What is the next Canon lens you want or covet and why...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
#24
I owned the 70-200 f2.8L IS II for a while and loved it. I sold it to pay for some non-photography expenses. Do I miss it? Sure, but I do just fine without it...

Now the 24-70 II... That's one lens I'd never get rid of if I had one :P
 
Upvote 0
#28
CANONisOK said:
neuroanatomist said:
I may get distracted by purchasing the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS II along the way...
Click to expand...
It seems to me that with the rave reviews the current model gets (and the fact it was introduced as recently as 2010) this may not be one released very soon.
Click to expand...

No thought that it was - typo corrected. I'm just so used to typing IS II, I guess...
 
Upvote 0
#29
Ladislav said:
Just rent 200 f/2 if you need it for any special event. It is pretty big investment if you don't need the lens regularly.

I would like to have 70-200L f/2.8 II and 24-70L f/2.8 II but don't want to invest so much in the near future. My next lens will be 100L f/2.8. It will give me new options for macro and some portraits.
Click to expand...
if you live near central pa, I'll make you a good deal on 100mm L. my 70-200 mkii has taken its place as my preferred lens. it is sad really.
 
Upvote 0
#30
200 F2 or the 300 f2.8 ii. I used to think about the 400 f2.8 ii but it is a $5000 premium over the 300mm for which I can buy a nice APS-C body and get same reach or use a 1.4x to get to 400mm (granted the 400mm will go even further) but the price difference is just huge between the two.

If I had to choose between the 200mm and 300mm, I'd go with the 300mm since I already own a 70-200 f2.8.

The 300 2.8ii seems to be one of the sharpest and best performing primes out there in a reasonable size that I can fit into my backpack. It has great micro contrast and amazing sharpness and is very usable with 1.4x and 2x TC's.
 
Upvote 0
#33
Well, the 200 f/2 is still the lens I want when I want to get pics of wrestling but I realized in some gyms, I might be too close and there might be too many things or people in the way for good shots. In the high school gyms, the length will be fine if I'm placed at a corner where there is not much obstruction and I'll be at a distance that will not impede others. Also, the 200mm would be good for baseball and football too. However, if some tournaments are held where everything can be crowded, that could be a problem. I may not get floor access as good as I can with the local matches.

Still want to get that 200 f/2 and the 1.4 III extender, though.

Well, here comes the 135 f/2. This lens is reasonably priced. From what I have read, it is the bees knees (still have no idea where this saying comes from, but it's something good). This lens could be real good for the indoor sports I can cover. It might be real good for basketball, if I want to cover games for that. I could but it's not a necessity. Still, the 135 lens I can walk around with relative ease and get great shots from various angles and not be in the way. I'm renting it from LensRentals for my nephew's graduation and although it may not be long enough, that's ok. I can try it for pics of the party and it'll get used a lot. I dont believe it has IS and I dont have a decent tripod yet (I dont think I could bring one in the arena anyway), so no video.

I'll have to add the 135 f/2 to the list. ;D
 
Upvote 0
#35
captainkanji said:
I'm hoping to upgrade my 70-200 f4 to the 2.8 version. I need the range and IS at low light events. I can't wait till my November event. I'm gonna rent one and a 24-70.
Click to expand...

I was fortunate enough to try the 2.8 non-IS for my nephews' baseball tournament and it did a damn good job of photos. I had set it to aperture priority and for the most part, the lens was tack sharp. A few photos were overexposed but that's on me, of course. It put my kit lens to shame in night settings, especially when I needed the reach and at 2.8.

An odd thing about these lenses for me is that, even though I really like the results, the lenses make me want to get even better with manual exposure time and change the apertures. Just learn even more and control everything and get the most out of the lens. I might be getting addicted to this photography stuff and I'm gonna take some courses that they offer here in my town.

The non-IS was great. I should just get the non IS as I was real happy with it but I'll pony up for the IS II because I need the video capabilities. Really could use that extra $900 for another lens, but it is what it is.

8) 8) 8)
 
Upvote 0
#36
RocklandDragon said:
Well, the 200 f/2 is still the lens I want when I want to get pics of wrestling but I realized in some gyms, I might be too close and there might be too many things or people in the way for good shots. In the high school gyms, the length will be fine if I'm placed at a corner where there is not much obstruction and I'll be at a distance that will not impede others. Also, the 200mm would be good for baseball and football too. However, if some tournaments are held where everything can be crowded, that could be a problem. I may not get floor access as good as I can with the local matches.

Still want to get that 200 f/2 and the 1.4 III extender, though.

Well, here comes the 135 f/2. This lens is reasonably priced. From what I have read, it is the bees knees (still have no idea where this saying comes from, but it's something good). This lens could be real good for the indoor sports I can cover. It might be real good for basketball, if I want to cover games for that. I could but it's not a necessity. Still, the 135 lens I can walk around with relative ease and get great shots from various angles and not be in the way.
Click to expand...

I shot a lot of Junior High wrestling this winter at my sons meets using primarily a 70-200 2.8 II and 135L on my 6D. I tried my 24-105 in one meet, but had to go to ISO's of 6400+ to stop the action, and I try not to go that high as the noise gets hard to clean up in PP. Also, lack of reach with the 24-105 was a problem at times.

Some of my best shots were with my 135L, but I also missed a few when this lens was on if the boys quickly moved to the near side of the mat if I didn't back up fast enough and find a new position. The additional light gathering ability of the 2.0 lens allowed faster shutter speeds with reasonable ISO's. So, as the season progressed, I used the 70-200 2.8 II more and more with good success.
 
Upvote 0
#37
The Canon 24-70 2.8 II is still at the top of my wish list, should have the money saved by this time next month.

Next on my list at this point would be a 16-35 II, as I've recently missed the UWA focal lengths. Last year I used a EF-S 10-22 with my 7D. Now that I'm using the 6D 95% of the time, I need something wider than 24mm.
 
Upvote 0
#39
Debating to replace my 24-105 for a 24-70 II for improved IQ reasons. Still on the fence whether I'll do this.

Next, really want a good, fast 50 mm lens that is not a specialty lens like the 50L, just doesn't exist. The ideal would be a 50 f/1.4L, but that will never happen. If I had these then I'd probably be with all those waiting to replace my 16-35 II with a 14-24.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
Sigma to announce a 200mm f/1.8 Sports Lens?
Replies
24
Views
4K
Del Paso
D
S
Canon’s disdain for APS-C users.
Replies
34
Views
2K
EricN
EricN
Fbimages
Svalbard and Arctic pack ice, summer 2025
Replies
16
Views
977
ArdoSmith
A
lfram
Canon R5 Mark II + 600EX-RT Compatibility - Need Quick Advice!
Replies
3
Views
3K
Moritz_RD02
M
H
Interesting Lens Setup Coming from GoPro
Replies
0
Views
1K
HarryFilm
H
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu