
> As a part of the kit, the 24-105 L is probably the best bargain Canon gives you in its entire lineup of L lenses.
> 
> While you say the budget is very tight but everything is relative. The difference in pricing (kit lens Vs. the 50mm f/1.4) is likely to be in the range of $ 200 or less so I'd say, go for the kit lens.



I completely agree. The 6D with the 24-105 L kit lens is a great way to get started.


----------



## fluidmania (May 20, 2013)

EDIT: i fotgot to mention, i will be doing lot of landscapes and low light photography


----------



## fluidmania (May 20, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> fluidmania said:
> 
> 
> > well am buying 6D, my first DSLR, and am on a very tight budget. As this is my first DSLR, obviously, i dont have any lenses either.
> ...



great. i will surely look for 2nd hand MII and work out on 60D also.
and yah, cash will be coming in soon. i was hoping that with a prime i can get how 6D works and then get more lens when the money comes in.
i will be doing lots of low light photography. Would you still suggest me not to go for 6D?
cheers


----------



## Marsu42 (May 20, 2013)

fluidmania said:


> great. i will surely look for 2nd hand MII and work out on 60D also.



Btw: for landscape the 5d2 has a bit higher resolution & is a bit sharper than the 6d (and even than the 5d3) - just the 5d2 iso is maybe <1 stop worse than the 6d and the 5d2 has more banding (ymmv).

The 60d is also ok for landscape @iso100, about same dynamic range as the rest of Canon, but the gradients are better on full frame than on crop, and of course low light is bad on crop (just up to iso800 is fine). The good thing about the 60d is the usability, same as 6d + swivel screen which is handy for tripod work, so it's a good first dslr to learn.



fluidmania said:


> i will be doing lots of low light photography. Would you still suggest me not to go for 6D?



You should try to figure out what "low light" is exactly for you, i.e. what exact iso is required with the lens you'll use and if you want or can live with the shallow depth of field of a fast prime. The 6d is excellent for hq available light or indoors w/o flash is you use a f2.8 or even f4 zoom, but with a f1.4 prime it's much easier even on crop and if you don't do large prints.


----------



## fluidmania (May 20, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> fluidmania said:
> 
> 
> > great. i will surely look for 2nd hand MII and work out on 60D also.
> ...



full frame is my main concern here. I had been using my friend's Rebel kiss since months and it breaks my heart everytime i return home with cropped images due to the crop sensor.
i was looking for 5DII at an un-authorised canon store(they ask whatever money they want to) and it was just $200 cheaper than new 6D at an authorised center, am from NEPAL


----------



## Marsu42 (May 20, 2013)

fluidmania said:


> i was looking for 5DII at an un-authorised canon store(they ask whatever money they want to) and it was just $200 cheaper than new 6D at an authorised center, am from NEPAL



Sure, in this case and if you cannot get hold of a cheaper used 5d2 get the 6d, it's certainly worth the $200 more, I'll most likely also buy a 6d if the price stops dropping like it still does now.


----------



## pj1974 (May 20, 2013)

fluidmania said:


> full frame is my main concern here. I had been using my friend's Rebel kiss since months and it breaks my heart everytime i return home with cropped images due to the crop sensor.



If the above is your experience / thinking, there are (at least) 2 (possible) issues here:

1) your friend's Rebel Kiss (300D), the first of that 'line' of Canon's 'entry level' DSLRs has been used with the 'wrong' lens - eg using a 28mm lens on a crop sensor (1.6x / APS-C) for 'wide angle' won't really be 'wide'. You need a lens at 17mm to be equivalent of 28mm in Full Frame (FF) format. Don't use wrong lenses (ie expecting the same mm as in FF) for the APS-C / crop sensors (btw, new crop bodies like 700D and 60D are MANY steps better in just about every regard). 

