# What would it take lens wise?



## Ozarker (May 16, 2017)

I am at the point now that I think I am just about done on the lens front. I got real lucky and think I got started during the golden age of lenses.

I've figured out a great white just isn't in the cards. That's okay.

The only two lenses I'm waiting for now are the new 85L and the fabled new 50L. Hopefully both will have BR.

So, have you reached the end point or getting real close? What lenses do you still want to make your collection complete?


----------



## sanj (May 16, 2017)

As and when the 800 next version is launched, it will be mine.

Also considering changing my 16-35 f4 IS to 16-35 f2.8 III

24-70 coming with IS?


----------



## drnedel (May 16, 2017)

Similar for me: Getting close. 

Most painful for me right now is not having a 50mm prime (or 55mm or 58mm, whatever) which I really love. I got the Canon 50mm 1.4, but ...

I will probably get myself a Zeiss Milvus 50mm, which should cover me for 50% (AF not essential, but Image Quality is), and 25% I can cover using the Canon 50mm 1.4 (slight sacrifice in IQ acceptable for having AF), which still leaves me uncovered for ~ 25% (IQ AND AF needed). Or wait for the next Canon 50mmL?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 16, 2017)

I've got 11mm to 1200mm covered on FF, with plenty of lenses in between – I think I'm good there, unless something new and unique comes out, or there's an upgrade to an existing lens (e.g. a 24-70/2.8 IS). I've got most of the EF-M lenses, although I could possibly see picking up an M18-150 at some point.


----------



## Random Orbits (May 16, 2017)

Just the longer great whites... hoping that the kids continue with field sports or pick up bird watching so I can justify the 200-400 or the 600. ;D


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 16, 2017)

New lenses keep coming out, and one may appear that is a significant update. I find IS for short focal length lenses to be mostly useless for my still photos, it takes a while to lock-in, and by then, the opportunity for the shot is passed. Its great for long distance telephoto shots of static subjects at slow shutter speeds. For my 24-70mm L, it would be of little use, I just keep the shutter speed up to 1/100 or faster. Most of my blurred shots are due to fast subject motion.

For video, where the IS stays on and locked, its more useful, but I do not do video.

However, Canon can and will make IS lenses, because the buyers want them, and they bring in lots of $$.


----------



## Zeidora (May 16, 2017)

Pretty well assorted with what I want, from 15/16 through 300/420 mm.
Depending on how my interest in UV reflectance imaging continues, I may get one of the Coastal Optics UV lenses (or both, maybe?). Currently use a Nikkor EL 80/5.6 for testing.
And if Zeiss ever comes out with a 100 macro 1:1, I'll snap that up in a heartbeat.


----------



## bholliman (May 16, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> So, have you reached the end point or getting real close?


I don't think I will ever be at the end point for equipment, too much GAS. That said, I'm pretty happy with my current lenses. I have 16-600mm(with extenders) covered with high quality glass, but would like to add a 50mm and 85mm prime at some point when/if Canon comes out with new L's or IS versions similar to the 35mm f/2 IS. I plan to add a 500mm f/4 II this summer, which will give me the reach I need for fall bird migration and eagle photography over the winter. 

For my M5, I have all the EF-M lenses except the 28mm Macro, so am pretty well covered there.


----------



## 2n10 (May 16, 2017)

I am happy with my selection. I have 10mm to 600mm covered on APS-c. I think I will go for the 200-600 if it comes out. Don't think I will get a great white but who knows?


----------



## Ozarker (May 17, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> I've got 11mm to 1200mm covered on FF, with plenty of lenses in between – I think I'm good there, unless something new and unique comes out, or there's an upgrade to an existing lens (e.g. a 24-70/2.8 IS). I've got most of the EF-M lenses, although I could possibly see picking up an M18-150 at some point.



IS on a new 24-70 would be very interesting to me too. Neuro, other than the 85 and 50 I mentioned I might be convinced to get the 11-24. I went with the Tamron and it is good. I just regret not going with the Canon. Of course, that money would go a long way towards a 5D Mark V if there ever is one.

I did today order a Riser pinhole standard (EF mount) from B&H. I figure it has to be worth $30 in fun.


