# What is the next Canon lens you want or covet and why...



## RocklandDragon (May 23, 2013)

Being relatively new to the Canon DSLR world, I have been reading up on various lenses. Many lenses that are just fantastic to have but cost a pretty penny or three. I am in the process of (FINALLY) getting a Canon 70-200 IS II and will be here in three weeks. Just need another $300 and it's in my hands. So, this dream lens will finally come to fruition and I cant wait to use it for sports.

But a new lens that I want has emerged and it's going to take much longer to save for but will be worth it. The Canon 200 f/2 lens. The wrestling matches I attend for my nephews and high school are usually in gyms with some craptastic lighting and when they are at an awards ceremony, the auditorium lights are even worse.

The reviews for the f/2 200mm have been superb. I wish I had this lens for my nephew's graduation at the end of this month but maybe next time for when the other nephews graduate.

So, that's my dream lens. The Canon 200mm f/2. A 400mm 2.8 is also on the list. What about y'all? Which lens would you like to obtain and why?

Just curious and I like reading about the varying subjects that people use for their photography. I use mine primarily for sports.


----------



## bycostello (May 23, 2013)

pretty have with the 2 i have...


----------



## jdramirez (May 23, 2013)

I'm not a pro, so I doubt I'll ever get a 5k+ lens, but I also didn't think i would every buy a lens that cost 1K. So that is out the window. What body do you have, because if you have a crop t2i or older, you would probably benefit more with a full frame body for better low light performance than getting an extra stop of light with the lens.

And to answer the question... I'm almost all set. I need a 35mm... maybe a sigma and then my individual needs are done. Maybe I'll get a 135mm f/2, but I don't see me WANTING a 24-70 mkii anytime soon.


----------



## RocklandDragon (May 23, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> I'm not a pro, so I doubt I'll ever get a 5k+ lens, but I also didn't think i would every buy a lens that cost 1K. So that is out the window. What body do you have, because if you have a crop t2i or older, you would probably benefit more with a full frame body for better low light performance than getting an extra stop of light with the lens.
> 
> And to answer the question... I'm almost all set. I need a 35mm... maybe a sigma and then my individual needs are done. Maybe I'll get a 135mm f/2, but I don't see me WANTING a 24-70 mkii anytime soon.



Right now, I have a 7D. It's not the best in low light situations but I have seen good videos of a 7D with a 200 f/2 and 70-200 f/2.8. Eventually, within the next year or two, I'll get a full frame camera. Maybe get a used 1D Mark IV (not full frame but still a real good camera) or find a good deal on a 1DX in late 2014. The lenses will stay good for many years and when I jump to full frame, I'll be set.


----------



## Ladislav (May 23, 2013)

Just rent 200 f/2 if you need it for any special event. It is pretty big investment if you don't need the lens regularly. 

I would like to have 70-200L f/2.8 II and 24-70L f/2.8 II but don't want to invest so much in the near future. My next lens will be 100L f/2.8. It will give me new options for macro and some portraits.


----------



## RocklandDragon (May 23, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> Just rent 200 f/2 if you need it for any special event. It is pretty big investment if you don't need the lens regularly.
> 
> I would like to have 70-200L f/2.8 II and 24-70L f/2.8 II but don't want to invest so much in the near future. My next lens will be 100L f/2.8. It will give me new options for macro and some portraits.



I'll use it a lot. I have six years of wrestling matches and other events that I can take pics for. It could really come in handy with football and either a 1.4 extender or 2.0 extender. I'll get good use out of it as well as the 70-200.


----------



## crasher8 (May 23, 2013)

A 400 variant. I have been doing a bit of birding and want more than crops from a 200.


----------



## RGF (May 23, 2013)

I am a nature photography, covering te full frame from macro to scenics to animals. If I could pick anything to photograph it would be birds with animals second. Thus I want 2lens- the new 200-400 and 600 M2

Only $25,000


----------



## bholliman (May 23, 2013)

I'm saving for a 24-70 2.8 II. Getting close, should be able to buy one by July or August. Next on my wish list would be the TS-E 24mm II and then an UWA zoom at some point.


----------



## CANONisOK (May 23, 2013)

I'll jump on board with the 200-400mm f/4 1.4x as the lens I covet the most. It looks to have exquisite IQ and extreme versatility. Will I ever buy it? No. It would be silly for me personally to spend that much for a single lens. 

Here's the part where I contradict myself. I can imagine a scenario where I try to discipline myself and over the course of a year: don't buy any other lenses, don't buy any computers, tablets, phones, televisions, etc. I could probably rationalize buying it then. Time will tell...


