Recommended Lenses for 60D

[mariayaz]

I have canon 60D with (18-55mm) and (canon 50mm 1.8) lenses. I am thinking to upgrade my lenses who could cover portraits, landscapes and macro photography.

I have heard that Tokina 11-16mm is sharpest landscape (inexpensive) lens, Also canon 85mm is great for portraits. However, i dont know best Macro lens yet.

What would you recommend me to get for 60D, It would be great if recommended lenses are also workable with full frame body as i might buy 5D3 next year (but its not necessary), All i am focusing to get best camera lenses for my Canon 60D to cover all kind of photography range.


Thanks

 

[Loswr]

EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS as general purpose zoom (or EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS), EF 85/1.8, and EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS. Plus a 430EX II.

 

[mariayaz]

EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS as general purpose zoom (or EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS), EF 85/1.8, and EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS. Plus a 430EX II.

Could you pls also specified purpose of each lens?

 

[Loswr]

17-55, general purpose zoom good for indoors and portraits.

15-85, general purpose zoom good for outdoors, travel.

85/1.8, portraits.

100L, macro.

 

[mariayaz]

17-55, general purpose zoom good for indoors and portraits.

15-85, general purpose zoom good for outdoors, travel.

85/1.8, portraits.

100L, macro.

Thank you so much, would 15-85 mm also work for Landscapes? I think i will not need 17-55
mm at the moment as i don't shot indoors, a lot.

Any of them can also work on Fullframe body (if i upgrade my camera later)?

Thanks once again.

 

[Loswr]

The 15-85 is great for landscapes. The EF-S lenses (15-85, 17-55) don't work on FF. Personally, I recommend buying the lenses you need for the camera you have now, not a camera you might get at some unspecified future time. The high-quality EF-S lenses that I listed, along with the 10-22 ultra wide, hold their value very well. More importantly, outside of those lenses that I listed (and some 3rd party counterparts), There really is no high quality general purpose zoom lens (wide angle to short tele) for both APS-C and FF.

 

[jdramirez]

I have a 100mm macro L lens and it was great for both macro and portraiture, so I would suggest that as a good all in one.

I'm actually selling my 100 because I have a 70-200 is mkii and it seems redundant, but I loved that lens, 100mm, for over a year and I would highly recommend it. also, from what I was told, it is the best macro lens on the market, better than the 60 and 180.

 

[jdramirez]

The 15-85 is great for landscapes. The EF-S lenses (15-85, 17-55) don't work on FF. Personally, I recommend buying the lenses you need for the camera you have now, not a camera you might get at some unspecified future time. The high-quality EF-S lenses that I listed, along with the 10-22 ultra wide, hold their value very well. More importantly, outside of those lenses that I listed (and some 3rd party counterparts), There really is no high quality general purpose zoom lens (wide angle to short tele) for both APS-C and FF.

if you buy them used or refurbished you could sell them for about what you paid. if you buy new, you are looking at about a twenty to thirty percent loss when you sell them. But the same can be said about most lenses.

 

[mariayaz]

The 15-85 is great for landscapes. The EF-S lenses (15-85, 17-55) don't work on FF. Personally, I recommend buying the lenses you need for the camera you have now, not a camera you might get at some unspecified future time. The high-quality EF-S lenses that I listed, along with the 10-22 ultra wide, hold their value very well. More importantly, outside of those lenses that I listed (and some 3rd party counterparts), There really is no high quality general purpose zoom lens (wide angle to short tele) for both APS-C and FF.

Alright John, i will look to buy these lenses, thanks for the help.

 

[mariayaz]

I have a 100mm macro L lens and it was great for both macro and portraiture, so I would suggest that as a good all in one.

I'm actually selling my 100 because I have a 70-200 is mkii and it seems redundant, but I loved that lens, 100mm, for over a year and I would highly recommend it. also, from what I was told, it is the best macro lens on the market, better than the 60 and 180.

I am actually new to gear and lenses, I have zero knowledge but i wanted to search and ask recommendations before i invest money, as i cant buy again or too frequently.

All those mentioned lenses above i just searched and i am amazed with the result, If not all i am surely going to buy at least 15-85mm and 100mm. I would be clicking mainly outdoors/travel/portraits/wedding photographs.


