Lens upgrade advice.

[pulseimages]

Tax free weekend is this weekend and I have a bunch of gift cards totaling $652.19 with my local camera shop. I shoot with a 6D and would like to upgrade a lens or two.

I currently own:
EF 17-40 f/4 L
EF 24-105 f/4 L IS
EF 40 f/2.8 Pancake
EF 85 f/1.8
EF 100 f/2.8 Macro USM
EF 70-200 f/2.8 L non-IS.

I shoot mainly classic cars, architecture, night photography, people and fine art.

I was thinking of buying the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L II and maybe 1 other lens. I don’t know if I should upgrade my 70-200 to the newer IS III version or my Macro to the IS version. Thoughts?

 

[tron]

The upgrade of 70-200 to the newer IS III seems a major upgrade not so much for IQ because the non L which I used to have has very good IQ but for the combination IQ, IS, and latest coatings. I assume that the shop will get your old lenses back to save you money...

Also you could upgrade 17-40 to 16-35 4L IS.

 

[pulseimages]

The upgrade of 70-200 to the newer IS III seems a major upgrade not so much for IQ because the non L which I used to have has very good IQ but for the combination IQ, IS, and latest coatings. I assume that the shop will get your old lenses back to save you money...

Also you could upgrade 17-40 to 16-35 4L IS.

What would be a fair trade in value for the 70-200 f/2.8 L?

 

[tron]

What would be a fair trade in value for the 70-200 f/2.8 L?

I do not know. Depends on country, condition of the lens, shop. Maybe you can ask two or more camera photo sellers. Unless you are able to find byers for your lens before you proceed with buying the new one. In that case price could be a little higher than the shop.

 

[TominNJ]

A tilt-shift for architecture is a possibility

 

[Maximilian]

Hi pulseimages!

A tilt-shift for architecture is a possibility

I would second that. Depending on your overal budget the Canon T&S are maybe out of reach if you don't get a great catch used.
But a Samyang could be within reach and the IQ is very good AFAIK (disclaimer: I don't own one).

Something maybe a little bit more versatile could be one of the WA/UWA EF primes with IS, depending on the focal length you prefer.
AF and IS are their main advantages over a T&S and so you could use them for night photography or classic cars e.g. when they drive by.
I own the EF 35/2 IS and 28/2.8 IS and love both of them.

... I don’t know if I should upgrade my 70-200 to the newer IS III...

This is something I would recommend only if you feel that the IS is missing.
Even though you can see some advantages for the new one at the TDP lens comparison esp. at the long end (200 mm) my guess would be that in daily shooting this will be not visible.

... or my Macro to the IS version...

If you use your macro a lot in the field, handheld, then this could be a really good idea.
That's what I do shooting insects.
But you would gain the HIS only, as the IQ is on paar.
I can tell you from personal experience with both macros.

Hope that helps.

Enjoy you GAS

 

[pulseimages]

I do not know. Depends on country, condition of the lens, shop. Maybe you can ask two or more camera photo sellers. Unless you are able to find byers for your lens before you proceed with buying the new one. In that case price could be a little higher than the shop.

I’m dealing with Hunt’s Photo in Massachusetts. I remember I asked them a few years ago what the trade in value was for my 70-200 2.8 L and they offered me $500.00 which I thought was a little low. Then the guy told me if I sold it myself on the street I could easily get $1,000.

 

[Del Paso]

Tax free weekend is this weekend and I have a bunch of gift cards totaling $652.19 with my local camera shop. I shoot with a 6D and would like to upgrade a lens or two.

I currently own:
EF 17-40 f/4 L
EF 24-105 f/4 L IS
EF 40 f/2.8 Pancake
EF 85 f/1.8
EF 100 f/2.8 Macro USM
EF 70-200 f/2.8 L non-IS.

I shoot mainly classic cars, architecture, night photography, people and fine art.

I was thinking of buying the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L II and maybe 1 other lens. I don’t know if I should upgrade my 70-200 to the newer IS III version or my Macro to the IS version. Thoughts?

Architecture, cars, ????
Then, a TSE lens is an absolute must.
The 17mm TSE easily outperforms the 17-40 zoom (take a look at the TDP review), being sharp and contrasty right into the corners, and has no noticeable distortion.
PS: do NOT buy a Samyang !!!!!!!

 

[pulseimages]

Hi pulseimages!


I would second that. Depending on your overal budget the Canon T&S are maybe out of reach if you don't get a great catch used.
But a Samyang could be within reach and the IQ is very good AFAIK (disclaimer: I don't own one).

