Im puzzled with lens choices

[Hainault]

I've got a Canon 77D and am sorta questioning what lens I should get next.

Budget is about £1000-1500
I have a 50mm 1.8 STM, 18-55 f4-5.6 IS STM & a 55-250 f4-5.6 IS STM.

 

I'm torn between improving my "wide glass" with a 24-105 f4 or 24-70 f2.8
Improving my zoom by picking up a 70-200 IS 2.8 
or getting a super zoom, EF 100-400 or Sigma 150-600.

Anyone got any experience with the above lenses?
(I like landscapes, I quite enjoyed wildlife photography when I last did it, I kinda like most photography)

[Revamp]

I picked up the sigma 70-200 for $500 and love it for portrait style work. For studio work or something I want more of the background, the 24-105/f4 is kind of a solid go to.

With landscapes and wildlife, I would choose the 24-105 over the 24-70/2.8. Simply because in landscape, you generally don't want the bokeh effect, so if you're shooting when its dark enough to need 2.8 aperature, it's likely not going to be the crisp image you want anyways.

 

If you can pick up used id say grab the 70-200 which will cover a lot of closer range wildlife as well as portrait work, and the 24-105 which will cover more landscape, as well as some close range wildlife/portrait as well. With those 2 lens alone, you have a lot of possibilities with use. Now ofcourse neither are super telephoto lens so you're not capturing a hummingbird from across a field, but for the general use these should cover you.

 

I also shoot the 77D.

[cc143]

Well given your camera's crop factor, the 24-105/24-70 actually becomes a very standard, not so wide, 40mm FOV. Therefore, that isn't what you'd really be after. 

 

I don't understand your current conundrum. When I am looking for a lens, I roughly know what I need given the style I want to use it for and knowing how my current lens colletion is lacking. I picked up a 17-40 because I wanted a wide angle for landscapes, a 70-200 because I wanted fast glass for concerts, portraiture and longer focal lengths for some of my landscape work. 

 

What is it you find yourself needing? Is it just a matter of wanting to upgrade current glass? do you just have  £1500 to burn?

 

Also, your current collection covers the focals you are after. The only reason I see to go for newer glass is if you are contemplating a move to full frame in the near future or you find your current glass lacking in either sharpness or need a wider aperture. 

 

If you need a wide angle on crop, the 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 is a very good lens, that is very affordable in the used market. So is the 17-55mm f/2.8. Both are EF-S lenses, so only for crop sensors, but will cover you much better if moving to FF isn't a concern. Note that bought new they are considerably more expensive than used, and will lose a lot of value if you ever sell them, so used is the way to go in this case.  

 

For the 24-70 and 70-200mm, look at the tamron sp lenses, they both have IS, are very sharp and considerably less expensive. The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is also due for a refresh, probably later this year too. You can get both the lenses I mentioned above from ebay for under £1500, combined...

 

As far as the 24-105mm is concerned, the 24-70mm is sharper, if you go for the tamron you still have IS, its not that much heavier and is more versatile for portraiture even lacking the extra 35mm reach. So I would definitely go for the 24-70 if you can afford it. 

[Hainault]

2 hours ago, cc143 said:

Well given your camera's crop factor, the 24-105/24-70 actually becomes a very standard, not so wide, 40mm FOV. Therefore, that isn't what you'd really be after. 

 

I don't understand your current conundrum. When I am looking for a lens, I roughly know what I need given the style I want to use it for and knowing how my current lens colletion is lacking. I picked up a 17-40 because I wanted a wide angle for landscapes, a 70-200 because I wanted fast glass for concerts, portraiture and longer focal lengths for some of my landscape work. 

 

What is it you find yourself needing? Is it just a matter of wanting to upgrade current glass? do you just have  £1500 to burn?

 

Also, your current collection covers the focals you are after. The only reason I see to go for newer glass is if you are contemplating a move to full frame in the near future or you find your current glass lacking in either sharpness or need a wider aperture. 

 

If you need a wide angle on crop, the 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 is a very good lens, that is very affordable in the used market. So is the 17-55mm f/2.8. Both are EF-S lenses, so only for crop sensors, but will cover you much better if moving to FF isn't a concern. Note that bought new they are considerably more expensive than used, and will lose a lot of value if you ever sell them, so used is the way to go in this case.  

 

For the 24-70 and 70-200mm, look at the tamron sp lenses, they both have IS, are very sharp and considerably less expensive. The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is also due for a refresh, probably later this year too. You can get both the lenses I mentioned above from ebay for under £1500, combined...

 

As far as the 24-105mm is concerned, the 24-70mm is sharper, if you go for the tamron you still have IS, its not that much heavier and is more versatile for portraiture even lacking the extra 35mm reach. So I would definitely go for the 24-70 if you can afford it. 

