Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
I'm changing my Canon 600d to a full frame 6d but now need new lenses. I do mostly landscape so maybe wide angle but a zoom would be good too! I will probably have to stick to one to start with!
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
The 17-40L would give the best bang for the buck, and is used by many professionals; some say the 16-35 has better edge to edge sharpness but it depends on if the relatively small difference are worth it to you. I would also count the 70-200 as an excellent landscape lens, but I am one of those who takes three quarters of landscape photos with a telephoto to capture parts of it rather than grand vistas.
My favourite lens with my crop canon camera was the 15-85. I went full frame and the equivalent is the 24-105 which is an excellent general purpose/walkabout lens. I recently got the 70-300 IS canon lens which has become my favourite. If you prefer wide angle landscapes the 17-40 is very good and affordable (take a look at these to see what it is capable of).
Hi, WhiteRose has made a very good comment......I have 5d and very much like the 24-105 lens, it's very under rated and use it for landscape with some lovely results. I have also used it over the past few weeks in low light landscape shots.....check my p/f. It's a great all round lens and has a nice feel. It's not as light as the 17-40 which I also use. Over the next few weeks I hope to move this one on and get the 16-35 f2.8. This one has a big price tag.......not cheep. Marktc also uses the 17-40 for stunning seascapes........WhiteRose knows his stuff and has always great advice. It's all down to budget in the end as all the L lenses feel top quality. I'm very pleased with mine after moving from crop with Nikon to my canon......
Judging from the shots in your portfolio, the 24-105 would definitely be the lens to go for.
Three lenses will cover all your needs. My ideal choice and money not a barrier would be the 16-35 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 (non IS fine if you shoot on a tripod mainly as although the IS version may give more versatility for hand holding it is heavier and more expensive). Some examples of the 16-35 in my PF. The less expensive f4 versions of the 70-200mm are also cracking lenses and should be a serious consideration if the budget doesn't stretch to the wider aperture versions.
The 24-105 as already stated is a great lens and although not as wide as the 16-35 it may suffice for the wider option. It is a great travel lens for its versatility. If you did go for the 16-35 the 24-105 does fill the gap between the 35mm end of this lens and the 70mm of the telephoto and then gives you the full range from 16mm to 200mm.
For me the investment in kit should always have the lens as your priority. Buy the best you can afford as this is what will have the biggest impact on IQ and will stay with you longer than any camera body. As sensor and technology moves forward the camera can be easily updated for relatively little cost whilst lens technology moves more slowly and some of the best lenses from Canon, Nikon, Zuiko etc are those that have been around for many, many years.
All these lenses are very sharp.
If I bought the 6d with the 24-105 as a starter I would then add the 70-200 next as the 24mm end of the "standard" lens will get you started on the wider vistas. I would recommend then the 16-35 over the 17-40 although this is a fine lens too.
HI I did exactly same last week I bought the 6d with the 24 to 105, so far so good but still getting to grips with it you'd think it would be easy having the canon 600d but its not Lin new learning curve
The main 3 contenders have to be the 16-35/17-40; the 24-105 and one of the 70-200's.
I swear by the 24-105 on my 5d as an all round lens and only use the others on the few occasions they are needed.
If, as you say, you will have to make do with one lens at first then the 24-105 has to be the choice, imo.
I've had the 17-40 for about 6-8 years now - it's used approx 90% of the time, but that said landscape is my preference. I bought mine second hand for less than £400 - it's built like a tank.
I also own the 24-105L. I often think that I should use this more than I do - it offers an excellent compromise, but it is heavy and I don't like the fact that the barrel extends as you zoom (not sure why). The IS feature of this lens is also worth having - especially if you like to hand hold. It's going to cost you a couple of hundred more than the 17-40mm.
Rather than the canon 70-200mm I went with a Sigma non IS version - this is also a good lens, but heavy. When travelling I tend to take 2-3 lenses: my trusted 17-40, the 24-105 (occasionally), and a 200mm L prime (the sharpest lens in my kit). I also take a lensbaby.
For a first lens - the 24-105 would be good, but if you shoot more landscapes than anything else the 17-40 mm would be my preference.
Very similar thread of advice coming through with personal preferences falling on specifics.
If you are starting with one lens it has to be the 24-105. Follow that with the telephoto choice of any of the Canon 70-200 L lenses or consider third party offerings from Sigma. The best of these is the Canon f2.8 if you can justify the additional cost
Going wide then you have the choice of either the 16-35 or the 17-40. The 16-35 is acknowledged as the class leader but the better IQ is only marginally better than the 17-40 with the advantage evident at the frame edge. Here it is really the wider 2.8 aperture that may be the deciding factor again if cost is not a barrier.
Sherlob makes a valid point and one I should have done so myself re looking at second hand. I bought both my 16-35 and 70-200 via EBay. I took my time to monitor prices and condition so selected the right lenses to bid for. I got both at the cost of typically what they were going for, used at the time for the best examples but around £300 cheaper than the new price. I have in fact bought all my Canon lenses, apart from the 24-105 which came with my original 5D, second hand. I look for mint unmarked examples, boxed with all original equipment such as end caps, lens hoods and lens pouch (Canon L lenses all come with these). In addition to those mentioned I have the 50mm f1.4 and 100mm f2.8 macro and the EF 1.4x extender III for the 70-200. In all cases I have found mint boxed examples showing no signs of previous use at about 25% to 35% cheaper than buying new.
Something to consider perhaps.
Enjoy the new camera. Full frame will be a great and exciting experience.
When I switched over from cropped to full frame I bought the 17-40L and the 24-105L. I previously had the Sigma 10-20mm and the Canon 15-85mm. I thought I would use the 17-40mm the most as the Sigma had been my favourite, but this has not been the case and the 24-105mm along with a Canon 70-300L, since bought secondhand, have been the most used whilst the 17-40L has stayed in the bag. The 70-300L has IS is a cracking lens, very sharp and lighter than the 70-200L.
I take mostly landscapes and have found the 24-105L plenty wide enough and as has been said it's a great walkabout lens. The 70-300L has also enabled me to shoot some interesting landscapes as well.
get a canon 28/300 ! & big mussels
Quote: Get a canon 28/300 ! & big mussels
Perhaps she doesn't like seafood, Colin
Adorama has the 24-105 L for $719 for a refurbished lens. I bought it to go with my newly acquired 5D and the lens is awesome. Until I can afford the 17-40 L it'll work as my landscape lens.
These may be worth a look;
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
01/09/2014 - 30/09/2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View September's Photo Month Calendar