----------



## RGF (May 23, 2013)

CANONisOK said:


> I'll jump on board with the 200-400mm f/4 1.4x as the lens I covet the most. It looks to have exquisite IQ and extreme versatility. Will I ever buy it? No. It would be silly for me personally to spend that much for a single lens.
> 
> Here's the part where I contradict myself. I can imagine a scenario where I try to discipline myself and over the course of a year: don't buy any other lenses, don't buy any computers, tablets, phones, televisions, etc. I could probably rationalize buying it then. Time will tell...



Or you take my route, join a12step program, nothing new except for a 1in, 1 out approach. In fact I am selling most of the non-core equipment I don't use but thought it would be good to have


----------



## The Bad Duck (May 23, 2013)

Something tells me I will get the 50 /1.2 L next. I have cravings for that lens. Seriously though I should get the 85 /1.2 since I really like that focal length way more. But then again, the 85 /1.8 is a great lens and I don´t feel the need to upgrade.

So, the 24-70 would be nice if I was do to more weddings next year but honestly, two bodies and 35 /1.4 L + 85 /1.8 got me covered nicely most of the time. Or 17-40 L + 70-200 /4 L IS. 
The 70-200 /2.8 II L IS would be nice for weddings aswell, but the 120-300 /2,8 OS HSM surprised me with its portraiture qualities so I can´t justify the 70-200 II.

Ehm what else? Actually the 14 /2.8 may be the lens that adds most to my kit at the moment, but the Samyang 14 /2.8 I have is surprisingly good so..I´ not sure.

That leaves me with the rumored 14-24. That would probably be it. But it is not on the market so...

No lens for me


----------



## theobdt (May 23, 2013)

Ah...the lens I would like to get next or most is the 400mm 2.8L and I've been saving up for it for two years. But since they've announced the 200-400mm I've been thinking of that one instead of the 400mm 2.8L. I am going to use the lens for high school/college football. Other lens I want are:


50mm 1.2
85mm 1.2
300mm 2.8
24-70 2.8 II. This lens will be an upgrade for me since I already have the version 1 of this lens.


----------



## cayenne (May 23, 2013)

My next two lenses I'm going to get are:

50L f/1.2 and the 24mm TS-E II lenses....

I'm just about to pay off the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II L lens....

Not sure where you buy your lenses, but I buy mine either at Crutchfield (using their rewards points for $$ off purchases), or Amazon.com. At both of these places, they offer 0% financing for 6-12 mos. I never buy anything these days I couldn't plunk cash down for, but I have NO problem taking advantage of their money and financing it out over time with 0% interest.

You might look into that and you can get your lens now...?

I currently have the 70-200 mentioned above, the 24-105 kit lens, the 17-40mm L f/4 lens, and a Rokinon 14mm lens, and the Canon non-L 85mm f/1.8...which is a pretty highly rated non-L lens.

After the 50mm and 24 Tilt shift, I'm thinking I'll get the 100mm L macro, and that should round out about everything I'd need for awhile I think...

cayenne


----------



## Sella174 (May 23, 2013)

None. (Although a *Canon EF-S 30mm f/1.8 L USM* would be nice, provided it is sans IS.)


----------



## RLPhoto (May 23, 2013)

According to a recent poll, the 14-24L is the most coveted lens here on CR


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 23, 2013)

The lens I'm currently coveting is the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II. I may get distracted by purchasing the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS II along the way...



Sella174 said:


> None. (Although a *Canon EF-S 30mm f/1.8 L USM* would be nice, provided it is sans IS.)





RLPhoto said:


> According to a recent poll, the 14-24L is the most coveted lens here on CR



Not that it matters much, but I got the sense that the OP was interested in lenses that actually exist.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 23, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The lens I'm currently coveting is the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II. I may get distracted by purchasing the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS II along the way...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If it does exist, It the most coveted. If it doesn't, It still the most coveted.


----------



## Cariboucoach (May 23, 2013)

Looking at the 70-300 L lens. I do track and field, and theatre photography and you can't be close to some of the events. I have the 70-200 f/4.0 L but the reach just isn't enough sometimes. I am also thinking 24-70 L so when I go to FF, I will have 2 lenses instead of the APS-C 15-85 and 70-200.


----------



## adhocphotographer (May 23, 2013)

My most wanted lenses are either 300 2.8 II or the 400 2.8 I or II...


----------



## Sella174 (May 23, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Not that it matters much, but I got the sense that the OP was interested in lenses that actually exist.



Hence my "None" answer.