Thanks for the help.

 

[Loswr]

I have a 100mm macro L lens and it was great for both macro and portraiture, so I would suggest that as a good all in one.

I'm actually selling my 100 because I have a 70-200 is mkii and it seems redundant, but I loved that lens, 100mm, for over a year and I would highly recommend it. also, from what I was told, it is the best macro lens on the market, better than the 60 and 180.

I found 100mm on APS-C to be a bit long for portraits.

I'd not say the 100L is 'the best'. The 180L delivers more (apparent) background blur, and the longer working distance is a huge benefit for some macro subjects (e.g., bugs, reptiles). From an IQ standpoint, the 100 and 180 are similar. The IS is nice, but keep in mind that at macro distances the IS is less effective (2 stops instead of 4), and the aperture is effectively reduced (less light).

 

[mariayaz]

I have a 100mm macro L lens and it was great for both macro and portraiture, so I would suggest that as a good all in one.

I'm actually selling my 100 because I have a 70-200 is mkii and it seems redundant, but I loved that lens, 100mm, for over a year and I would highly recommend it. also, from what I was told, it is the best macro lens on the market, better than the 60 and 180.

I found 100mm on APS-C to be a bit long for portraits.

I'd not say the 100L is 'the best'. The 180L delivers more (apparent) background blur, and the longer working distance is a huge benefit for some macro subjects (e.g., bugs, reptiles). From an IQ standpoint, the 100 and 180 are similar. The IS is nice, but keep in mind that at macro distances the IS is less effective (2 stops instead of 4), and the aperture is effectively reduced (less light).

Then its necessary to buy 85mm for portraits separately and 100mm for Macro?

 

[Loswr]

Define necessary... You can take nice portraits with the 100/2.8L, but you'll get better subject isolation with an f/1.8 lens which is 1.33-stops faster. If you have good physical separation between subject and background, the 15-85 at f/5.6 would work ok, too. But when you don't have control over a busy background, a fast aperture is very useful.

 

[mariayaz]

Alright john.. i go for them. I checked your gallery, i must say i have seen most beautiful photos there. Your photos speak your command over gears. Thanks for sincere advise.

 

[wsmith96]

I have to agree with neuro here. I was in the same boat a while back and I upgraded the lenses for my T1i to the 17-55, 10-22, and the 60 macro. Still on my list is the 85 1.8 and I'd like to change the 60 macro to the 100L macro as the 60 requires you to get insanely close to a subject for real close up work. I don't have experience with the 15-85, but that one's on my list to get too as the reviews on it suggest it is a quality lens with a bit more reach than what I have in my kit. I can confirm that the 17-55 is an amazing lens for aps-c cameras. And I also concur that you shouldn't worry too much about planning for the future FF cameras - by the time you are ready to make that move, there will be something newer and better than what you currently have that you'll want more. My only exception my to recommendation is the 70-200 2.8, but you weren't looking for a zoom lens like that right now.

 

[sunnyVan]

I upgraded from the 60D. Nice camera!!

Get the 10-22 for landscape. Tokina is not bad. But the price is not much different so why not get the best?

17-55. I used it for almost two years. Love the image quality but got pretty annoyed by the build. Make sure you buy used. The original price is absurd for this build quality.

100mm non-L Macro is wonderful. It's almost identical to the L version except for two things which a lot of people seem to care about but I don't--superior build quality and IS. The non-L is half price of its counterpart. I would suggest saving that money and use it to get the 85 1.8. Both 100 Macro and the 85 are usable in the future when you go FF.

 

[Don Haines]

I've got to say 100L for macro. There are some lenses that are such a pleasure to use that you don't know how you lived without it... And this is one. It was my first Lglass lens and the difference in quality and image over the kit lens was like night and day.

 

[jdramirez]

I've got to say 100L for macro. There are some lenses that are such a pleasure to use that you don't know how you lived without it... And this is one. It was my first Lglass lens and the difference in quality and image over the kit lens was like night and day.

I love my 100L too, but it wasn't my first. I had a very solid 24-105, but it wasn't love the way the 100 is.