I never ownwd the Mk1, but I read there is a lot if copy variation. I think a new 24-105L for about the same money would be a better deal if you are ok with an f/4 lens.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I know video is much more important these days, so STM is a nice get, but as a strictly stills shooter this trend is alarming. The has-to-happen-eventually EF 50mm f/wehavenoidea IS that will replace the 50 f/1.4 USM had better retain USM focusing or I'll have to buy that Sigma's blasted pickle jar as my next 50. Focusing speed is a big deal!
There is much more to a photo than IQ. Many who can't afford the 1dx or longer telephotos will find 7d2 ideal for their needs. They will know it is not the very best IQ in the market, but the very best IQ that they can afford.
And MANY MANY times the 2nd best IQ is just FINE. And difference visible only to pixel peeping photographers.
just stumbled upon a special offer for an EF 135L (brand new) for ~710€. Regular price in my country is 900€.
I know that it is a great lens, so I am really tempted. But do I need it?
I have a 7D with a number of lenses, at least three of which would really be competing for a space in the bag with the EF 135L: 70-200 f4 IS, EF 85 1.8, and the EF 100L 2.8 Macro.
I am afraid that the 135mm FL will be a bit too long for interior shots on APS-C (I find the 100L Macro too long most of the times...)
So is it justifiable to add this lens?
I was just about to start new thread with exactly same question.
I used to have 135L when I had crop body, and it was awesome. I took so many awesome shots. I had to sell it after one drunken night I accidentally ordered 70-200 IS II, so it was either sell the 135L or sleep on couch.
Now I have FF body, and I'm really thinking I should get the 135L again. Quite often I shoot indoor sports with the 70-200 (typical settings: 1/500, 2.8, ISO6400), so I could come down one stop on ISO if I get the 135L, although I'd lose the zoom-capability.
Especially if I find good copy used, I could use it for couple months to see how I feel and if I don't like, I'm sure I'd lose less than $100 selling it again. So better option than renting IMHO. And if I like, I can keep it.
At some point I probably want also the 100L macro, but I'm not sure if I like that so 135L is first on the list.
If your shooting with the 600 f4 I would guess you would not be using the 7D... Honestly I would rather use the 5D and crop than the 7D. The IQ will be better in most cases.
I'm transitioning to FF across most focal lengths (will keep my EF-S 15-85mm lens though), and just ordered the 16-35mm f/4. While I know it to be true, I keep telling myself if it's as good as the 10-22mm I'll be a happy camper. Love that lens!
It looks like you're not planning on full frame. I'm not sure why people say to buy full frame lenses as a better investment if you're not planning on it any time soon. The EFS lenses are so much cheaper. I would avoid the 16-35. You are way overpaying for something you won't benefit from. Get EFS lenses. Cheaper, smaller, lighter but can be great quality.