----------



## charlesa (May 23, 2013)

None really, covered except for a coveted second body, hopefully the tout high MP one for landscape work and the 14-24 if it ever appears.


----------



## Harry Muff (May 23, 2013)

Oh, please don't start me off again… This place is getting expensive!


----------



## Wildfire (May 23, 2013)

I owned the 70-200 f2.8L IS II for a while and loved it. I sold it to pay for some non-photography expenses. Do I miss it? Sure, but I do just fine without it...

Now the 24-70 II... That's one lens I'd never get rid of if I had one


----------



## 2n10 (May 23, 2013)

70-300L to replace my 70-300 non-L for birding would be the my reasonable covet. Then one of the 300mm or 400mm primes or 100-400l II.


----------



## cayenne (May 23, 2013)

I'm looking for the *Sigma 200-500 f/2.8*

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-200-500mm-Ultra-Telephoto-Canon-Cameras/dp/B0013D8VDQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1369331847&sr=8-2&keywords=sigma+200-500mm+f2.8

LOL...just read the reviews, that alone is worth the click on the link....

cayenne


----------



## CANONisOK (May 23, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I may get distracted by purchasing the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS II along the way...


It seems to me that with the rave reviews the current model gets (and the fact it was introduced as recently as 2010) this may not be one released very soon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 23, 2013)

CANONisOK said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I may get distracted by purchasing the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS II along the way...
> ...



No thought that it was - typo corrected. I'm just so used to typing IS II, I guess...


----------



## jdramirez (May 23, 2013)

Ladislav said:


> Just rent 200 f/2 if you need it for any special event. It is pretty big investment if you don't need the lens regularly.
> 
> I would like to have 70-200L f/2.8 II and 24-70L f/2.8 II but don't want to invest so much in the near future. My next lens will be 100L f/2.8. It will give me new options for macro and some portraits.


 if you live near central pa, I'll make you a good deal on 100mm L. my 70-200 mkii has taken its place as my preferred lens. it is sad really.


----------



## K-amps (May 23, 2013)

200 F2 or the 300 f2.8 ii. I used to think about the 400 f2.8 ii but it is a $5000 premium over the 300mm for which I can buy a nice APS-C body and get same reach or use a 1.4x to get to 400mm (granted the 400mm will go even further) but the price difference is just huge between the two.

If I had to choose between the 200mm and 300mm, I'd go with the 300mm since I already own a 70-200 f2.8.

The 300 2.8ii seems to be one of the sharpest and best performing primes out there in a reasonable size that I can fit into my backpack. It has great micro contrast and amazing sharpness and is very usable with 1.4x and 2x TC's.


----------



## jdramirez (May 23, 2013)

I remember when my greatest want was to upgrade from the 75-300 to the 55-250. it seems like such a long time ago even though it was only three years.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 24, 2013)

I only covet my neibours OX or is that OSX


----------



## RocklandDragon (May 29, 2013)

Well, the 200 f/2 is still the lens I want when I want to get pics of wrestling but I realized in some gyms, I might be too close and there might be too many things or people in the way for good shots. In the high school gyms, the length will be fine if I'm placed at a corner where there is not much obstruction and I'll be at a distance that will not impede others. Also, the 200mm would be good for baseball and football too. However, if some tournaments are held where everything can be crowded, that could be a problem. I may not get floor access as good as I can with the local matches.

Still want to get that 200 f/2 and the 1.4 III extender, though. 

Well, here comes the 135 f/2. This lens is reasonably priced. From what I have read, it is the bees knees (still have no idea where this saying comes from, but it's something good). This lens could be real good for the indoor sports I can cover. It might be real good for basketball, if I want to cover games for that. I could but it's not a necessity. Still, the 135 lens I can walk around with relative ease and get great shots from various angles and not be in the way. I'm renting it from LensRentals for my nephew's graduation and although it may not be long enough, that's ok. I can try it for pics of the party and it'll get used a lot. I dont believe it has IS and I dont have a decent tripod yet (I dont think I could bring one in the arena anyway), so no video.

I'll have to add the 135 f/2 to the list. ;D


----------



## captainkanji (May 29, 2013)

I'm hoping to upgrade my 70-200 f4 to the 2.8 version. I need the range and IS at low light events. I can't wait till my November event. I'm gonna rent one and a 24-70.


----------



## RocklandDragon (May 29, 2013)

captainkanji said:


> I'm hoping to upgrade my 70-200 f4 to the 2.8 version. I need the range and IS at low light events. I can't wait till my November event. I'm gonna rent one and a 24-70.



