Help to get a new cam + lenses (FX)

[pattocl]

Hey all.
Hope you guys are doing well.

I have just registered to this forum, because I really need your guys help.

I have some spare money to buy my first FX camera. I used to use Nikon's for years (D90, D5000, F80, plus lots of lenses), but last year I sold my D90 because I wanted to jump to FX area. I have saved some money to get a FX camera + lens, but the thing is that I don't want Nikon anymore (it doesn't matter what people tell me, or whatever the reason is, I just don't want to use a Nikon ever again - the only cam that I have now is a Fuji x100 but I'm going to sell it), so the thing is: I really need your guys advice, since this is going to be my first Canon gear.

The question is that I'm torn between the 6D + a mighty prime lense (I was thinking about the 50 mm f/1.2 or the 6d + 24-105 and some cheap prime, but im not sure about the 24-105mm) vs 5Dmk3 + a cheap shitty lens (under U$ 250, maybe there's a 50mm out there f1.8 ).

The other thing is that I travel a lot, so I don't feel like carrying with me lots of lenses (it's awful, I used to carry lots of gears/lenses with my D90, and Its such a pain in the a**)

I rarely shoot sports, I'm into portraits/landscape/str.photography. I have done some portrait work in the past. What would be the best option for me? I have been reading some reviews, and it seems like the 24-105 is not that good for what I want to. Or maybe if you guys have any better option, i'm looking forward to hear it.

I don't want to get in my hands a Tamron lens either. I have own a couple of Tamron's and i didn't like it that much.

Many thanks!

Cheers from Chile

 

[Jim Saunders]

Judging by what you want to do, a 5D2 is an option; there are lots of good copies available. That and a Sigma 50 Art could work, $2500 tops for both. If you want a zoom the original 24-70 f/2.8 is pretty good and likewise affordable.

Jim

 

[Quasimodo]

The 6D will give you a great camera for money. By the sound of the type of photo you do, a rugged body like the 5DIII would not be necessary.

If you need a great prime, go for the not so expensive 85/1.8. Or if you feel crazy, go for the sublime 135L F2.0

For what it is worth, I do actually like my 24-105L a lot. I was wondering about the 24-70L II, but the longer reach on FF and great quality did compell me to stay on.

 

[tayassu]

How about being puristic and going for just a Sigma 35/1.4 as a classic street lens?
Or, if that is too wide, their 50?
6D sounds great for you, though

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Canon 6D has everything you need, but its AF is not quick to shoot subjects that are moving quickly. The central focal point of Canon 6D works very well, but the focus points outside the center are not encouraging.

If you need faster and more accurate AF, including using the AF points off center, then 5D Mark iii is a great option.

Canon 24-105 do a good job when the light is decent, but does not give you great images when the light falls. For this, the wonderful Canon 24-70 F2.8 ii seems ideal, although weight and price are high.

I quote the Canon prime lenses with high image quality and fair price:
EF24mm F2.8 IS (great)
EF28mm F2.8 IS (wonderful)
EF35mm F2 IS (wonderful)
EF40mm F2.8 (great)
EF85mm F1.8 (very good)
EF100mm F2 (great)
EF100mm F2.8 IS (wonderful)
EF135mm F2 (wonderful)
EF200mm F2.8 (wonderful)

I do not like the Canon 50mm lens options currently, and surrendered to the wonderful Sigma Art, although some people have had problems with off-center AF points on top of the line Canon cameras. The Canon 50mm F1.2 has beautiful bokeh, but the sharpness is disappointing for the price, and even when used at F2.8 does not surpass the image quality of the Canon 50mm F1.4 modest. Incidentally, the 50mm F1.4 only becomes really crisp on the edges of the image when used at F2.8.

See comparisons of lenses on the link below, where you can choose various lenses to see the quality side by side.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=403&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=115&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

 

[Hjalmarg1]

Welcome to this forum!

Even though I own the 5D3, I highly recommend the 6D for stills, travel and low light performance. 5D3 is heavy and if you don't need to shoot sports or fast moving objects the 6D is the way to go.
I would accompany the 6D with the 24-70mm f/4L IS, which is good for travel (light) and have good IQ and one prime. I highly recommend the Canon 35mm f/2 IS, that works terrific as street photo, with fast and accurate AF and very good performance in low light.

 

[dgatwood]

I'd pick a 6D over a 5D Mark II any day. It's a better camera in pretty much every respect except maximum shutter speed, slightly higher resolution, and the second slot. If you were doing wedding photography where a backup slot is highly critical, I might steer you in the other direction, but for anybody not using it in critical professional work, the 6D is almost certainly a better choice.

The 5D Mark III is another matter. In terms of image quality, it's still a tradeoff. The 5D Mark II's slightly higher resolution comes at a cost in terms of shadow noise levels. Its more capable autofocus comes at a cost in terms of low-light focusing. So for sports shooting, the 5D Mark III is a no-brainer, and if you need that second slot, the 5D Mark III is a no-brainer. For everything else, the decision comes down to how much you're willing to pay for better outer autofocus point behavior, and whether you consider that more or less important than shadow noise.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The 6D + 24-105mmL is a good start, and when bought as a kit, its usually a excellent priced deal. The lens has a lot of distortion at 24mm, but its easily correctable in Lightroom. The next step up will cost a bit more money, but for a walk around lens, the 24-105 is tough to beat.

Get a low cost prime or two with it. I see that the refurbished Canon 20mm f/2.8 is on sale right now, but you would need a friend in the US to buy it for you. That's a good wide lens, and stopped down like you do for landscape anyway, $346 seems like a OK price. (There is a code to enter for 15% off)
http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses/ef-20mm-f-28-usm-refurbished

A low cost 40mm f/2.8 pancake lens is great for general street use, its excellent for the price, I'd take it over the 50mm f/1.8.

Unless you want to tear your hair out with autofocus issues, I'd bypass Sigma lenses unless you get one of the ART models with the dock that lets you adapt the autofocus to your specific body. Tamron is good by comparison in the AF department.

 

[Helios68]

Hi Pattocl,

I would recommend you the 6D. The great difference between 5DmkIII and 6D is the better AF, shutter speed and burst rate which is not your primary use. For landscape, portrait and other still subjects you won't need such features. But don't think that the 6D is unable to capture action ! ;D

Usually it is better to own good lenses and a cheaper body than the opposite, because the lens has a great impact on IQ. You can also keep lenses longer than your body. The other point is that you may spare $1500 if you get a 6D instead of a 5DmkIII. Which is a lot of money to invest in a great lens !

These lenses could be:
*24-105mm f/4L (often in the kit) or the 24-70mm f/2.8L II which is quite expensive
*50mm f/1.8. Amazing quality regarding the price. AF noise is just horrible but it is a great lens!
*Have a look at the new 16-35mm f/4L. It should be a good zoom for travellers
*100mm f/2.8L Macro. Great for various purpose including portrait and even landscape. it is quite light and relatively cheap
*I am also having a look at the 85mm f/1.8 which I could offer myself as a Christmas gift ! ;D

Regards,