2) you don't understand photography - that is, that you think the lens 'won't crop' an image in the first place. What you see through the optical view finder (OVF) in a DSLR is what you get. So, therefore get a lens that you need. Eg, I have the Canon EF-S 15-85mm IS USM, which is a great lens for a APS-C, and very comparable in focal length (and other aspects) to the EF 24-105mm L IS USM on a FF. So get the lens or lenses you need, whether prime or zoom, whether fast or slow.

Generally for landscapes and low light, FF is superior. If you do a lot of low light, maybe the 24-105mm will serve you well, because although it is 'only' f/4 (not particularly fast) - it has IS which will help you in getting steadier hand-held shots than even non-stabilised f/2.8 lenses.

I love using primes (eg f/1.2 ti f/2) for low-light / subject isolation. Zooms for good light, and travel / convenience. Even on a crop, such prime lenses can produce stunning images with shallow depth of field (DOF) and zooms - particularly EF-S like the 15-85mm or Canon's 17-55mm f/2.8 can be really handy and have high Image Quality (IQ).

Regards

Paul


----------



## fluidmania (May 20, 2013)

pj1974 said:


> fluidmania said:
> 
> 
> > full frame is my main concern here. I had been using my friend's Rebel kiss since months and it breaks my heart everytime i return home with cropped images due to the crop sensor.
> ...



Thanks for the description Paul.
Am aware of the lens fact on crop censor. 
If i go too wide with this cam then maybe on FF it will be too wide, i dont know. D300's IQ is killing me.
Maybe this year i should just invest in some lenses and wait till next year for any surprises from canon


----------



## drob (May 20, 2013)

Seriously, if this is going to be your first DSLR, then I'd recommend the 7D with 24-105 f/4, then a Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4, or a 50mm. The 24-105mm is a great all around lens, and then one of the primes for low light. As a newby, you won't notice the difference in the 6D. When I got my 60D with the 18-135mm kit lens and took a shot indoors @ f/3.5 with no flash, ISO 1600 I got an immediate boner on how good it look compared to a P&S. Stepping up to your first DSLR (as a great as the 6D is) your focus should be on the best glass possible. The 7D is more than enough body for you to handle. I'd recommend the 60D too which is even cheaper. Heck the T5i might be worth a look too since it has in camera HDR and tutorials. Seriously, settle for a decent body and splurge on your glass, you won't be sorry. 
Oh and why your at it saving money from not buying the 6D or 5DMkII, invest in a decent tripod too. For landscapes a nice sturdy tripod is essential, as well as one or 2 neutral density filters.


----------



## fluidmania (May 20, 2013)

drob said:


> Seriously, if this is going to be your first DSLR, then I'd recommend the 7D with 24-105 f/4, then a Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4, or a 50mm. The 24-105mm is a great all around lens, and then one of the primes for low light. As a newby, you won't notice the difference in the 6D. When I got my 60D with the 18-135mm kit lens and took a shot indoors @ f/3.5 with no flash, ISO 1600 I got an immediate boner on how good it look compared to a P&S. Stepping up to your first DSLR (as a great as the 6D is) your focus should be on the best glass possible. The 7D is more than enough body for you to handle. I'd recommend the 60D too which is even cheaper. Heck the T5i might be worth a look too since it has in camera HDR and tutorials. Seriously, settle for a decent body and splurge on your glass, you won't be sorry.
> Oh and why your at it saving money from not buying the 6D or 5DMkII, invest in a decent tripod too. For landscapes a nice sturdy tripod is essential, as well as one or 2 neutral density filters.