I was fortunate enough to try the 2.8 non-IS for my nephews' baseball tournament and it did a damn good job of photos. I had set it to aperture priority and for the most part, the lens was tack sharp. A few photos were overexposed but that's on me, of course. It put my kit lens to shame in night settings, especially when I needed the reach and at 2.8. 

An odd thing about these lenses for me is that, even though I really like the results, the lenses make me want to get even better with manual exposure time and change the apertures. Just learn even more and control everything and get the most out of the lens. I might be getting addicted to this photography stuff and I'm gonna take some courses that they offer here in my town. 

The non-IS was great. I should just get the non IS as I was real happy with it but I'll pony up for the IS II because I need the video capabilities. Really could use that extra $900 for another lens, but it is what it is. 

8) 8) 8)


----------



## bholliman (May 29, 2013)

RocklandDragon said:


> Well, the 200 f/2 is still the lens I want when I want to get pics of wrestling but I realized in some gyms, I might be too close and there might be too many things or people in the way for good shots. In the high school gyms, the length will be fine if I'm placed at a corner where there is not much obstruction and I'll be at a distance that will not impede others. Also, the 200mm would be good for baseball and football too. However, if some tournaments are held where everything can be crowded, that could be a problem. I may not get floor access as good as I can with the local matches.
> 
> Still want to get that 200 f/2 and the 1.4 III extender, though.
> 
> Well, here comes the 135 f/2. This lens is reasonably priced. From what I have read, it is the bees knees (still have no idea where this saying comes from, but it's something good). This lens could be real good for the indoor sports I can cover. It might be real good for basketball, if I want to cover games for that. I could but it's not a necessity. Still, the 135 lens I can walk around with relative ease and get great shots from various angles and not be in the way.



I shot a lot of Junior High wrestling this winter at my sons meets using primarily a 70-200 2.8 II and 135L on my 6D. I tried my 24-105 in one meet, but had to go to ISO's of 6400+ to stop the action, and I try not to go that high as the noise gets hard to clean up in PP. Also, lack of reach with the 24-105 was a problem at times.

Some of my best shots were with my 135L, but I also missed a few when this lens was on if the boys quickly moved to the near side of the mat if I didn't back up fast enough and find a new position. The additional light gathering ability of the 2.0 lens allowed faster shutter speeds with reasonable ISO's. So, as the season progressed, I used the 70-200 2.8 II more and more with good success.


----------



## bholliman (May 29, 2013)

The Canon 24-70 2.8 II is still at the top of my wish list, should have the money saved by this time next month.

Next on my list at this point would be a 16-35 II, as I've recently missed the UWA focal lengths. Last year I used a EF-S 10-22 with my 7D. Now that I'm using the 6D 95% of the time, I need something wider than 24mm.


----------



## Don Haines (May 29, 2013)

I keep hoping for a 400 f5.6 II. I'm looking for a long sharp lens that is still portable.... The big whites, even if I could afford them, are just too big to take on hiking or canoe trips.


----------



## RC (May 29, 2013)

Debating to replace my 24-105 for a 24-70 II for improved IQ reasons. Still on the fence whether I'll do this. 

Next, really want a good, fast 50 mm lens that is not a specialty lens like the 50L, just doesn't exist. The ideal would be a 50 f/1.4L, but that will never happen. If I had these then I'd probably be with all those waiting to replace my 16-35 II with a 14-24.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 29, 2013)

RC said:


> Debating to replace my 24-105 for a 24-70 II for improved IQ reasons. Still on the fence whether I'll do this.



I debated that same issue. Now I'm debating whether to sell the 24-105L, as I haven't used it since getting the 24-70L II.


----------



## charlesa (May 29, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> RC said:
> 
> 
> > Debating to replace my 24-105 for a 24-70 II for improved IQ reasons. Still on the fence whether I'll do this.
> ...



Neuro getting rid of a lens... that's a new one!


----------



## RC (May 29, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> RC said:
> 
> 
> > Debating to replace my 24-105 for a 24-70 II for improved IQ reasons. Still on the fence whether I'll do this.
> ...


I'm sure I'll do it in time, just wish CL wasn't flooded with all those damn 24-105 kit lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 29, 2013)

RC said:


> I'm sure I'll do it in time, just wish CL wasn't flooded with all those damn 24-105 kit lens.



Indeed. Since the 24-105L added $800 to the 5DII kit, it used to go for ~$800 on CL (and I still see many listed there, but they aren't selling). Right now, the 24-105L adds $600 to the 5DIII kit and only $500 to the 6D kit, so if you want to offload the lens, you've got to price it accordingly.


