Which lens for my new 6D (my first DSLR)?

[fluidmania]

well am buying 6D, my first DSLR, and am on a very tight budget. As this is my first DSLR, obviously, i dont have any lenses either.

I was planning to get EF 50mm f/1.4 USM to use if for everything and when i know the cam inside out then i will hunt for other lenses and by that time i will have some $$ also.

Guys i need your help for lens. Which one should i go for? I dont have much $$. Suggestions?

EDIT: i fotgot to mention, i will be doing lot of landscapes and low light photography

[J.R.]

Get the 6D + 24-105mm L f/4 kit.

As a part of the kit, the 24-105 L is probably the best bargain Canon gives you in its entire lineup of L lenses.

While you say the budget is very tight but everything is relative. The difference in pricing (kit lens Vs. the 50mm f/1.4) is likely to be in the range of $ 200 or less so I'd say, go for the kit lens.

[Marsu42]

well am buying 6D, my first DSLR, and am on a very tight budget. As this is my first DSLR, obviously, i dont have any lenses either.

Sorry, I just have to mention this: You are aware of the fact that the lens takes the pictures, and that buying an expensive camera body (that quickly looses value) in combination with a cheap lens is the wrong way around- unless cash is coming in shortly and you're able to purchase more lenses & flashes?

Imho the 6d as a "first" dslr is only a good choice if you shoot in very low light often or need top quality in lower light - or of course if you really need the wifi function (you can get better gps via an external tagger). If you just want a full frame camera you could also get a used 5d2, for everything else look at the 60d and buy better lenses (sorry if I have given unasked advice, just couldn't help it :-p).

As a part of the kit, the 24-105 L is probably the best bargain Canon gives you in its entire lineup of L lenses.

+1 - another cheap but good option would be the 40mm pancake lens, it's wider but at least you'll have an unbeatable iq-size package.

[barracuda]

Get the 6D + 24-105mm L f/4 kit.

As a part of the kit, the 24-105 L is probably the best bargain Canon gives you in its entire lineup of L lenses.

While you say the budget is very tight but everything is relative. The difference in pricing (kit lens Vs. the 50mm f/1.4) is likely to be in the range of $ 200 or less so I'd say, go for the kit lens.

I completely agree. The 6D with the 24-105 L kit lens is a great way to get started.

[fluidmania]

EDIT: i fotgot to mention, i will be doing lot of landscapes and low light photography

[fluidmania]

well am buying 6D, my first DSLR, and am on a very tight budget. As this is my first DSLR, obviously, i dont have any lenses either.

Sorry, I just have to mention this: You are aware of the fact that the lens takes the pictures, and that buying an expensive camera body (that quickly looses value) in combination with a cheap lens is the wrong way around- unless cash is coming in shortly and you're able to purchase more lenses & flashes?

Imho the 6d as a "first" dslr is only a good choice if you shoot in very low light often or need top quality in lower light - or of course if you really need the wifi function (you can get better gps via an external tagger). If you just want a full frame camera you could also get a used 5d2, for everything else look at the 60d and buy better lenses (sorry if I have given unasked advice, just couldn't help it :-p).

As a part of the kit, the 24-105 L is probably the best bargain Canon gives you in its entire lineup of L lenses.

+1 - another cheap but good option would be the 40mm pancake lens, it's wider but at least you'll have an unbeatable iq-size package.

great. i will surely look for 2nd hand MII and work out on 60D also.
and yah, cash will be coming in soon. i was hoping that with a prime i can get how 6D works and then get more lens when the money comes in.
i will be doing lots of low light photography. Would you still suggest me not to go for 6D?
cheers 

[Marsu42]

great. i will surely look for 2nd hand MII and work out on 60D also.

Btw: for landscape the 5d2 has a bit higher resolution & is a bit sharper than the 6d (and even than the 5d3) - just the 5d2 iso is maybe <1 stop worse than the 6d and the 5d2 has more banding (ymmv).

The 60d is also ok for landscape @iso100, about same dynamic range as the rest of Canon, but the gradients are better on full frame than on crop, and of course low light is bad on crop (just up to iso800 is fine). The good thing about the 60d is the usability, same as 6d + swivel screen which is handy for tripod work, so it's a good first dslr to learn.

i will be doing lots of low light photography. Would you still suggest me not to go for 6D?

You should try to figure out what "low light" is exactly for you, i.e. what exact iso is required with the lens you'll use and if you want or can live with the shallow depth of field of a fast prime. The 6d is excellent  for hq available light or indoors w/o flash is you use a f2.8 or even f4 zoom, but with a f1.4 prime it's much easier even on crop and if you don't do large prints.