Kinda feeling my current focal and aperture coverage is pretty lacking, Plus the images I take aren't as sharp as I'd like (which does push me heavily towards a Canon or Tamron 70-200, Just doesn't feel like enough focal, Even 250 seems lacking), Which is why I referenced lower aperture glass and high focal glass, I'm also heading towards a 5D III or IV due to needing weather sealing (I don't really see the point of going cheaper since then there is almost no point in upgrading), So I'm probably only going to buy FF compatible lenses from now on.

[cc143]

5 minutes ago, Hainault said:

Kinda feeling my current focal and aperture coverage is pretty lacking, Plus the images I take aren't as sharp as I'd like (which does push me heavily towards a Canon or Tamron 70-200, Just doesn't feel like enough focal, Even 250 seems lacking), Which is why I referenced lower aperture glass and high focal glass, I'm also heading towards a 5D III or IV due to needing weather sealing (I don't really see the point of going cheaper since then there is almost no point in upgrading), So I'm probably only going to buy FF compatible lenses from now on.

if you are going to be moving to FF soon, sell both the 18-55 and 55-250, although you won't be getting much for them and look through ebay for the tamron 24-70 and 70-200 I mentioned. I found them pretty cheap quite recently, cheap enough you could go for both, thus no need to decide. 

[Hainault]

2 minutes ago, cc143 said:

if you are going to be moving to FF soon, sell both the 18-55 and 55-250, although you won't be getting much for them and look through ebay for the tamron 24-70 and 70-200 I mentioned. I found them pretty cheap quite recently, cheap enough you could go for both, thus no need to decide. 

I'm keeping my 77D as a backup/lighter body and for multi cam setups, Smaller lenses will be better for walk around using that too, Less noticeable.

 

Hardly worth selling them anyway, Not worth more than £300

[cc143]

1 minute ago, Hainault said:

I'm keeping my 77D as a backup/lighter body and for multi cam setups, Smaller lenses will be better for walk around using that too, Less noticeable.

 

Hardly worth selling them anyway, Not worth more than £300

So what you are basically doing is buying a whole new system. Well then why not think of going nikon? I love Canon and have been using them for years, but right now there's a whole lot of reasons to go with nikon instead. I love my 5d3, but the d810 is better on paper, and so is the d850. You also have a bunch of older glass available you can use on that side that is pretty amazing, the 105f2 for instance. 

[Hainault]

1 minute ago, cc143 said:

So what you are basically doing is buying a whole new system. Well then why not think of going nikon? I love Canon and have been using them for years, but right now there's a whole lot of reasons to go with nikon instead. I love my 5d3, but the d810 is better on paper, and so is the d850. You also have a bunch of older glass available you can use on that side that is pretty amazing, the 105f2 for instance. 

I've tried a Nikon, Atleast the one I used made me never even want to look at it again, I'm more likely to look at Sony FF atm.

[cc143]

Just now, Hainault said:

I've tried a Nikon, Atleast the one I used made me never even want to look at it again, I'm more likely to look at Sony FF atm.

You'll be paying way too much for the glass, with Nikon and Canon you can get 3rd party or used for very cheap. 

 

You could also spend the entire amount on a 10-22, 17-55 2.8 and 70-200mm 2.8 tamron and wait a bit longer for the 7d3 instead, i.e. stay with crop sensor, depending on the specs at the time. 

 

Idk, I personally like the 5d4 a lot, and would probably be off selling my kidney if it had a cfast+uhs2 sd card and no AA filter, but I'm not comfortable recommending it to someone who doesn't do video over the d850, I also am quite invested in the system, so switching isn't really an option at this point, you aren't. 

 

The 5d4 will serve you well, and so will the glass I told you above. But before you go that route, maybe check out the d850 in store, or even consider renting it for a couple of days. It might change your mind. 

[xQubeZx]

If you want something that will act as a normal zoom but works well on FF later, look at a 16-35. That will also give you sharper results on the wide angle side. Otherwise a used 70-200 is hard to go wrong with. 

[Hainault]

11 hours ago, cc143 said:

You'll be paying way too much for the glass, with Nikon and Canon you can get 3rd party or used for very cheap. 

 

You could also spend the entire amount on a 10-22, 17-55 2.8 and 70-200mm 2.8 tamron and wait a bit longer for the 7d3 instead, i.e. stay with crop sensor, depending on the specs at the time. 

 

Idk, I personally like the 5d4 a lot, and would probably be off selling my kidney if it had a cfast+uhs2 sd card and no AA filter, but I'm not comfortable recommending it to someone who doesn't do video over the d850, I also am quite invested in the system, so switching isn't really an option at this point, you aren't. 