----------



## J.R. (May 29, 2013)

I'd personally want a 90mm TSE L and a 200mm f/2.8 L II IS. The reason for the first is obvious and for the second, I feel the need for a fast prime 200mm lens ... the 200 f/2 is out of question right now! 

Cheers ... J.R.


----------



## Grumbaki (May 30, 2013)

Shoping list:
- Sigma 35 1.4
- Canon 85 1.2

Wish list:
- Canon 12-24.
- Canon 35 1.4

The 35 is a real pain in the... brain. Focus problems reports starts to pop up (but are they reliable and consequent) and the canon is due for renewal...


----------



## iaind (Jun 7, 2013)

200-400 1.4extender bu.t Uk price is extortionate.

Can I have a sample to evaluate Please Canon


----------



## RocklandDragon (Jun 8, 2013)

Got to try out the 135 f/2 last weekend and yep...I'm gonna have to get it. Not sure when though. I could try to get it in February. It's a definite lens I want now.

That lens is fantastic. 

The one I want to try is the new Sigma 120-300 f/2.8. Once again, LensRentals can come in handy for this one. I rent it during football season and use it along with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II. That extra reach could really come in handy to catch shots on the opposite side of the field. If it works great, then time to add it to the list too.

Suddenly, my wallet feels quite empty.


----------



## TM (Jun 8, 2013)

Recently purchased the Canon 200mm f2.0, which was on my wish list for a long time. Now with the bigger purchases out of the way, I'm looking forward to getting a 35mm f1.4. May go for the Siggy. There's always another lens to get.


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 8, 2013)

I'm not sure... I thought I wanted a 35... then no... then I thought maybe i'll go to the 85 f/1.2, but that is a ton of money to spend on an occasional prime, and the 135 is really nice but the focal length would be redundant with my 70-200mm f/2.8L is mkii... the 50's are all soft wide open... so I don't know.

I want something that is a solid wide open, but not overly wide like the 35 (and I realize that isn't that wide, but coming from a crop, it is comparable to a 22mm on a crop and that is pretty wide for what I usually photograph), so maybe I'll just go cheap for a little while and get an 85mm f/1.8. $300 for some low light functionality... solid performer, but obviously not as good as its big brother.


----------



## Jim Saunders (Jun 8, 2013)

I'd like a Sigma 200-500, painted 18% grey; I figure if it is going to be photographed more than photographed with I might as well provide people with decent white balance...

That said I'd like a 300 f/2.8 but I'll settle for the f/4 I have a line on for a trade for my 24-70.

Jim


----------



## RGF (Jun 8, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> RC said:
> 
> 
> > Debating to replace my 24-105 for a 24-70 II for improved IQ reasons. Still on the fence whether I'll do this.
> ...



same here

Lens I want

Now that my 200-400 is being shipped
replace 500F4 IS with 600 II
new 100-400. Sold the old one, did not like the push pull

If they replace the 180 macro, might be interested. 
Possibly replacement for the 28 - 300 if they make it much sharper but with the 70-300 not sure I will really miss the 28-70 range.

If they make the 70-300 fixed F4 that would warrant a serious look

If they replace the 400 F5.6 with either 400 F5.6 IS or 400 F4 IS, I would be interested.

General goal is not to increase the number of lens


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Jun 8, 2013)

The next lens I want: EF 24-70 f/2.8 L II
Why: I lost it earlier this year and I really miss it


----------



## sanj (Jun 8, 2013)

I missed out on a potential great shot but was too tight. 
I want the 200-400


----------



## bardamu (Jun 8, 2013)

Instead of which _lens_ do you want this thread should be which _lenses_ do you want.

Here's my roadmap, in order of priority. I do a lot of macro. I tossed in bodies too:
EF-S 60mm macro (sometimes the 100 is too long on APS-C)
100mm L macro (upgrade from non-L)
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 (just sold the 10-22mm coz I found I preferred the less wide end)
7D mk ii (where the hell is it???)
6D (move to full frame, I don't need the 5D iii)
TS-E 24mm (ultimate landscape lens)
Sigma 35mm f/1.4 (just because...)

I reckon Canon should definitely make, say, an EF-S 23mm pancake. A compact, high-quality, inexpensive walk-around 35mm-equivalent for APS-C. It would be a slam-dunk. But, perhaps they are concerned it would undermine sales of the more expensive stuff. Sigh...


----------



## Jim K (Jun 8, 2013)

The 500 f/4L IS II. My 500 gets heavy after a while and the 1.5 pound decrease would be nice. But perhaps I should get the 600 II for more reach but that weighs as much as my present 500 but it would be good on the 5D3.

