I'm thinking about buying a lightweight travel tele to compliment my 50 1.4 and 16-35L ii. I would like to keep my bag light when walking around cities for long hours using a messenger bag. I like shooting everything from street scenes, portraits of my wife, and low light environments like the inside of churches. My current contenders include:
1. 135L
2. 100L is macro
3. 100 f2
I already own a 70-200L ii, but carrying that along all day will destroy my shoulder. I have a black rapid strap, but I'm more interested in reducing the weight of the items inside of my bag than getting the weight off of my shoulder when shooting.
Anybody have any suggestions on what might be the best option? I know some people love their 70-200 f4 lenses, but I don't want to get that b/c it's a bit redundant with my 70-200L ii and I also think f4 is too slow for my tastes.
More info: I have the trinity of L zooms and they are fantastic. However, there is just something appealing about traveling with primes for normal and tele shots that are lightweight.
I have a nice ONA Union Street messenger bag and a larger Dakine camera backpack. I could take my zooms with me in the backpack, but the lenses aren't as accessible, plus I look like an American tourist when traveling abroad with the big backpack, and there is still the matter of weight.
Since I have already bought into the Canon system, I'm not willing to purchase an m4/3 system just for travel or use a Canon rebel crop camera. I want to stick to lightweight ef lenses. Thus, my request for recommendations based on the primes listed above.
I am happy using the 50 1.4 as my go-to walk around lens and my 16-35 when I want to shoot more environmental stuff. Now all I need is a lightweight tele to complete my lightweight walk around kit for my messenger bag.
I like the images I've seen on Flickr taken with the 100 f2, but I question if the focal length is long enough to get detailed shots of gargoyles and stuff like that outside of churches. The 135L is also really appealing. Everyone seems to love this lens and the extra length might be useful. However, you need to crank up the shutter speed to get crisp shots and that might be harder in dark environments. I know I can always crank up my ISO, but less noise is always better.
Thoughts?
Thanks for your insight!
Jason
Reply to thread
1. 135L
2. 100L is macro
3. 100 f2
I already own a 70-200L ii, but carrying that along all day will destroy my shoulder. I have a black rapid strap, but I'm more interested in reducing the weight of the items inside of my bag than getting the weight off of my shoulder when shooting.
Anybody have any suggestions on what might be the best option? I know some people love their 70-200 f4 lenses, but I don't want to get that b/c it's a bit redundant with my 70-200L ii and I also think f4 is too slow for my tastes.
More info: I have the trinity of L zooms and they are fantastic. However, there is just something appealing about traveling with primes for normal and tele shots that are lightweight.
I have a nice ONA Union Street messenger bag and a larger Dakine camera backpack. I could take my zooms with me in the backpack, but the lenses aren't as accessible, plus I look like an American tourist when traveling abroad with the big backpack, and there is still the matter of weight.
Since I have already bought into the Canon system, I'm not willing to purchase an m4/3 system just for travel or use a Canon rebel crop camera. I want to stick to lightweight ef lenses. Thus, my request for recommendations based on the primes listed above.
I am happy using the 50 1.4 as my go-to walk around lens and my 16-35 when I want to shoot more environmental stuff. Now all I need is a lightweight tele to complete my lightweight walk around kit for my messenger bag.
I like the images I've seen on Flickr taken with the 100 f2, but I question if the focal length is long enough to get detailed shots of gargoyles and stuff like that outside of churches. The 135L is also really appealing. Everyone seems to love this lens and the extra length might be useful. However, you need to crank up the shutter speed to get crisp shots and that might be harder in dark environments. I know I can always crank up my ISO, but less noise is always better.
Thoughts?
Thanks for your insight!
Jason
Reply to thread