jupitersolo

IMO, stay away from superzooms, they are slow and are soft on the long end. Some past 200mm, some past 150mm.

As you're a Canon shooter, if you want distant, find a used 100-400mm.

srika

really love that first image Jupe!

srika

I hear you Matt - it sounds like you are looking for a "jack of all trades" all-around kind of lens. On most of those they get not-as-sharp at the higher zoom end. I have a Tamron 28-300 and it's pretty good from 28-200 but gets soft beyond that. But 28-200 is still a pretty good range. Also these all-around lenses will have more distortion than others. Just some things to keep in mind.

You should also consider what focal lengths you love shooting at and tend to stick to and consider lenses at those specific ranges we well. You will generally get sharper images and less distortion with those choices.

mattg

What about the Canon 18-200 I posted? Same thing where it gets soft closer to the big end? I just don't like the fact that the lenses I use most are either super wide or zoom. Something to bridge the gap would be nice. Most of the time lately that I wanted a more powerful zoom has been for taking moon shots. But how often do I take those shots? Quite a bit lately... Wish I had the dough to buy a few lenses but alas I am limited.

srika

if you want to bridge the gap you would go with something like the Canon 17-55 or Sigma 17-50.

I checked the reviews on the Canon 18-200 and they seem fairly good. Not having used the lens myself I can't comment on its sharpness or use, but the reviews sound good.

jupitersolo

Matt,

I see your photography evolving, time to get away from consumer type lenses....

Mizouse

Agree.

I've got 2 lenses, and they've covered 90% of what I take pics of.

Not necessarily recommending these, but I have the 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8

There are a handful of times I wish I had 17-40 or 100-400mm, but not often enough to justify buying it.

mattg

Thanks Jeff.

Are lenses more important than what body I'm using? I'm not sure where to start. I am open to suggestions though and may be in the position to get some new gear and sell off the old in the not too distant future.

mattg

I need something like the 10-22 for home interiors, but I don't need 400mm.

Mizouse

That's why I wasn't recommending it.

Are you mostly wide angle?

What type of pics do you shoot or want to shoot?

Also do you see yourself upgrading your body any time soon.

I'd go with jups suggestion and get away from consumer glass.

jupitersolo

Bodies come and go, GOOD glass is where you want to spend your money. You are doing very well from what Ive been seeing you post here and flickr. Time to buy some glass that will stay with you for next 10 yrs or more.

Buy glass that is GOOD through the focal length and f/stops and is built to NOT have distortion and color shift.

asianspec

iTrader: (1)

Yes, bodies will become obsolete faster than lenses. If home landscaping is what you are interested in, a wide angle is essential. 10-22, or a 17-40. There is the 16-35mm but if you have the money for it. I would look at the used market or wait for canon refurbish sales to get the best deals. Once you get comfortable and feel like you can go a step further in your lens collection then a Tilt shift lens should be the next step.

mattg

I'm taking listing photos for 24 agents now, as well as marketing shots for different new-home neighborhood projects we have. I take a lot of interior photos. I've had an EF-S 10-22mm I've been using for ~ 8 years now. I also need to be able to capture views with a zoom lens, which is what I use the 55-250 EFS for. And I use them both for scenery for fun like what I have been posting lately.

Is the 10-22 considered consumer grade? Does it need to be serviced or retired at some point?

The nice thing about doing photography "professionally" is I can write off everything I buy.

Mizouse

If you're looking for a good zoom out to the 200mm range the 70-200 f4 is good and relatively low cost.

I had one, liked it's smaller size and sharp images, but way back when, I needed the extra stop of the 2.8 version.

jupitersolo

The 10-22mm is a good lens, it's working for you, stick with it. Though it doesn't have Canon's red stripe. It's a good one!

As Miz said, if you want longer and better. Canon' s white lenses, 70-200mm is what you should be looking at. They have four versions of that lens that you can find used.. Two F/4's and two 2.8's, both with and without IS. I owned all four of them at one time, yrs ago.

Then the new offerings from Sigma and Tamron are getting great reviews.

Then Canon has the new, 2.8, if you want to spend two grand.

EuRTSX

Hi folks. I'm traveling to Taiwan in a few days for about 2 weeks. I want to pick up a tripod that won't be much of a burden to carry for my A7...any recommendations?

jupitersolo

MeFoto, they have three sizes and choice of aluminum or CF, depending on models. Come with ballheads and plate, the little one is great for travel.

