# new lens advice



## rob14 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hi All,

I need help. I "believe" I need a new lens but you know how that goes. I have a 6D body. The only lens I have is 85mm f/1.8. I primarily enjoy shooting people but from time to time I enjoy the ability to shoot landscape, etc. 

The problem is...I don't know IF/WHAT I need. 

For example...there was a robin's nest on my porch with three blue eggs in it that I wanted to photograph. I had to climb high on a ladder to focus with the 6D and 85mm. 

What would best suit my needs?

I can spend roughly $1,000 but I'd rather keep it in the 7-800 range.

Thanks!


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 25, 2013)

If you are wanting a 'super zoom' for Canon full frame, under $1000, you are out of luck, and likely always will be. Canon will never offer a lens like that in the $1000 or under price range. Nikon's 28-300 looks like a superb lens (at least from the test at thedigitalpicture), but I despise the Nikon system.

I bought the Sigma 120-400 for around $900, and use it on my 6D. I prefer to use it on a monopod, because it is about 4 pounds. I feel it is as good as the Canon 100-400, but costs half the price. Also costs 1/3 the price of the upcoming new Canon 100-400, which will be forced to sell around $2500, because Nikon's new 80-400 costs $2700. Tit for tat. "L" lenses are never going to be as affordable as they are now, but then neither are third party lenses such as Sigma or Tamron.

I'm not sure if you are wanting a "walk around" lens or not. The lens that will give the best image quality, reach, and combined with light weight, is the 300 f/4 L IS. The best "walk around" zoom lens is probably the 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS. But both of these cost higher than your budget, about $1300 to $1450, depending on if there is a "sale". You could always buy a used lens, but that's not the best way to spend your money...unless it is very mint condition, and no accumulated dust inside. 

The 70-200 f/4L _without IS_, at around $600 and only 1.5 pounds, is by far the best value in the entire Canon lens lineup, in my opinion. However, 200mm may not be enough "reach" on the 6D, for what you are wanting. 

There are many users on here and elsewhere, who are happy to spout that the 70-200 f/4 (non-IS) is a "soft" lens or otherwise not worth owning. But I say they either got a bad copy, or else want to justify spending more than twice the price on the IS version, which is as heavy as the 70-300L, but only goes to 200mm, and is a waste of money in my opinion (at least since the 70-300L came out). At the full frame corners wide open, my 70-200 f/4 can get a tad soft, but I close it down a bit if I need sharpness there (usually at infinity focus). 

I have rented the less costly 70-300 Canon, but only used it on a crop body. I liked it ok. For $600 or less, it's kind of a halfway decent value. Autofocus was fairly slow. I'm not sure how good/bad its image is outside the crop area, either. I had considered renting the much touted Tamron 70-300, but apparently I read something that made me think the Canon was sharper, so I rented it instead. It was certainly more than sharp enough on the crop body, but the color palette and the contrast definitely were not as good as my 70-200 f/4L, and the sharpness was a tad behind also. 

If you are wanting to do macro shots, I would say try the new Tamron 90mm f/2.8. Read some of the user reviews on amazon, or elsewhere. The longer macro lenses cost considerably more than $1000. Not sure if macro is necessarily what you are wanting, though. Certainly you can buy extension tubes and do macro photography with any lens. The Canon 100L is a very popular macro lens, but it's never gotten me excited.

I have rented the Canon 24-105L, and despite some chromatic aberration, I loved the color and contrast of that lens. I decided ultimately to not buy it when I bought the 6D, because I feel they will never sell it in the "kit" at as low a price as I would pay...around $580 plus the body. 

The 24-70 f/2.8 lens I crave is the Tamron, but I actually need something wider to use first. I suspect you are probably not really looking for a 24-70 at this time.

My favorite lens is the 135 f/2L. It costs just under $1000. It has the best bokeh of any lens I have ever used, rivaling that of the 85 f/1.2L...and had no "bokeh fringing" to boot (the 85L has a hefty amount at the wider apertures). Its sharpness might vary from one copy to the next, but mine is very sharp.

The 135L may or may not be the best lens for you, though. I suspect the 70-300L might be. You would need to go a bit above your budget.


----------



## tpatana (Jun 25, 2013)

I would totally get the 24-105, you'll find it for ~$750-800. That's awesome lens with 6D, and after you learn how it'll behave, you can think if you want to change it for something else or keep it. Regardless you can sell it for almost the same, so basically you can try it for ~free.

And it's great lens, you'll love it.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 25, 2013)

tpatana said:


> I would totally get the 24-105, you'll find it for ~$750-800. That's awesome lens with 6D, and after you learn how it'll behave, you can think if you want to change it for something else or keep it. Regardless you can sell it for almost the same, so basically you can try it for ~free.
> 
> And it's great lens, you'll love it.



You can't sell it for almost the same, because you will be paying a 10% fee to either ebay or amazon, along with taking a bit of a hit off the new price...unless of course someone knows of a nice website that charges reasonable fees, or else free. There's always craigslist if you are in a large city, but I have found too many craigslist buyers, want a "deal"...as in, they want to be able to buy something used, use it a while, then turn around and sell it again for more than they paid you for it.