 

The 5d4 will serve you well, and so will the glass I told you above. But before you go that route, maybe check out the d850 in store, or even consider renting it for a couple of days. It might change your mind. 

Actually I never thought of renting, I'm going to get one of the Metabones adaptors for Full frame to crop (LTT Did a video) But I might try to rent the tamron and canon 70-200s and see which I like best, I think the better IS options on the canon might make the tamron less valuable to me though.

[cc143]

6 minutes ago, Hainault said:

Actually I never thought of renting, I'm going to get one of the Metabones adaptors for Full frame to crop (LTT Did a video) But I might try to rent the tamron and canon 70-200s and see which I like best, I think the better IS options on the canon might make the tamron less valuable to me though.

a) those will only work with mirrorless cameras, you can use it to the same end on a dslr, especially a Canon one, because of the flange distance. 

 

b) that is also a flawed statement. It is not the case that the tamron sp g2 has a worse IS system than the Canon, once Canon come out with the version 3, maybe, but right now, that is simply not the case. In fact, I would wager the tamron will outperform the Canon in most quantifiable ways. Which is understandable given the latter is an 8 year old lens. 

 

You clearly are very confused on the subject, which is fine since I'm assuming you just got into it, and tbh, many photographers I know don't really know how the camera works, but still take amazing images with it. But maybe you are rushing a bit. I'm not sure you are in need of spending this money on these lenses or going Full Frame. The lenses I recommended above  for crop sensors are much cheaper, perform very close to L lenses, and there's even glass out there that FF people are jealous of. Look at Sigma's 18-35mm and 50-100mm. 

 

Bottom line, its your money, you are welcome to spend it how you like, but I do think you should wait until you have a better grasp on the entire thing before you shell out almost half of what I've spent on cameras and lenses over the past 10 years of being into photography. 

[LaFemmeEnVert]

On 4/3/2018 at 11:10 PM, Hainault said:

I've got a Canon 77D and am sorta questioning what lens I should get next.

Budget is about £1000-1500
I have a 50mm 1.8 STM, 18-55 f4-5.6 IS STM & a 55-250 f4-5.6 IS STM.

 

I'm torn between improving my "wide glass" with a 24-105 f4 or 24-70 f2.8
Improving my zoom by picking up a 70-200 IS 2.8 
or getting a super zoom, EF 100-400 or Sigma 150-600.

Anyone got any experience with the above lenses?
(I like landscapes, I quite enjoyed wildlife photography when I last did it, I kinda like most photography)

because you have a camera with a crop sensor the 18-55 lens you already own is your similar lens to a 24-70 lens on a full fram sensor but the 18-55 is not fixed maximuim aperture.  if you want to improve your wide glass , what photographers call midium zoom lens, you can look for a fixed maximum aperture lens designed for your crop sensor. is one option. or you can buy a wider lens for your landscapes.  for your wildlife your 55-250 is like a ok telephoto lens and you can buy lenses with longer focal lengths. your 250mm on your camera crop sensor give you angle of view similar to 400mm on a full frame camera so if you buy a 400mm lens you see something similar to 640mm angle of view.

[another random person]

On 4/4/2018 at 7:10 AM, Hainault said:

I've got a Canon 77D and am sorta questioning what lens I should get next.

Budget is about £1000-1500
I have a 50mm 1.8 STM, 18-55 f4-5.6 IS STM & a 55-250 f4-5.6 IS STM.

 

I'm torn between improving my "wide glass" with a 24-105 f4 or 24-70 f2.8
Improving my zoom by picking up a 70-200 IS 2.8 
or getting a super zoom, EF 100-400 or Sigma 150-600.

Anyone got any experience with the above lenses?
(I like landscapes, I quite enjoyed wildlife photography when I last did it, I kinda like most photography)

Pick a lens you feel you'd need, if you are picking up a lens for the purpose of picking one up then its definitely not worth it. Play around with what you have and maybe invest that money into other things like location, lights, accessories and etc. I started shooting on the stock 18-55, after a while I felt like i needed the extra reach to take wildlife so I purchased the 55-250, following that I started to get into video work so the rotating focus ring and non constant aperture of the standard zoom got on my nerves so I purchased a 17-50 from sigma. After that I moved further along with my landscapes and realised that i always kept trying to get wider FOVs with my lens so I purchased a 10-18. 

 

TLDR: get what you feel you need

Portraits: Light stands, flashes and diffusers. Ebay works fine for those so you can nail them all down for under 100.

Tamron G2 70-200 f2.8 on the lens side of things or if you don't mind non weather sealed lenses then the Sigma 70-200. Maybe even the sigma 50-100 f1.8 art.

Advanced landscapes: Sigma 10-20mm, canon 10-18mm, maybe canon 10-22

The lens side of the portraits recommendation is also applicable to Wildlife photography.