[fluidmania]

great. i will surely look for 2nd hand MII and work out on 60D also.

Btw: for landscape the 5d2 has a bit higher resolution & is a bit sharper than the 6d (and even than the 5d3) - just the 5d2 iso is maybe <1 stop worse than the 6d and the 5d2 has more banding (ymmv).

The 60d is also ok for landscape @iso100, about same dynamic range as the rest of Canon, but the gradients are better on full frame than on crop, and of course low light is bad on crop (just up to iso800 is fine). The good thing about the 60d is the usability, same as 6d + swivel screen which is handy for tripod work, so it's a good first dslr to learn.

i will be doing lots of low light photography. Would you still suggest me not to go for 6D?

You should try to figure out what "low light" is exactly for you, i.e. what exact iso is required with the lens you'll use and if you want or can live with the shallow depth of field of a fast prime. The 6d is excellent  for hq available light or indoors w/o flash is you use a f2.8 or even f4 zoom, but with a f1.4 prime it's much easier even on crop and if you don't do large prints.

full frame is my main concern here. I had been using my friend's Rebel kiss since months and it breaks my heart everytime i return home with cropped images due to the crop sensor.
i was looking for 5DII at an un-authorised canon store(they ask whatever money they want to) and it was just $200 cheaper than new 6D at an authorised center, am from NEPAL

[Marsu42]

i was looking for 5DII at an un-authorised canon store(they ask whatever money they want to) and it was just $200 cheaper than new 6D at an authorised center, am from NEPAL

Sure, in this case and if you cannot get hold of a cheaper used 5d2 get the 6d, it's certainly worth the $200 more, I'll most likely also buy a 6d if the price stops dropping like it still does now.

[pj1974]

full frame is my main concern here. I had been using my friend's Rebel kiss since months and it breaks my heart everytime i return home with cropped images due to the crop sensor.

If the above is your experience / thinking, there are (at least) 2 (possible) issues here:

1) your friend's Rebel Kiss (300D), the first of that 'line' of Canon's 'entry level' DSLRs has been used with the 'wrong' lens - eg using a 28mm lens on a crop sensor (1.6x / APS-C) for 'wide angle' won't really be 'wide'. You need a lens at 17mm to be equivalent of 28mm in Full Frame (FF) format.  Don't use wrong lenses (ie expecting the same mm as in FF) for the APS-C / crop sensors  (btw, new crop bodies like 700D and 60D are MANY steps better in just about every regard).

2) you don't understand photography - that is, that you think the lens 'won't crop' an image in the first place. What you see through the optical view finder (OVF) in a DSLR is what you get. So, therefore get a lens that you need. Eg, I have the Canon EF-S 15-85mm IS USM, which is a great lens for a APS-C, and very comparable in focal length (and other aspects) to the EF 24-105mm L IS USM on a FF. So get the lens or lenses you need, whether prime or zoom, whether fast or slow.

Generally for landscapes and low light, FF is superior. If you do a lot of low light, maybe the 24-105mm will serve you well, because although it is 'only' f/4 (not particularly fast) - it has IS which will help you in getting steadier hand-held shots than even non-stabilised f/2.8 lenses.

I love using primes (eg f/1.2 ti f/2) for low-light / subject isolation. Zooms for good light, and travel / convenience. Even on a crop, such prime lenses can produce stunning images with shallow depth of field (DOF) and zooms - particularly EF-S like the 15-85mm or Canon's 17-55mm f/2.8 can be really handy and have high Image Quality (IQ).

Regards

Paul

[fluidmania]

full frame is my main concern here. I had been using my friend's Rebel kiss since months and it breaks my heart everytime i return home with cropped images due to the crop sensor.

If the above is your experience / thinking, there are (at least) 2 (possible) issues here:

1) your friend's Rebel Kiss (300D), the first of that 'line' of Canon's 'entry level' DSLRs has been used with the 'wrong' lens - eg using a 28mm lens on a crop sensor (1.6x / APS-C) for 'wide angle' won't really be 'wide'. You need a lens at 17mm to be equivalent of 28mm in Full Frame (FF) format.  Don't use wrong lenses (ie expecting the same mm as in FF) for the APS-C / crop sensors  (btw, new crop bodies like 700D and 60D are MANY steps better in just about every regard).