Thanks drob.
Some great suggestions coming in. Will surely re-consider my buying plans.
CR rocks ;D


----------



## verysimplejason (May 20, 2013)

drob said:


> Seriously, if this is going to be your first DSLR, then I'd recommend the 7D with 24-105 f/4, then a Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4, or a 50mm. The 24-105mm is a great all around lens, and then one of the primes for low light. As a newby, you won't notice the difference in the 6D. When I got my 60D with the 18-135mm kit lens and took a shot indoors @ f/3.5 with no flash, ISO 1600 I got an immediate boner on how good it look compared to a P&S. Stepping up to your first DSLR (as a great as the 6D is) your focus should be on the best glass possible. The 7D is more than enough body for you to handle. I'd recommend the 60D too which is even cheaper. Heck the T5i might be worth a look too since it has in camera HDR and tutorials. Seriously, settle for a decent body and splurge on your glass, you won't be sorry.
> Oh and why your at it saving money from not buying the 6D or 5DMkII, invest in a decent tripod too. For landscapes a nice sturdy tripod is essential, as well as one or 2 neutral density filters.



He's doing landscapes. 7d with 24-105 might be too tight unless he wants to try panorama. 7d and 10-22 might do the trick better. I suggest that if he wants FF then go for an FF. Poor man pays twice. 6D and 24-105 should be the best and cheapest in the long run. Buy a decent tripod and a decent flash and you're ready to go.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 20, 2013)

New Sigma 35mm f1.4


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (May 20, 2013)

fluidmania said:


> EDIT: i fotgot to mention, i will be doing lot of landscapes and low light photography



What ranges? That makes a huge differnece - a 50mm is nice but tight. Gotta agree with the rest of those replying - the kit 24-105 may be your best option. It isn't the best lens out there, but it is versatile and the 6d is a beast in low light so being limited to f4 shouldn't hurt too bad (plus, if this is your first DSLR, going with a fast prime may be difficult - the DOF at 1.4 will be hard to manage.)


----------



## Marsu42 (May 20, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> He's doing landscapes. 7d with 24-105 might be too tight unless he wants to try panorama.



That's correct, that's why I bought what I've got now - 60d + the very reasonably priced 17-40L is ok for landscapes, and it's a full frame upgrade path unlike an ef-s lens.



Chuck Alaimo said:


> the 6d is a beast in low light so being limited to f4 shouldn't hurt too bad



... except if you're shooting high dynamic range scenes, because less iso noise on the 6d cannot repair the fact that dr takes a hit also on the 6d, though not as bad as the crop sensor: http://www.sensorgen.info/CanonEOS_6D.html


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (May 20, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> verysimplejason said:
> 
> 
> > He's doing landscapes. 7d with 24-105 might be too tight unless he wants to try panorama.
> ...


...

DR is gonna be an issue either way, and if the DR in the scene is too much then bracketing the shot will have to happen (or get some grad ND filters...)

Note that in my original reply, not making a judgement based on the OP buying his first DSLR.

As for first DSLR and lenses --- FF vs crop. each do have their place. Landscape vs lowlight -- again each area is different - and what kind of low light are you talkig ---low light portraits...low light landscapes, low light waterscapes? For low light, a good tripod may be a better investment, unless your shooting people...then even with a good low light body you may still want a flash for fill...

SLR's give you options --- but for limited budget first time investment ---it is almost too many options (due to cost, because each option is pricey!!!!!)

That's why I stick to saying ---if you go FF - get the 24-105. then over the course of the year, check you shots and see what you shoot at the most...if your staying in the 24-35 range and wanting wider - then your in UWA territory. But if you find that your at 105 a lot and cropping, then you may want a 70-200... or, if you find all your shots at 50mm and want more control over DOF and OOF areas, snag a 50mm. This is all stuff you have to find out on your own though, only way to know is have it and shoot. Which is again why I say grab the kit lens ---it may not be the best at everything but it is a great jack of all trades lens (also ---it is L series and L quality so if you do choose to sell it in favor or something more specialized it will retain its value pretty good unless you smash it or something.)