----------



## Ozarker (May 17, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> New lenses keep coming out, and one may appear that is a significant update. I find IS for short focal length lenses to be mostly useless for my still photos, it takes a while to lock-in, and by then, the opportunity for the shot is passed. Its great for long distance telephoto shots of static subjects at slow shutter speeds. For my 24-70mm L, it would be of little use, I just keep the shutter speed up to 1/100 or faster. Most of my blurred shots are due to fast subject motion.
> 
> For video, where the IS stays on and locked, its more useful, but I do not do video.
> 
> However, Canon can and will make IS lenses, because the buyers want them, and they bring in lots of $$.



As usual, I have to agree with you.


----------



## Ozarker (May 17, 2017)

bholliman said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > So, have you reached the end point or getting real close?
> ...



Thankfully I only have one mount size to worry about. I see you mention the 35 f/2 and it gets a lot of good press. The 35 f/1.4L II is superb too should GAS get the better of you.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 17, 2017)

I'm generally fairly happy with my current choices. But after recently seeing a $2 laser cut 0.3mm pinhole on eBay recently, I knew I had to make it mine.


----------



## Maximilian (May 17, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> So, have you reached the end point or getting real close? What lenses do you still want to make your collection complete?


Hi CanonFanBoy!

Considering real life budget, I am pretty much done with my setup. There are some I'd like to have and some I haven't considered yet:

I would have been very interested in a better 24-105/4. The V2 got me quite disappointed, so I stayed with V1
I'd like to have a 24-70/2.8 but I cannot justify by budget
I'd need a 85/1.8 successor. I don't want to go to L or third party here
I haven't considered T&S lenses yet. But again: justify by budget?
maybe a (new) 50/1.4


----------



## axtstern (May 17, 2017)

I wish for two classic lenses to come back in modern Quality:

The 50-150 1:2.8 in a stabilized Version but not much bigger than the old Sigma 50-150 without OS was
and the 35-135 1:2.8 which Tamron produced back in the days when touch, feel and IQ was not Tamrons strength.

Sigma had a 50-150 in two Versions without OS which was extremly well build and small but soft, very soft.
Afterwards they gave that lens OS but packed it in the 70-200 Chassis and gone was the size Advantage.


----------



## Larsskv (May 17, 2017)

bholliman said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > So, have you reached the end point or getting real close?
> ...



+1. I already have my lenses covered, and I am happy with the ones I have. But GAS will drive me into buying new stuff I really don't need. It is my hobby, I am curious, have a decent economy, and therefore reason is a small factor in my decision making. 

I have all the current L-lenses up to 135mm, apart from the 14mm and the 100 macro (both which I probably will acquire at some point.) I would definitely buy updates to the 50 f1.4 and 85 f1.8, if they were small and with increased IQ. I am also interested in the Tamron 85 f1.8, due to its reported quality, IS and decent size.


----------



## Ozarker (May 17, 2017)

Hillsilly said:


> I'm generally fairly happy with my current choices. But after recently seeing a $2 laser cut 0.3mm pinhole on eBay recently, I knew I had to make it mine.



LOL! I'm wondering whether or not the pinhole images can be enlarged much, or do they need to stay fairly small for IQ? Maybe postcard size? This is probably a situation that the 50 megapixels of a 5DSr would really be nice to have.

Is there a DSLR pinhole photo thread on this forum? I couldn't find one. That could be interesting. Thanks for responding!


----------



## Fleetie (May 17, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Hillsilly said:
> 
> 
> > I'm generally fairly happy with my current choices. But after recently seeing a $2 laser cut 0.3mm pinhole on eBay recently, I knew I had to make it mine.
> ...


I'd like to see some pinhole images.
Also, how did the pinhole get mounted to the Canon camera?
Or did it come mounted to an EF flange? Doubt that, for $2.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 17, 2017)

Fleetie said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Hillsilly said:
> ...



Something like this: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/915823-REG/rising_rpsc001_camera_pinhole_body_cap.html

But a DIY option starting from a cheap 3rd party body cap would cost much less than $30.


----------



## Ozarker (May 17, 2017)

Fleetie said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Hillsilly said:
> ...