Something maybe a little bit more versatile could be one of the WA/UWA EF primes with IS, depending on the focal length you prefer.
AF and IS are their main advantages over a T&S and so you could use them for night photography or classic cars e.g. when they drive by.
I own the EF 35/2 IS and 28/2.8 IS and love both of them.


This is something I would recommend only if you feel that the IS is missing.
Even though you can see some advantages for the new one at the TDP lens comparison esp. at the long end (200 mm) my guess would be that in daily shooting this will be not visible.


If you use your macro a lot in the field, handheld, then this could be a really good idea.
That's what I do shooting insects.
But you would gain the HIS only, as the IQ is on paar.
I can tell you from personal experience with both macros.

Hope that helps.

Enjoy you GAS

Hi Maximilian!

Thank you for the breakdown, that’s what I have been looking for.

When I shoot with the 70-200 2.8L I have to take multiple shots of the same subject just to make sure I get a keeper because the lens is heavy and it’s getting harder for me to keep the lens steady as I get older without IS. Especially during the golden hour when cars look best and I need to stand back far enough not to get my shadows in the shot. Would IS give me a better keeper rate and keep my ISO down as the sun goes down?

I have never used my 100 Macro on a tripod and actually bought it before the L version was released. I haven’t had a problem with it but I just can’t use it really up close with details of a car because I can’t hold it that steady closeup. Is the L’s IS able to counteract the back & forth movements and sideside movements when you’re up close?

I know my 17-40’s sharpness is weak wide open but stopped down to f8 it’s pretty good but the corners could be better. Is the 16-40 IS night and day better?

I’ve never been impressed by my 24-105’s sharpness. It’s actually the softest L lenses I have ever used. That’s why I wanted to get the 24-70 2.8 L II. Do you own this one?

 

[privatebydesign]

I’d upgrade the 17-40 to the 16-35 f4 IS as has been said, it is a massive improvement and a great bargain.

For you chosen specialities I’d then get a TS-E24 II, it is a game changing lens that when mastered will give you incomparable results if you are a tripod user.

 

[TominNJ]

Hi Maximilian!

Thank you for the breakdown, that’s what I have been looking for.

When I shoot with the 70-200 2.8L I have to take multiple shots of the same subject just to make sure I get a keeper because the lens is heavy and it’s getting harder for me to keep the lens steady as I get older without IS. Especially during the golden hour when cars look best and I need to stand back far enough not to get my shadows in the shot. Would IS give me a better keeper rate and keep my ISO down as the sun goes down?

I have never used my 100 Macro on a tripod and actually bought it before the L version was released. I haven’t had a problem with it but I just can’t use it really up close with details of a car because I can’t hold it that steady closeup. Is the L’s IS able to counteract the back & forth movements and sideside movements when you’re up close?

I know my 17-40’s sharpness is weak wide open but stopped down to f8 it’s pretty good but the corners could be better. Is the 16-40 IS night and day better?

I’ve never been impressed by my 24-105’s sharpness. It’s actually the softest L lenses I have ever used. That’s why I wanted to get the 24-70 2.8 L II. Do you own this one?

I think a monopod would help you a lot

 

[Maximilian]

Would IS give me a better keeper rate and keep my ISO down as the sun goes down?

It depends on whether the car is moving or standing still.
If it is moving you have to use shorter shutter times to avoid subject motion blur. Then the IS is not that important.
If the blur is comming from your hand shaking and ths subject is standing still, the is will help a lot.

...Is the L’s IS able to counteract the back & forth movements and sideside movements when you’re up close?

The macro HIS is able to compensate not only vertical and horizontal rotary/anglular shake but also shift shake.
To avoid back & forth shake I typically use servo AF. That compensates my leaning back and forth.

I know my 17-40’s sharpness is weak wide open but stopped down to f8 it’s pretty good but the corners could be better. Is the 16-40 IS night and day better?

I know the 17-40L but not the 16-35L IS. From what I've heard it should be much better than the old 17-40. Best compare yourself at TDP.
At the wide end corners seem to be much better with the 16-35 IS. And the 17-40 has much more CA, but this can be calculated out in post.

I’ve never been impressed by my 24-105’s sharpness. It’s actually the softest L lenses I have ever used. That’s why I wanted to get the 24-70 2.8 L II. Do you own this one?