Again, I have a feeling the 70-300 would be the better focal length range for rob14.


----------



## tpatana (Jun 25, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > I would totally get the 24-105, you'll find it for ~$750-800. That's awesome lens with 6D, and after you learn how it'll behave, you can think if you want to change it for something else or keep it. Regardless you can sell it for almost the same, so basically you can try it for ~free.
> ...



Maybe I've been lucky, but most of my lenses I've sold for at least the same what I paid for, using Craigslist. Smaller cities I'm sure it doesn't work, but bigger yes. Tokina 11-16 I sold for $100 gain even I bought Tokina new from B&H, 135L also $100 gain after ~2 years of using it, but that one I bought used from Craigslist myself.

70-300 would be nice lens, but if 70mm is the widest he can go, that'll limit his options quite plenty. I'd rather get the 24-105, and then if it feels he doesn't use the wide-end at all, but needs longer, sell it for about the same and get the 70-300.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 25, 2013)

tpatana said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > tpatana said:
> ...



What city are you in? Why on earth would anyone buy something used at a higher price than new? I kind of doubt your claim...unless of course the price you paid new, was some kind of inside deal that was lower than the average street price.

Well, he mentioned having to get on a ladder to shoot the bird eggs and nest. He would certainly still have to get on a ladder with 105mm, going from 85mm. Of course, if he wants to see down into a nest from above, he would have to get on a ladder anyway, haha.


----------



## tpatana (Jun 25, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> What city are you in? Why on earth would anyone buy something used at a higher price than new? I kind of doubt your claim...unless of course the price you paid new, was some kind of inside deal that was lower than the average street price.



Seattle area. I always scout for good deals, and I landed really nice one on the Tokina, few years of shooting and sold it for more. During the time they had come out with the Mark II, which increased the street price slightly, so that also helped me. Same with the 135L, I waited some time until found good deal for used, then sold it after couple years. Most of the time I don't have rush to sell stuff, so I can keep the asking price firm. Good lenses keep their value.


----------



## wsmith96 (Jun 25, 2013)

I believe the lens you are looking for is the 24-105L.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 26, 2013)

@OP - I'd get the 24-105L, used. Now that they only add $500 to the 6D price as a kit, they're selling for a good value on the used market. 

@CarlTN - I'm in Boston, and I'm in the black on CL buy/sell. I paid $450 for a 200/2.8 II, $750 for a 300/4 IS, $500 for an MP-E 65 (sold the first two for a decent profit, kept the third) I bought and sold for the same amount both a 70-300 DO and a 24-105L. I bought a 10-22 new from Amazon, sold it after about a year for a $50 loss - if I was selling it today, I'd make a profit. It helps that I never have an urgent need to sell, and I have cash on hand if a deal pops up.


----------



## rob14 (Jun 26, 2013)

I really appreciate the responses.

I do believe the 24-105 is what I am looking for but I need people to tell me it!

The 70-300 I think is too long for me. 

I should have bought the 6D with the kit I suppose but at the time I was just reading too many mixed reviews.


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 26, 2013)

+1 24-105.... I like it as a walk-around "one lens will do" lens!


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 26, 2013)

tpatana said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > What city are you in? Why on earth would anyone buy something used at a higher price than new? I kind of doubt your claim...unless of course the price you paid new, was some kind of inside deal that was lower than the average street price.
> ...



Why the heck would you ever want to sell the 135L??


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 26, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> @OP - I'd get the 24-105L, used. Now that they only add $500 to the 6D price as a kit, they're selling for a good value on the used market.
> 
> @CarlTN - I'm in Boston, and I'm in the black on CL buy/sell. I paid $450 for a 200/2.8 II, $750 for a 300/4 IS, $500 for an MP-E 65 (sold the first two for a decent profit, kept the third) I bought and sold for the same amount both a 70-300 DO and a 24-105L. I bought a 10-22 new from Amazon, sold it after about a year for a $50 loss - if I was selling it today, I'd make a profit. It helps that I never have an urgent need to sell, and I have cash on hand if a deal pops up.



Well good for you, you bought those used I assume? ($450 for a 200 f/2.8, etc.)

Well, I've tried my local craigslist, as well as Atlanta, Knoxville, Nashville. I was able to sell my Rebel Xsi on my local CR back in 2009 for about a $100 loss off the new price. I haven't sold anything else camera-related since, other than a very cheap flashgun that I got for free. The rest of my cameras and lenses have since sold on amazon marketplace, fairly quickly. 

I finally sold my telescope off the Nashville craigslist, after trying for about 3 years. I paid about $460 for it new in 2004, sold it for $275.

I guess it's good that people in Boston and Seattle are willing to sell low and buy high...but in my experience in my area, they want you to give stuff away.