The one I ordered through B&H (Rising brand) is made with a a piece of aluminum moulded into a camera cap. It is an EF (plastic) mount ($30). There is a standard 50mm (what I got) and a wide angle. 

I won't have it until next week because I'm traveling. Will post as soon as I can. Neuro posted the link.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 18, 2017)

Given that I just took advantage of CPW and the multi-lens rebate to add the 24-70/2.8ii and 70-200/2.8ISii, I'm done for a good while. Those plus the 100-400ii, 100L, and 35/2IS should hold me for some time.

I really should sell my 50A, 24-105L, and 70-300L.


----------



## Ozarker (May 18, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Given that I just took advantage of CPW and the multi-lens rebate to add the 24-70/2.8ii and 70-200/2.8ISii, I'm done for a good while. Those plus the 100-400ii, 100L, and 35/2IS should hold me for some time.
> 
> I really should sell my 50A, 24-105L, and 70-300L.



Those two lenses you just got are sooooooo good!


----------



## jd7 (May 18, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Given that I just took advantage of CPW and the multi-lens rebate to add the 24-70/2.8ii and 70-200/2.8ISii, I'm done for a good while. Those plus the 100-400ii, 100L, and 35/2IS should hold me for some time.
> ...



Every time I get close to done, I seem to find something else I "need" to add to the list ... I guess that's GAS for you! I think (hope!) I'm finally getting close now though.

After going for a combination of 24-70/4L IS zoom (small, light, IS) plus 35 and 50 primes, I'm thinking of switching to a 24-70/2.8. I'd still keep the 35, but might then sell the 50 (I think my 50A is awesome, it's just that I'm not sure I like/use 50mm enough to warrant keeping it). Anyway, I still hesitate about the Canon 24-70 II, given its price and lack of IS (I know not everyone thinks IS is useful in that focal length range but I've found it useful for me). Am looking forward to seeing how the Sigma 24-70 OS Art and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 stack up ... hopefully in the near future.

The only other lens I'm interested in (realistically!) at the moment is the 16-35/4L IS ... but just not sure how much I'd use an UWA.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 18, 2017)

jd7 said:


> Every time I get close to done, I seem to find something else I "need" to add to the list ... I guess that's GAS for you! I think (hope!) I'm finally getting close now though.
> 
> After going for a combination of 24-70/4L IS zoom (small, light, IS) plus 35 and 50 primes, I'm thinking of switching to a 24-70/2.8. I'd still keep the 35, but might then sell the 50 (I think my 50A is awesome, it's just that I'm not sure I like/use 50mm enough to warrant keeping it). Anyway, I still hesitate about the Canon 24-70 II, given its price and lack of IS (I know not everyone thinks IS is useful in that focal length range but I've found it useful for me). Am looking forward to seeing how the Sigma 24-70 OS Art and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 stack up ... hopefully in the near future.
> 
> The only other lens I'm interested in (realistically!) at the moment is the 16-35/4L IS ... but just not sure how much I'd use an UWA.



Yeah, that lens is a nice one, but I'm in the same boat on it - if I needed UWA that'd be the choice (or go budget with a 17-40 as little as I'd use it), but I don't really miss it with my current options and one of my biggest issues already is avoiding a cluttered background. Getting a clean UWA shot would be painful. Maybe some day.


----------



## jd7 (May 19, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> jd7 said:
> 
> 
> > Every time I get close to done, I seem to find something else I "need" to add to the list ... I guess that's GAS for you! I think (hope!) I'm finally getting close now though.
> ...



I had an UWA when I was shooting crop and I found I really didn't use it that much - although I did really like it on a few occasions, such as when I was in The Kimberley (if you haven't heard of it, have a look at http://www.australia.com/en/places/wa/7-breathtaking-sights-to-see-in-the-kimberley.html). Sadly I rarely get to spend time in those sorts of places these days. And to be honest, even if I did, with the software available now I'd generally prefer to stitch a panorama.

I've thought about picking up a second-hand 17-40 as a budget option too, but I've been thinking I'd probably rather "do it properly" with the 16-35/4 IS (I've almost never heard a bad word about it!) or go without. Maybe I should reconsider that though.