----------



## Oneand0 (May 20, 2013)

Fluid,
This is my first post reply, saw your post and had to respond. I just bought the 6D and 24-105mm kit. I am a landscape photographer hobbyist. I could have bought a full frame canon last year, but forced myself to keep shooting with my 7D and maximize my learning process with what I had. It's not the gear that will produce photos you like, it will be you getting out there and getting to the landscape locations at the right time and trial and error. With that being said, the 17-40 f/4 is my main work horse, get it and you won't be disappointed. You should buy the kit to save money and use it (24-105), then buy the 17-40. I do not blend my photos, I never have, keep in mind when you look at my links below. I do use filters to even out the dynamic range, and software (single photo) to bring back the range to what it was as close as possible. I use GND (soft) Lee Filters on my 17-40mm, and a Lee Big Stopper filter to smooth out choppy water, or get a sense of motion with clouds. Get your 6D and eventually 17-40 and you will never regret it. 

6D photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/8743790103/#in/photostream/lightbox/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/8747014060/#in/photostream/lightbox/

7D photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/8522315080/#in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/7640580806/#in/photostream

All photos 17-40mm used.

Have fun and travel safe with your 6D

Oneand0


----------



## fluidmania (May 20, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > verysimplejason said:
> ...



I will be doing lot of low light potraits and landscapes.
Thanks Chuck for this great advice


----------



## fluidmania (May 20, 2013)

Oneand0 said:


> Fluid,
> This is my first post reply, saw your post and had to respond. I just bought the 6D and 24-105mm kit. I am a landscape photographer hobbyist. I could have bought a full frame canon last year, but forced myself to keep shooting with my 7D and maximize my learning process with what I had. It's not the gear that will produce photos you like, it will be you getting out there and getting to the landscape locations at the right time and trial and error. With that being said, the 17-40 f/4 is my main work horse, get it and you won't be disappointed. You should buy the kit to save money and use it (24-105), then buy the 17-40. I do not blend my photos, I never have, keep in mind when you look at my links below. I do use filters to even out the dynamic range, and software (single photo) to bring back the range to what it was as close as possible. I use GND (soft) Lee Filters on my 17-40mm, and a Lee Big Stopper filter to smooth out choppy water, or get a sense of motion with clouds. Get your 6D and eventually 17-40 and you will never regret it.
> 
> 6D photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/8743790103/#in/photostream/lightbox/
> ...



Nice shots mate.
Great that you posted a reply, will surely help me with my decision.
Cheers


----------



## timmy_650 (May 20, 2013)

I would say get the 6D over the 5D hands down. To me the upgrades are worth the few extra $100s. But for what your asking I would look into Nikon D600. Before they were going a great deal with a lens but that was around Christmas time and I don't watch Nikon prices bc I shoot canon.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 21, 2013)

if you want a blazing good cheap lens get the 40mm f2.8 pancake
this lens is sharp across the frame and is an excellent general purpose lens
I prefer it to the 50 f1.4 which needs to be stopped down to about f2.2 anyway

or as someone else suggested the sigma 35 f1.4 is hands down one of the best lenses around IMO


----------



## Sella174 (May 23, 2013)

I'd go for the 50mm f/2.5 Macro and then the 28mm f/1.8 lenses.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 24, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> That's why I stick to saying ---if you go FF - get the 24-105. then over the course of the year, check you shots and see what you shoot at the most...if your staying in the 24-35 range and wanting wider - then your in UWA territory. But if you find that your at 105 a lot and cropping, then you may want a 70-200... or, if you find all your shots at 50mm and want more control over DOF and OOF areas, snag a 50mm.



This is some of the wisest advice you will get. No one can really tell you "you need to get this lens" unless they know not only what you shoot but how and what effect you want. A lens that works for one photographer may not work for you. Only you, the photographer, can make that determination. Using a zoom lens like Chuck described is an excellent way to help you fine tune your lens collection. 

Start your lens collection exactly like what you are doing now -- thinking about it and planning it. 

With the priority on buying good glass (cheap glass is seldom a good investment) you want to make your lens-money efficiant in not only buying good glass but the right glass -- good glass is easy, finding the right glass takes time. I have spent a lot of money on many cheap glass in my time.  regretting all the time. 

Good luck with this.


----------