2) you don't understand photography - that is, that you think the lens 'won't crop' an image in the first place. What you see through the optical view finder (OVF) in a DSLR is what you get. So, therefore get a lens that you need. Eg, I have the Canon EF-S 15-85mm IS USM, which is a great lens for a APS-C, and very comparable in focal length (and other aspects) to the EF 24-105mm L IS USM on a FF. So get the lens or lenses you need, whether prime or zoom, whether fast or slow.

Generally for landscapes and low light, FF is superior. If you do a lot of low light, maybe the 24-105mm will serve you well, because although it is 'only' f/4 (not particularly fast) - it has IS which will help you in getting steadier hand-held shots than even non-stabilised f/2.8 lenses.

I love using primes (eg f/1.2 ti f/2) for low-light / subject isolation. Zooms for good light, and travel / convenience. Even on a crop, such prime lenses can produce stunning images with shallow depth of field (DOF) and zooms - particularly EF-S like the 15-85mm or Canon's 17-55mm f/2.8 can be really handy and have high Image Quality (IQ).

Regards

Paul

Thanks for the description Paul.
Am aware of the lens fact on crop censor.
If i go too wide with this cam then maybe on FF it will be too wide, i dont know. D300's IQ is killing me.
Maybe this year i should just invest in some lenses and wait till next year for any surprises from canon 

[drob]

Seriously, if this is going to be your first DSLR, then I'd recommend the 7D with 24-105 f/4, then a Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4, or a 50mm.  The 24-105mm is a great all around lens, and then one of the primes for low light. As a newby, you won't notice the difference in the 6D.  When I got my 60D with the 18-135mm kit lens and took a shot indoors @ f/3.5 with no flash, ISO 1600 I got an immediate boner on how good it look compared to a P&S. Stepping up to your first DSLR (as a great as the 6D is) your focus should be on the best glass possible. The 7D is more than enough body for you to handle.  I'd recommend the 60D too which is even cheaper. Heck the T5i might be worth a look too since it has in camera HDR and tutorials.  Seriously, settle for a decent body and splurge on your glass, you won't be sorry.
Oh and why your at it saving money from not buying the 6D or 5DMkII, invest in a decent tripod too. For landscapes a nice sturdy tripod is essential, as well as one or 2 neutral density filters.

[fluidmania]

Seriously, if this is going to be your first DSLR, then I'd recommend the 7D with 24-105 f/4, then a Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4, or a 50mm.  The 24-105mm is a great all around lens, and then one of the primes for low light. As a newby, you won't notice the difference in the 6D.  When I got my 60D with the 18-135mm kit lens and took a shot indoors @ f/3.5 with no flash, ISO 1600 I got an immediate boner on how good it look compared to a P&S. Stepping up to your first DSLR (as a great as the 6D is) your focus should be on the best glass possible. The 7D is more than enough body for you to handle.  I'd recommend the 60D too which is even cheaper. Heck the T5i might be worth a look too since it has in camera HDR and tutorials.  Seriously, settle for a decent body and splurge on your glass, you won't be sorry.
Oh and why your at it saving money from not buying the 6D or 5DMkII, invest in a decent tripod too. For landscapes a nice sturdy tripod is essential, as well as one or 2 neutral density filters.

Thanks drob.
Some great suggestions coming in. Will surely re-consider my buying plans.
CR rocks 

[verysimplejason]

Seriously, if this is going to be your first DSLR, then I'd recommend the 7D with 24-105 f/4, then a Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4, or a 50mm.  The 24-105mm is a great all around lens, and then one of the primes for low light. As a newby, you won't notice the difference in the 6D.  When I got my 60D with the 18-135mm kit lens and took a shot indoors @ f/3.5 with no flash, ISO 1600 I got an immediate boner on how good it look compared to a P&S. Stepping up to your first DSLR (as a great as the 6D is) your focus should be on the best glass possible. The 7D is more than enough body for you to handle.  I'd recommend the 60D too which is even cheaper. Heck the T5i might be worth a look too since it has in camera HDR and tutorials.  Seriously, settle for a decent body and splurge on your glass, you won't be sorry.
Oh and why your at it saving money from not buying the 6D or 5DMkII, invest in a decent tripod too. For landscapes a nice sturdy tripod is essential, as well as one or 2 neutral density filters.

He's doing landscapes. 7d with 24-105 might be too tight unless he wants to try panorama.   7d and 10-22 might do the trick better.  I suggest that if he wants FF then go for an FF.  Poor man pays twice.  6D and 24-105 should be the best and cheapest in the long run.  Buy a decent tripod and a decent flash and you're ready to go.

[Dylan777]

New Sigma 35mm f1.4