----------



## Hillsilly (May 19, 2017)

Fleetie said:


> Or did it come mounted to an EF flange? Doubt that, for $2.



It was actually £2 (not $2) - http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Pinhole-034-lenses-034-for-pinhole-camera-/282456711286?

It is a square piece of very thin metal with a hole cut in it. There is no mount as such - you need to make your own. I bought mine to go with a 4x5 camera and it will just be taped to a board (or if I get super keen, I might build a specialised box), but you could easily drill a larger hole into the front of a Canon body cap and tape this over that hole as the DIY option. Or you could just use a pin to put a small hole in a body cap. Supposedly, the better the hole, the less distortion in the image. 

I kept missing all of the fun of world pin hole day, which is what prompted me to go looking for this. I haven't used it yet, but I'll get a few chances in coming weeks and will post some photos.


----------



## chrysoberyl (May 19, 2017)

I have nothing longer than 200mm because I want a sharp 400-500mm prime with good AF, IS and less than $2500.


----------



## Random Orbits (May 19, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> I have nothing longer than 200mm because I want a sharp 400-500mm prime with good AF, IS and less than $2500.



And what about the 100-400 II wouldn't fit that criteria besides being a zoom. Better IQ than the 400L f/5.6 + IS + fast AF + < 1900 USD.


----------



## chrysoberyl (May 19, 2017)

Random Orbits said:


> chrysoberyl said:
> 
> 
> > I have nothing longer than 200mm because I want a sharp 400-500mm prime with good AF, IS and less than $2500.
> ...



For me, primes have a lot of advantages:

- Usually sharper across the frame.
- Don't huff dust and moisture.
- Lighter.
- Smaller.
- Potentially less expensive.

The first two are the most important to me. I just don't want another zoom.


----------



## Act444 (May 19, 2017)

I think I'm FINALLY close to reaching the point where I'm content. The one major lens purchase I have left on "the list" is a super-telephoto lens for animals and birds...and at this point it's not even a matter of cost so much as it is a matter of weight, space and transport. As tempting as a 500 or 600mm f4 is, I've come to the realization if I can't handhold it, or carry it around easily, it's little more than a prop. I've come close multiple times to getting the 400 DO only to back off due to rumors on a 600 DO or 200-600 zoom (600 is ideally what I'm shooting for). While normally I don't mind grabbing what's available now and then "upgrading" later, at this price range I need to be in it for the long haul. 

I had the 24-105 II on my list for a long while, but bad reviews gave me pause and eventually led me to scratch it altogether. 

If this rumored 85 1.4 IS turns up, that may go on the list too, depending on performance and price.


----------



## mnclayshooter (May 19, 2017)

300 f2.8 II
TS-E 24
MP-E 65


That would round out my kit (somewhat in order of priority for me) and give me flexibility for nearly any type of shot that I like to take. The 11-24 looks awesome too, but honestly, the money for it vs the amount I'd use it, probably not worth it, yet.. the 16-35 f4 is pretty darn good, and I have a Rokinon 14mm - not in the same league as the 11-24, but I use the 14 about 2x a year, and that's about the budget I'm willing to allocate to that super-ultra-mega wide angle. If I'm honest, I have yet to borrow/rent an 11-24 yet. I've had the others in hand and fell in love with them instantly... ok the TS-E took a little fiddle-farting around to figure out that I was in love with it. 

My goal isn't so much to have every Focal length covered - I didn't do that in film and not going to try in digital, but to have a handful of the very best (or nearly best) quality lenses available to me to select from for the various scenes/things I might encounter on that given day. I don't go out carrying all of my gear, so does it matter that I have a lens in the closet that can get me to exactly 561mm? Not if I'm not carrying it with me. If I spot a bird on a fence post 200 yards away, if I have an 16-35 mounted, does it matter that I own the lens that "could have gotten the shot"?

What matters most is the gear you have with you at the very moment you need it, and more importantly, your knowledge of how to use it/capitalize on it's potential for quality. My feeling is that it takes a LONG time to get to be an expert at a given focal length or particular lens. Filling up a kit with lenses you barely ever use isn't giving you that expertise.