I don't have the 24-70 2.8 L II either but it is praised to have prime sharpness in a zoom.
I would get it for sure if I had the money to spend. Although I'd miss the range above 70 mm which I use a lot.

 

[BeenThere]

I’m dealing with Hunt’s Photo in Massachusetts. I remember I asked them a few years ago what the trade in value was for my 70-200 2.8 L and they offered me $500.00 which I thought was a little low. Then the guy told me if I sold it myself on the street I could easily get $1,000.

See what they sell for on eBay, in the same condition. That will give you a good idea of what you may get trying to sell it yourself. You may also look at buying what you want in the used market.

 

[pulseimages]

It depends on whether the car is moving or standing still.
If it is moving you have to use shorter shutter times to avoid subject motion blur. Then the IS is not that important.
If the blur is comming from your hand shaking and ths subject is standing still, the is will help a lot.


The macro HIS is able to compensate not only vertical and horizontal rotary/anglular shake but also shift shake.
To avoid back & forth shake I typically use servo AF. That compensates my leaning back and forth.


I know the 17-40L but not the 16-35L IS. From what I've heard it should be much better than the old 17-40. Best compare yourself at TDP.
At the wide end corners seem to be much better with the 16-35 IS. And the 17-40 has much more CA, but this can be calculated out in post.


I don't have the 24-70 2.8 L II either but it is praised to have prime sharpness in a zoom.
I would get it for sure if I had the money to spend. Although I'd miss the range above 70 mm which I use a lot.

The subject isn’t moving and I’m still trying to combat blur from holding the 70-200.

 

[BeenThere]

Tax free weekend is this weekend and I have a bunch of gift cards totaling $652.19 with my local camera shop. I shoot with a 6D and would like to upgrade a lens or two.

I currently own:
EF 17-40 f/4 L
EF 24-105 f/4 L IS
EF 40 f/2.8 Pancake
EF 85 f/1.8
EF 100 f/2.8 Macro USM
EF 70-200 f/2.8 L non-IS.

I shoot mainly classic cars, architecture, night photography, people and fine art.

I was thinking of buying the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L II and maybe 1 other lens. I don’t know if I should upgrade my 70-200 to the newer IS III version or my Macro to the IS version. Thoughts?

You will need to decide what it is that you need that you are not getting with your current lenses. Is it better sharpness at some focal length? A focal length that you don’t have? A lens that is better for hand holding? A lens that is better in low light? Let the answers guide your choices.

 

[pulseimages]

I’m thinking I’m going to have to rent these lenses before I buy them.

 

[pulseimages]

You will need to decide what it is that you need that you are not getting with your current lenses. Is it better sharpness at some focal length? A focal length that you don’t have? A lens that is better for hand holding? A lens that is better in low light? Let the answers guide your choices.

Well the 24-105 is good for portraits but it’s sharpness is lousy in just about everything else I have used it for such as night photography, architecture and classic cars. This is my main lens and I feel it’s holding me back. What would be the ideal upgrade to this lens?

I could use a monopod for my 70-200 and 100 Macro if I want to save money instead of buying the IS versions.

It would be nice to go wider than 17mm. I’ve heard the product quality of the Samyang and Rokinon lenses have been lacking in recent years though.

 

[Dantana]

One note on upgrading the 24-105 to the 24-70 2.8 II. You will be giving up the IS that you have in the current lens. I only mention this because it seemed to be a concern with the other lenses mentioned.

 

[BeenThere]

Well the 24-105 is good for portraits but it’s sharpness is lousy in just about everything else I have used it for such as night photography, architecture and classic cars. This is my main lens and I feel it’s holding me back. What would be the ideal upgrade to this lens?

I could use a monopod for my 70-200 and 100 Macro if I want to save money instead of buying the IS versions.

It would be nice to go wider than 17mm. I’ve heard the product quality of the Samyang and Rokinon lenses have been lacking in recent years though.

You can find a used Canon 24-70mm L II for under a thousand. That would be much sharper than the 24-105. The Rokinon 14mm f~2.8 is very sharp and great for Astro if you can live with manual focus. Manual focus is not bad for Astro shooting. I’ve used both lenses in the past. I would probably use your EF 100mm macro for portraits.

 

[tron]

It seems (actually seemed since a lot of time has passed since I last used it) to me that my 24-105 is fine on 5DIV (and 5DIII before). Since 6D has "only" 20Mpixels I would assume that you would be satisfied from 24-105. I understand that these descriptions are not quantitative so the suggestion to check at the-digital-picture.com is a sound one.