I put my binoculars in the Atlanta craigslist, and within 5 minutes, it was flagged and deleted. So to retaliate, I flagged everything in that section...hahaha. That kind of thing goes on a lot too.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 26, 2013)

Regarding the 24-105, it's a fine lens, but not perfect. The CA can be kind of strong. I used to want it. I now would prefer a 24-70 f/2.8. I get by with the 40mm pancake (which optically is about perfect), the 58mm Voigtlander, the 70-200 f/4, and a couple of other lenses I've mentioned before. I owned the Rokinon 85mm f/1.4, and it was a fine lens. Sold it for about a $25 loss. But it was a full manual, and I don't need anymore of those. I might wind up buying the 14mm "Samyang"...not decided yet. If I do, I guess I will sell it at a huge loss...as is my way!


----------



## tpatana (Jun 26, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



There was crazy good offer on the 70-200 IS II, and when I told my wife about that, she just stared at me. I think my and her definition of the "crazy" were different on that point. The deal was until midnight, my parents were over and we had few drinks over dinner, and few afterwards. I think it was somewhere after 6+ beers that I sneaked on my PC, took out my credit card and ordered the lens.

The next morning hangover, I had to confess the purchase. I think the options were to sleep on the couch with the 135L, or sell it and get back the bed-permit.

So I was happy and willing to sell my 135L.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 26, 2013)

tpatana said:
 

> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Why the heck would you ever want to sell the 135L??
> ...



"Crazy" stuff ;D ;D ;D


----------



## tpatana (Jun 26, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > @OP - I'd get the 24-105L, used. Now that they only add $500 to the 6D price as a kit, they're selling for a good value on the used market.
> ...



Some items move better and some don't, but neuro had the keyword there. Don't sell in rush, and when buying have the money ready to jump if there's good deal. If you can wait, there's always someone who needs your lens today, or someone who needs your money today. That's when you can make good deals.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Jun 26, 2013)

tpatana said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > tpatana said:
> ...


Hazards of online shops. I love this story, the best about it is that you actually admit to it ;D 

Checked your FB, nice shots.
J


----------



## bholliman (Jun 26, 2013)

As others have pointed out, the 24-105L is a terrific value and fits nicely in your price range. Its image quality is good and its very solidly built. It has a nice zoom range that will work for most walk around photography and on the 6D its usable in low light situations by using higher ISO settings.


----------



## bholliman (Jun 26, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> What city are you in? Why on earth would anyone buy something used at a higher price than new? I kind of doubt your claim...unless of course the price you paid new, was some kind of inside deal that was lower than the average street price.



I'm slightly above break even on buying and selling used lenses and camera bodies. I've also sold two kit lenses for a nice "profit" over incremental price paid for a kit. I sold on eBay until their fees got too high, now use Craigs List almost exclusively. We live in a small town, but only an hour or two from several large midwestern US cities. As Neuro pointed out, the key is not being in a hurry to sell and waiting until you get your price.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 26, 2013)

Hobby Shooter said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



I suppose I can understand that. I am not burdened with having to answer to a better half. I'm just burdened with ruining my life all on my own right now...it's a shame I'm not getting paid to do that...hahaha.

I think I responded to the wrong post...sorry...hopefully ya'll will figure it out. My eyes are going crossed looking at this forum, haha.


----------



## CarlTN (Jun 26, 2013)

bholliman said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > What city are you in? Why on earth would anyone buy something used at a higher price than new? I kind of doubt your claim...unless of course the price you paid new, was some kind of inside deal that was lower than the average street price.
> ...



Well, I wasn't in a hurry for selling the telescope, obviously...it took 3 years and I still had to let it go under the price I wanted. Obviously it was not in demand, etc. I should have just paid the $15 and put it on astromart, I guess.

I don't have the time or desire to spend to try to buy low and sell high, on used camera items, lenses, etc. I would rather flush all my money down the stock market toilet...it takes less time, and is more fun if I ever do make a profit.

Anyway, these are some fine Fujinon 12x60 HB roof prism binoculars I'm trying to sell, originally retailed for ~$800. They're made in Japan. I got them new from Eagle Optics for $299 a year ago, and am willing to take a slight loss on that. If you know anyone who likes binoculars, please send them my way.

Basically I went nuts in 2012, and spent too much on 3 pairs of binoculars (didn't buy any camera stuff that year). These are the pair I use the least often, but they work fantastically...have a nice wide apparent FOV, excellent in low light...a bit heavy but easily hand-holdable for a while...very steady view, good balance...come with carrying case and solid cast aluminum tripod mount, which I've used on a monopod lately. Handholding, I can easily follow nearby ducks in flight as they passed low overhead, etc.


----------



## tpatana (Jun 26, 2013)

Hobby Shooter said:


> Hazards of online shops. I love this story, the best about it is that you actually admit to it ;D



My father taught me to never do something I'm too ashamed to admit. Given things I've done, I guess I have no shame :-\



> Checked your FB, nice shots.
> J



Thanks. I'm still quite newbie with photos, especially on post processing. But the local girls are so good with posing that it's easy for me to just keep shooting and get good pictures.


----------



## yablonsky (Jun 27, 2013)

get the 17-40 for landscapes. The wide angle is crazy on FF. Very nice.


----------