The 100-400 II if it's a lot better than my old 1-4, doesn't cost a fortune and isn't too long to pack.

The 7D II if it delivers a lot more than my 7Ds.

So many decisions, so little money. :-\


----------



## Vossie (Jun 8, 2013)

I would really fancy a big white. After switching to FF my 100-400 is not as long as it used to be. Do not know which one yet, but probably will find it too expensive to pull the trigger.

Also on my desire list are:
- TSE-24 or 17
- 135 2.0
- 100 L macro
- 2nd body (7D2 maybe?)


----------



## RGF (Jun 8, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> The next lens I want: EF 24-70 f/2.8 L II
> Why: I lost it earlier this year and I really miss it



Sorry about your loss, I have risk floater on home owners/renters. Covers nearly everything


----------



## killswitch (Jun 8, 2013)

I thought of replacing my current 70-200 2.8L (non IS) with the 70-200 2.8L IS II. On the fence if should go for it or instead keep the existing 70-200 f2.8L and add the 85 1.2L II to my armory.

So possible list

70-200 f2.8L IS II (to replace the original 70-200 f2.8L)
24-70 f2.8L II (to replace the orginal 24-70 f2.8L)
85 f1.2L II (add the prime to my kit/replace the 50 f1.8 II).


----------



## Bob Howland (Jun 8, 2013)

200-400 f/4 L IS 1.4X, to photograph outdoor sports, especially in dusty locations


----------



## awbjerkhaug (Jun 8, 2013)

I think my next lens will be a EF 70-200 f4L (upgrade from EF-S 55-250 IS). I would really love a 70-200 f2.8L IS II, but my current budget won't allow it.


----------



## Click (Jun 8, 2013)

I just ordered my 600 f4L II, so now my next wish is the TSE-24.


----------



## Act444 (Jun 8, 2013)

Next one I'm looking at is a good walkaround "wide-angle" lens for my 6D - probably the 16-35. Wide-angle coverage is the only thing missing in my collection (besides a couple of 24mm zooms). Tried the 17-40 and was completely unimpressed (soft...). Actually the 16-35 didn't blow me away either. But at the same time, the wide end opens up possibilities...

I'm guessing the sacrifice made in UWA lenses is sharpness? 
_________

As for "pipe dream" lenses, the 85 1.2 is on the list...a good 50mm lens as well (tried to like the 1.2, but couldn't get a sharp shot with it to save my life...and the 1.4 is quite old now)...and I hope a good 35 or 50mm EF-M mount lens (with IS) comes out as well.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Jun 8, 2013)

At the moment I'm done buying stuff... finally 

Hope this feeling lasts!


----------



## wayno (Jun 8, 2013)

mrsfotografie said:


> At the moment I'm done buying stuff... finally
> 
> Hope this feeling lasts!



Pretty much feel the same way. Maybe a 5d3 later in the year. Maybe.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2013)

mrsfotografie said:


> At the moment I'm done buying stuff...



I....

Just......

Don't.......

Understand...........

???


----------



## Roadtrip (Jun 9, 2013)

mrsfotografie said:


> At the moment I'm done buying stuff... finally
> 
> Hope this feeling lasts!



Me too! I'm leaning more towards going full frame (with my Canon 10s)! I'm itchin' to get back into film...

Of course, after I do THAT I'll probably go back to digital with my 30D....


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 9, 2013)

mrsfotografie said:


> At the moment I'm done buying stuff... finally
> 
> Hope this feeling lasts!



I keep saying to myself, Alexander wept for when he looked upon the breadth of this empire, there were no more worlds to conquer... and it's kinda true... yes I want a fast prime, but I really need one... I'm just wanting to spend some cash... It feels weird considering 4.5 years ago I bought a canon xs with the 18-55 kit and the 75-300...


----------



## TeenTog (Jun 9, 2013)

I'd love a 300. The only one I could remotely afford is the 300 F/4L IS USM, but it sure would be nice to have one! Maybe after a 70D....


----------



## tron (Jun 9, 2013)

mrsfotografie said:


> At the moment I'm done buying stuff... finally
> 
> Hope this feeling lasts!


If you let us know which lenses you have we would be delighted to relieve you of that feeling ;D ;D ;D


----------



## anthonyd (Jun 9, 2013)

I covet my neighbor's lens ... because I am weak.






But I'd seriously like the 85 f/1.2, because I love tight portraits and bokeh. I also like doing stitched panoramas for 100+Mpix landscape shots, and I currently use my 70-200 for that, but I have a feeling that the 85 would be sharper (but it might be hair splitting, I don't know, especially given the resolution of the resulting picture).


