Looking for input on lens purchase

[Orcrone]

I own the Canon T4i along with three zoom lenses; the EF-S 10-22, an EF-S 18-135 STM and an EF 70-300. Canon has the EF 24-105 F4l refurbished on sale for $639.99 and I'm wondering about pulling the trigger. One concern is the three lenses have a nice amount of overlap that I would lose on the 24 mm end with thiws purchase. I'm not a professional photographer,  but I do occasionally blow up a shot and hang it on the walls.

Normally I leave my 18-135 on the camera. With the 24-105 having less reach on each end of the scale I'm concerned about how much more often I'll be changing lenses.

Are my concerns unjustified? I've never useds an L series lens before, so I'm not sure about how much of an improvement I will see. Will it offset any potential disadvantages?

Thanks

[Orcrone]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

Zoom lenses, such as they were, were pretty crappy in those days. (I was there too; I got my first Nikon in 1958.) But they're not crappy anymore. At least the ones being discussed here aren't.

---

I'm not saying that a zoom lens is crappy. However, if you can live with a single focal length you can't beat the aperture size per dollar of a prime lens. And consumer grade prime lenses still have image quality on par with even the latest L zoom lenses.

The point I was trying to make about prime lenses isn't that they are better than zooms, but, that learning to deal with the limitations of a prime lens may lead to someone being a better photographer. Seeing the photo before ever looking through the viewfinder, instead of looking through the viewfinder and zooming to get the photo you want. You can't zoom with your feet while looking through the viewfinder. Well you can, but, you might end up on your face or your butt if you do. When you use a prime lens you have to see the photo before you ever lift the camera up. I think there is still value to that do matter how good zoom lenses are.

You may not appreciate how much you learned with that first 50mm prime lens back in 1958, but, it may be more than you realize. Those of us who started out with film and a 50mm lens, learned to look at the surrounding environment, pick out our subject, and see the photo in our minds, all before we ever started to zoom with our feet. You had to see the photo when shooting film, because you didn't have the instant feedback of digital on a rear LCD.  

And would I want go back to only using primes and never touching a zoom lens? heck no. But, for someone like the OP who's experience has been with zoom lenses, I think there is value to experiencing a prime lens.

---

Throughout this thread I've often felt attacked for not doing something in the same manner as someone else, without knowing why. Now that you've explained (thankfully in small words so I understand) you make a very compelling case for using primes to improve the artistic eye. Thanks for making me think of this from another angle.

[Orcrone]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

---

At one point in this thread you had said you had decided against the 5D Mk II and were set on the 5D Mk III. When and if you get the 5D Mk II then decide on the lens. BTW, the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM would make a great lens to get acquainted with your 5D Mk II while you shop for your ultimate lens.

What on earth is going on here? Three inches above the cursor as I type, he says he's already bid on five Mark III's. How did a Mark II get back in the picture?

---

I was also wondering when I changed my mind.

No wins tonight. I can't believe what these are sellling for!!! One just sold used for $2051 plus shipping. I can buy a refurbished for $2239 with a Canon USA warranty. Why would someone spend that much on a used one?

[TTMartin]

---

@Orcrone wrote:

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

---

At one point in this thread you had said you had decided against the 5D Mk II and were set on the 5D Mk III. When and if you get the 5D Mk II then decide on the lens. BTW, the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM would make a great lens to get acquainted with your 5D Mk II while you shop for your ultimate lens.

What on earth is going on here? Three inches above the cursor as I type, he says he's already bid on five Mark III's. How did a Mark II get back in the picture?

---

I was also wondering when I changed my mind.

No wins tonight. I can't believe what these are sellling for!!! One just sold used for $2051 plus shipping. I can buy a refurbished for $2239 with a Canon USA warranty. Why would someone spend that much on a used one?

---

I could have sworn that when I read the post it said you were bidding on a 5D Mk II. I apologize for the error. 

p.s. can your marriage afford it?

[RobertTheFat]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

I could have sworn that when I read the post it said you were bidding on a 5D Mk II. I apologize for the error. 

p.s. can your marriage afford it?

---

All that takes is common sense and a little bit of luck. Early in our marriage, when my wife's old Sears 35mm crapped out, I asked her what camera she wanted as a replacement. Her answer: "One that can use your lenses." I had a Nikon F-2, so I got her a Nikkormat and a 50mm f/2 (a lens I didn't have that was reputed to be sharper than the f/1.4 I did have). It's been smooth sailing ever since!

[ebiggs1]

My take at this point is get the 5D Mk III and the Tammy.  Forget any primes.  You simply will not use it when you get this combo.  The disadvantages with primes far out weight a slightly more than one stop faster aperture.  You will need to be in pixel picker territory to see the IQ difference.

Although I still prefer the Canon , I understand the price difference is big factor.  And there again, you will be in pixel picker territory to see the difference.

Two more things not mentioned but left unclear is Tamron and Sigma can re-chip most of their lenses if need be to work with newer models of cameras.  Not to say that will not change in the future but it is true today.

And two, Adobe Lightrooom and Photoshop both have lens correction for most lenses including Tamron.  Canon only has it for its own lenses. Plus either software lets you create your own profiles as you see fit.

The 5D Mk III and the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 would be the dream outfit for most prosummers!  Very difficult to fault it.

Long way to go from your original query but you will love that combo. 

[TTMartin]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

All that takes is common sense and a little bit of luck. Early in our marriage, when my wife's old Sears 35mm crapped out, I asked her what camera she wanted as a replacement. Her answer: "One that can use your lenses." I had a Nikon F-2, so I got her a Nikkormat and a 50mm f/2 (a lens I didn't have that was reputed to be sharper than the f/1.4 I did have). It's been smooth sailing ever since!

---

My wife has gotten into birding, and now as long as it's a birding camera or lens it's OK. She's bought herself a 40D (wth 800 clicks on the shutter) and has adopted my Sigma 150-500 OS. I bought her and SX50 now she carries both. 

I carry a classic 7D and a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 with either a 1.4X or 2X TC and an Induro M34 Monopod (64"/39# rating).

[ebiggs1]

TTMartin check out the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens.  It is unbelieable.  It is heavy but it goes with the territory for a lens in this caliber.

Outstanding bird lens!

[TTMartin]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

TTMartin check out the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens.  It is unbelievable.  It is heavy but it goes with the territory for a lens in this caliber.

Outstanding bird lens!

---

Without a weight savings, I'll just stick with the 120-300 f/2.8 and TCs. I've considered the EF 100-400 IS II at almost half the weight of the Sigmas (150-600 Sport or 120-300 f/2.8).

But, my ultimate goal is a big white most likely the EF 600mm f/4 IS II a couple pounds heavier than the Sigmas, but, in my opinion worth it. 

I'm working on getting the most out of the gear I have until then. 

[ebiggs1]

"But, my ultimate goal is a big white most likely the EF 600mm f/4 IS II a couple pounds heavier than the Sigmas ..."

And then there's that cost factor again.  Is it worht it?

[TTMartin]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"But, my ultimate goal is a big white most likely the EF 600mm f/4 IS II a couple pounds heavier than the Sigmas ..."

And then there's that cost factor again.  Is it worht it?

---

In my opinion, Yes

Think about it, the OP of this thread is about to spend 1/3 of the cost of that lens.