Angmo wrote:
My walk around kit for this trip:
Rolleiflex 6008 MF camera, 40, 60, 80, 180 and 300 mm
medium format lenses & Tripod. 40 rolls of film.
Walk around location: Himalaya Mountains for 2 weeks.
Lost 12 pounds on that walk.
If that works for medium format, then all that's needed
to exactly match it for the Canon 6D is one rather tidy,
not unusually extreme, 28-200/3.5-5.6. This would not
be a budget bender today as that range has been passe
for a few years now !
OTOH passe lenses are older tech. So, better to go for a
28-300/3.5-5.6 [or /3.5-6.3] and just ignore all the FLs
beyond 200mm. That way the 28-200mm range doesn't
approach the long end where IQ may be kinda sketchy.
I use a top shelf 28-300 that is no problem at 300mm,
but it weighs a ton with all that optical magic. But a 28-
300 whose "no problem" range reaches to about
200 is
gonna be much lighter [and waaaay cheaper].
`
If I was gonna only walk around nikon wise, the newest 24-70 and 70-300 afp would be all the glass I’d likely ever ever need. Short of birding or wild beast shoots. Then possibly a 16, 18, or 20mm and whatever used long glass off eBay
I normally prefer having a lens on my camera, but if you prefer having what others insist is what you need...then who are you shooting for them or you? Your feet control the best all around lens there is...the ones attached in your head and connected to your brain? After that it's up to you on who you want to shoot for using your gear? You or the ones telling you what to get? Rent, rent, rent, try, try, try ... but I will promise you this, sooner or later you will convince yourself there is something better and it's because you're brain damaged into believing new is better...who markets the truth anyway? What you should convince yourself of is, there are lenses that achieve things differently ...not better, bestest, or best, "different" so there is no Good or Bad, what there is different light and different ways lenses handle it.... there is no all around lens, ebay is proof of that unholy grail.
East Banana wrote:
I normally prefer having a lens on my camera, but if you prefer having what others insist is what you need...then who are you shooting for them or you? Your feet control the best all around lens there is...the ones attached in your head and connected to your brain? After that it's up to you on who you want to shoot for using your gear? You or the ones telling you what to get? Rent, rent, rent, try, try, try ... but I will promise you this, sooner or later you will convince yourself there is something better and it's because you're brain damaged into believing new is better...who markets the truth anyway? What you should convince yourself of is, there are lenses that achieve things differently ...not better, bestest, or best, "different" so there is no Good or Bad, what there is different light and different ways lenses handle it.... there is no all around lens, ebay is proof of that unholy grail.
I normally prefer having a lens on my camera, but ... (
show quote)
Hey thanks for the recommendation!
Aldente wrote:
What I jokingly meant was if you buy prime lens, then it's going to always have the same fixed focal length and to bring the photographed subject closer to you, you'd need to walk towards that subject or, inversely, if you're to close to the subject, you'll need to walk away from it for better framing -- something you don't need to do with zooms (or do less).
My suggestion then would be, if snapping birds is your main thing, then don't go with primes and go with the zooms. Spend as much as you can for the one with quality glass and greater reach. Considering the fact that you also specified your preference for "all-around lens", I'd say 24-105 would probably be the very minimum zoom you should consider, keeping an eye for others, with higher second number (105, 135, 200, 300, etc.). Hope that helped.
What I jokingly meant was if you buy prime lens, t... (
show quote)
Well, if you photograph birds, you probably have a lens which zooms from 100mm or thereabouts, so you could fill in with a shorter lens which ranges from medium wide-angle to where your birding lens starts.
bcrawf wrote:
Well, if you photograph birds, you probably have a lens which zooms from 100mm or thereabouts, so you could fill in with a shorter lens which ranges from medium wide-angle to where your birding lens starts.
Exactly what I was looking for!! So many out there .
I couldn't agree more about Canon's 24-105. Nice focal range, superb images, I'm finding that I'm switching lenses less and less.
RickBechtel wrote:
I couldn't agree more about Canon's 24-105. Nice focal range, superb images, I'm finding that I'm switching lenses less and less.
Guess I will be saving up for it!
Angmo wrote:
My walk around kit for this trip:
Rolleiflex 6008 MF camera, 40, 60, 80, 180 and 300 mm medium format lenses & Tripod. 40 rolls of film.
Walk around location: Himalaya Mountains for 2 weeks.
Lost 12 pounds on that walk.
Excellent shot! No wonder you lost 12 pounds; you were carrying the equivalent of
a 1990s era desktop computer!
Quite an impressive equipment lineup.
Best wishes,
Alan
You might take a look and see if you can find the immediate previous model. You should be able to get it for a nice bargain price, and in my opinion, most of us would be hard put to discern the difference between that model and the current/new one (which came out a year or so ago).
East Banana wrote:
I normally prefer having a lens on my camera, but if you prefer having what others insist is what you need...then who are you shooting for them or you? Your feet control the best all around lens there is...the ones attached in your head and connected to your brain? After that it's up to you on who you want to shoot for using your gear? You or the ones telling you what to get? Rent, rent, rent, try, try, try ... but I will promise you this, sooner or later you will convince yourself there is something better and it's because you're brain damaged into believing new is better...who markets the truth anyway? What you should convince yourself of is, there are lenses that achieve things differently ...not better, bestest, or best, "different" so there is no Good or Bad, what there is different light and different ways lenses handle it.... there is no all around lens, ebay is proof of that unholy grail.
I normally prefer having a lens on my camera, but ... (
show quote)
Agreed! The frequently trashed kit lenses are actually excellent quality "glass." If you don't need an f-stop lower than 4.5 or so, you're all set.
The best all-around lens will vary by what someone shoots. The question should be more specific.
RichardTaylor wrote:
From personal experience a EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens
I have a 24-105 F4L IS USM for sale $500, excellent condition. includes lens caps, hood & several filters. The ad is under UHH Classifieds.😊
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.