EuRTSX

I was looking at that one as well.

jupitersolo

If your gear is light and no heavy winds, should work perfectly for travel. A friend has taken hers to China.

is300eater

I have the FotoPro C5i, basically the MeFoto's "Roadtrip".... they are essentially the same tripod and I love how small it folds down to, and can totally fit in a carry-on suitcase. And I love how one of the legs can be converted into a monopod

is300eater

jupitersolo

That's effing hilarious!

I saw that at the airshow a few weeks ago, and I was in it!

Mizouse

WTF at teh guy on the left, hes turning the wrong way!

theres another guy with a white jacket in the middle too

EuRTSX

Here's the tripod I'm thinking of getting. Was thinking the orange since it matches the ring on the outside of the A7, but figured if I got rid of this camera later on, it won't matter. Plus it's only a dollar less. Play it safe and get Titanium?

jupitersolo

That should be good, even the smaller one would be good for light use on trips.

mattg

So which one of these does a guy without a fancy set of gear go with? I would love to get the Canon f/2.8 IS but I'm just not quite there yet to drop 2K on a lens. I think between the f/2.8 non IS and f/4 IS, the f/4 makes the most sense. It also sounds like it produces the finest images. The 2 off brands sound like they are pretty darn close to the Canon image quality but not as nice of build (though still nice I'm sure). There is something sexy about that white lens though.

I know you said you've gone completely to mirrorless, Jeff. Do people hang these big ass lenses off those little cameras?

mattg

I'm going to have to get one of these. The tripod I'm using has got me by but it pretty much sucks.

is300eater

I do, if I have to. I mean, if I'm going to photograph eagles and the longest zoom I have is a 70-400mm, I'm going to use whatever it takes. It has a tripod/monopod collar mount anyways

mattg

Cool. I just don't know anything about them. You're using DSLR and mirrorless too, yeah?

is300eater

I'm all mirrorless now, I sold the a99 recently

jupitersolo

I do have Fuji for mirrorless, but I still have Nikon for my super telephoto lenses. I will always have some Nikon gear, because thats what my son and wife shoot.

I don't use adaptors on my Fuji, except when shooting macro. And now with my 90mm and 16mm ext tube. I no longer use my adaptor.

As for the lenses listed, I to would have to go with the Canon F/4, for the size and weight. And now with camera bodies giving better higher ISO results, can't see the need for 2.8, unless you really have to have it.

I always like the images of the Canon F/4 lenses over the 2.8 ones anyways.

Mizouse

Yea in the past, iirc the f4 is, was the sharpest of the bunch. Not sure how the 2.8IS II compares now thou.

Mizouse

For me I went with the 2.8 because I needed the extra stop of light. Also most DSLRs are more sensitive in terms of autofocus with glass that is 2.8 or faster.

My use that's why I went with the 2.8. I used to shoot sports.

This was back in 2008-2009. I've since gotten a newerish camera body. And now use that 2.8 glass with my Sony NEX-6.


So as said before good glass will last you a long time.

mattg

So for a dummy like me to understand, how wide of angle and how much zoom can you achieve with your Fuji lens(es) and ext tubes? For what I use my equipment for would it make sense for me to get a mirrorless body? And if I did that, would I still want to buy the Canon F/4?

I'm going to have to send my t5i body in soon. And whether the repair or replace it, that may be the time to sell it if I was going to do something.

mattg

From what I was reading, the F/4 IS has the best image quality.

Mizouse

Fujis have a 1.5x crop, similar to your canons 1.6x crop. So you'd want glass similar in focal length if you switch.

mattg

So I could get a mirrorless body and adapter (if I didn't buy a Canon?) and use my 10-22 & whatever new zoom I buy?

jupitersolo

One thing with Fuji, there are releasing lenses with focal lengths equal to the most popular 35mm lens. They don't have a 70-200mm, but did release a 50-140mm 2.8 and they don't have a 24-70mm, but released a 16-55mm 2.8. So with the crop factor of 1.5, it puts them there.

Now as far as changing brands for form factor, that's a whole other kettle of fish.....

If it's something you think you may want to do, this would be the time, do it. As you don't have a lot of money into your current gear.

mattg

So if I was going to buy a Fuji mirrorless, it would be best to buy the Fuji lenses you mentioned above instead of buying a new Canon lens..

mattg

I see to do that would cost about 4K though, and I maybe have a grand worth of stuff I could sell. What to do, what to do..