----------



## mikeclary (Jun 9, 2013)

I'm going to order the 135 f/2L next week...tried it and I'm amazed at the image quality!


----------



## mrsfotografie (Jun 9, 2013)

tron said:


> mrsfotografie said:
> 
> 
> > At the moment I'm done buying stuff... finally
> ...



Ok I challenge you to give it a go, at the moment I feel I've covered every need I have in my style of photography. Body-wise I use the 7D for sports and zoo/wildlife, the 5D2 for everything else. (No sense in upgrading bodies - these two are a perfect match). I have grips for both and like the flexibility of being able to remove the grip when I need to reduce bulk. When I need something small I use my NEX-6. And I still have my old 400D when I need something expendable.

I'm not into portraiture or studio / product photography, and although I have a monopod and a tripod I don't like to carry them around unless I really have to. I have a Metz flash but very rarely use it. Portability and speed of operation is important for me, especially when traveling. Macro photography is limited to butterflies and the like and I find I'm using my 70-200L + extender for this more often than the 90 mm Tamron. 

Lens-wise I have a nice range of L-zooms and some really satisfactory third-party primes to suit my needs, plus the old canon 35 and 50 mm for travel or small size. The 17-40 and 24-105 are great for travel and general use. I have no need for longer or faster lenses. For example the 100-400 is my motorsports lens, and for that purpose I tend to stop it down to f/9 - f/11. In long lenses I really prefer a zoom because a prime is too limiting. When I need something small/light, I've a few alternative (non-L) zooms as well to suit both full frame and/or crop.

Note that having just replaced my car helps me emphasize the need to cut down a little on photography related expenditure though... (oh wait I just upgraded the most expensive accessory - I frequently use my car to go somewhere and take photo's )

Here's my lens line-up:

35mm Prime:

Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical
Sigma 20mm F1.8 DG Aspherical RF
Canon EF 35mm f/2.0
Voigtländer 40mm f/2 Ultron SL-II + close-up lens
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM
Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di MACRO 1:1

35mm 'L' zoom:

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM + Canon Extender EF 1.4x II
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM 

Lightweight zoom:

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2,8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]
Canon EF 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 II
Tamron SP AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD

Canon EOS 400D 'kit':

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II

Sony NEX-6 'kit':

Sony E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS
Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN
Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS


----------



## eml58 (Jun 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> mrsfotografie said:
> 
> 
> > At the moment I'm done buying stuff...
> ...



Exactly, my thoughts as well, how is that possible ?, your a Photographer ?, your never done buying new gear, it's built into the gene pool.

I just picked up my 200-400 10 days ago, So I'm all Coveted out.......Well, I only have 2 x 600RT's, maybe a 3rd would help, some how, some where.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Jun 9, 2013)

eml58 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > mrsfotografie said:
> ...



Well I did say _'At the moment...'_ 

Have fun with your 200-400! It's a cool lens, sub-zero in fact (but outside my budget and fortunately also outside my photography scope).


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 10, 2013)

50f1.8 ?


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 11, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> 50f1.8 ?



that is a great little lens. for about three years it was my favorite lens. now I have three L lenses and a fisheye, and while they are excellent, most of my photos that hang on the wall are from that one hundred dollar plastic lens. but part of that might be laziness about printing out new prints and framing them.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Jun 11, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > 50f1.8 ?
> ...



It is, and the Mk I is even better, mostly in build quality.


----------



## hawaiisunsetphoto (Jun 11, 2013)

I'd like to pick up the 400mm f/2.8L IS II at some point. Used it once on loan... epic lens. Also, a 17mm TSE....


----------



## sandymandy (Jun 11, 2013)

Some ind of wideangle, preferably L lens oh and of course i need the FF body first too...

I really like the 24mm 1.4 L II but im hesitating since im mostly doing portrait/people photos and not sure if 24mm is too wide for this. Well ive seen really nice portaits taken with it..argh..no idea 

also wondering if i should get 25mm f2 (no IS) for my APS-C or if it sucks compared to 50mm 1.8 II regarding IQ


----------



## Maxaperture (Jun 11, 2013)

I have a 500m F/4 L IS mkI
Thinking of selling it to fund a 300mm 2.8 L IS mkII, this will be lighter and I can use it with my 2x mkIII
I'll then have a sport (horses) lens and a wildlife lens in one package


----------



## trulandphoto (Jun 11, 2013)

My next lens will be the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. I just decided to sell my 300 f/4 IS and 70-200 f/2.8 non IS to cover the cost. I've been doing a fair bit of event coverage lately and the IS would be a great help. I think I can live with converters with the IS II and won't miss the 300 f/4 all that much.


----------



## FilipOk (Jun 11, 2013)

50 f1.4 IS (L) prising ~ 600 - 1000$

It is shame for Canon, but from my point of view where is no perfect 50 mm lens currently in its optics line.
50 1.8 II is too cheap and plastic
50 1.4 is not optically perfect and has known mechanical issue
50 1.2 L is too expensive and quite soft until well stopped down

I know that company is very proud for ​​its reputation of best reportage brand, but I hope it has enough resources to provide also perfect solution for most popular fix-focals between upgrades of next "big white pipe" ).
The lens should be optically and mechanically perfect! Also due to Canon doesn't provide sensor stabilisation IS is very desirable (for almost every new lens). I also agree to pay extra for weather sealing and Luxury quality.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Jun 11, 2013)

FilipOk said:


> 50 f1.4 IS (L) prising ~ 600 - 1000$
> 
> It is shame for Canon, but from my point of view where is no perfect 50 mm lens currently in its optics line.
> 50 1.8 II is too cheap and plastic
> ...



The best Canon 50mm EF lens IMHO is the 50mm f/1.8 Mk I. Tiny size, reasonable build and good optically. However no longer available new of course. Thankfully some good copies still exist ;-)


----------



## tron (Jun 11, 2013)

mrsfotografie said:


> FilipOk said:
> 
> 
> > 50 f1.4 IS (L) prising ~ 600 - 1000$
> ...


I do have one 8) (Simply because I had bought it by 1989 or 1990 to gether with 28 2.8 )


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 15, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > 50f1.8 ?
> ...



And if you believe DXO, it is rated higher than the 600F4 V2...... And at only 1/80th the price..


----------



## yogi (Jun 16, 2013)

The 200/f2 L. From everything i have seen and heard, it is a wonderful lens. I would probably use it more as a long portrait lens than anything else. Maybe when i win the lottery.


----------



## tron (Jun 16, 2013)

The 500mm f/4L IS II. 

Up to now I have the 300mm f/4L (non-IS) and 100-400L

300mm f/4L non-IS with 1.4 is superb (better that 100-400 at even more stopped down aperture!)
However I do not like it with my 2X II.

I have not used yet 100-400 with the 1.4X II but it can't be that great and I am afraid for flare (when I shoot sunsets).

I am thinking also of a 400mm 5.6L that it will be decent with the 1.4X and will get me to 560mm f/8.

But in that case I will have both 100-400 and 400 5.6 which is a little too much considering how old they are.

Next experiment: 100-400 with 1.4X... (Until I get a 500mm)


----------



## J.R. (Jun 18, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



That's why I don't believe DXO ... not saying the 50mm f/1.8 is a bad lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 18, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > jdramirez said:
> ...



I do believe DxO. But you have to uderstand what their numbers mean, and that's the problem - most people don't take the time to do so, and dismiss useful information out of hand.

The 600 II is better in terms of sharpness, distortion, vignetting, and CA. The 50/1.8 has higher transmission...and a higher 'DxOMark Score'. Why? As they state, "_The DxOMark Score is measured for defined exposure conditions corresponding to low-light scene with 150 lux illumination and an exposure time of 1/60s. These conditions were chosen as we believe low-light performances are very important for today’s photography and it is also important for photographers to know how well lenses perform at the widest aperture._" At 150 lux and 1/60 s, which will perform better - an f/1.8 lens or an f/4 lens? That's why the 50/1.8 is 'better'. For most of us, the 'Score' isn't often relevant. However, the *Measurements* are a useful tool to compare lenses.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 19, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Thanks Neuro ... the measurements are good enough but I don't believe in the ratings and scores DXO sets out - in this case, I don't see the point as to why one would need to compare the 50mm vis-a-vis the 600mm.


----------



## P_R (Jul 10, 2013)

The 50mm f/1.2 especially since the 85 f/1.2 is so nice to use, albeit with slow focus. The very large aperture allows for creativity but my technique of focus and recompose is not exactly compatible with high apertures!
Maybe a body upgrade then the 50...


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Jul 18, 2013)

What I'd really like to see Canon do is re-release the FD to EF lens adapter again. I'd love to be able to
use my collection of FD lenses on a digital body (with a real viewfinder for you EOS-M fans) even with the
restrictions to "manual" use.


----------



## ions (Jul 18, 2013)

14-24 f2.8


----------