----------



## Daan Stam (May 19, 2017)

Well I have a 18-135 stm and a 75-300 so anything will do
But I am just sixteen so this is fine.
I would really like a 16-35 and 70-200 and 24-70 though  on a FF camera.

Does anybody have tips on making money i am looking into stockphotography but i live in the Netherlands so i don't 
know how to handle the taxes in the US.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (May 19, 2017)

For travel I've put away the "heavy stuff" my wife refuses to carry and settled on a simple but reliable package - a crop body T5 with the 10-18, 18-55 and the 55-250. Reasonable image quality, very light weight, able to stuff in a small shoulder bag and covers 90% of shots I want without jockeying into position. I'm not sure if any of the mirrorless offerings would be more portable. The whole deal probably weighs less than my 100-400 and my back and shoulders and neck are a whole lot more comfortable. About the only lens I would like to see is something from Canon to rival the 200-600 long zooms from sigma and tamron in the same price range.


----------



## jolyonralph (May 19, 2017)

Good question.

I've also got to the point where I wonder what else I actually need.

I am tempted to buy some more Sony lenses for the A7RII, but let's keep to the topic of the site for a bit 


The ones I'd really want to get are (in no particular order) - discounting things that I really would like but could never, ever, justify the price for the amount I'd use it:

11-24 f/4L
35mm f/1.4L (I may actually settle for the 2.0 IS as that's actually a superb little lens)
100-400 II
300 f/2.8 IS II
TS-E 17mm or 24mm (haven't decided which yet)
50mm f/1.0L (absolutely don't need it, but do I want it? Hell yes)
200mm f/2.0L (ditto)



In reality, the next lens I'm going to get is probably the EF-M 18-150


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 19, 2017)

daaningrid said:


> Well I have a 18-135 stm and a 75-300 so anything will do
> But I am just sixteen so this is fine.
> I would really like a 16-35 and 70-200 and 24-70 though  on a FF camera.
> 
> ...


There are some topics in this forum about image banks like stockphotography. The bottom line is that after making a few thousand photos available, you earn more than a hundred dollars a year, and that's it. The motif would be the "signature" model that entitles the use of many photos in a certain period of time, where the photographer receives only a few cents per signature.


----------



## hbr (May 20, 2017)

Congratulations, daaningrid, on taking up photography at an early age. While I have never made any real money with my photography and I do not want to discourage you, very few people make any money on stock sites. A few years ago I had several hundred photographs on several leading stock sites and after a year I had only earned a couple of dollars. I didn't even ask them for a payout. Stock sites pay almost no money for each photograph that sells and their customers are mainly advertising firms who want royalty free images, but are not willing to pay for them. Then you run into many copyright issues and model releases, etc. Not worth the effort.

My advice is to keep improving your photographic/editing/artistic talent, save up for better equipment and try first to develop some local following. Don't pass up any opportunity to do a photo shoot even if it is free at this stage. Just like any business you need to advertise and look for opportunities.

Hope this helps,

Brian


----------



## arbitrage (May 28, 2017)

I'm content with my selection for now. I am waiting for the 600DO and will surely replace the 600II with it. If the 600DO is as light as 500II then I may also sell off 400DOII. I'm sure I'd have to sell both to break even on the new lens which will surely end up being the most expensive lens in current production.


----------



## geekpower (May 28, 2017)

I have a way to go yet, but at least I have a plan. I could have put everything I wanted on the credit card, but being new to DSLRs, I wanted to take my time (as in a year or more) learning each new lens before getting another.

My version of a well balanced kit would be:

16-35 and 70-200 for landscapes (1 down, 1 to go)

50 and 135 for portraits (1 down, 1 to go)

and maybe someday a 300 or 400 for sports and wildlife (don't tell the wife!)


----------



## Zv (May 29, 2017)

I've not felt the need to buy a new lens in a while. My last major FF lens purchase was the 16-35 f/4L in Nov 2015. I'm covered from 16-200 now on FF but I want to focus on my M lens collection. Eyeing that 18-150, right now I only have the 11-22 and 22/2, so need some more range. 

Are we ever "done"? Nah I don't think so. Maybe we can be satisfied long term but eventually technology moves forward enough that we have to upgrade. Though I'm hoping my current set up will last at least another couple of years!


----------

