Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Mon Jan 16, 2017 3:32 pm

All times are UTC

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2014 6:56 pm 

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:08 am
Posts: 24
Location: London
Hi All again!

I last left you guys having just filled you in on my first few weeks with my new 6D. I've been places (despite the weather in the UK) and had long weekend on the Continent too, with various combinations of kit. The 6D feels incredible balanced and perfectly suited to primes; compact and precise. The ISO band is incredible and allows me to 'get away with murder' in comparison to my venerable 40D in shady areas! Put it this way the 6D is an enabler.

I've also traded and sold all of my APS-C lenses (painful; firstly: because they were great, secondly: revealing how much they had depreciated by), and bought full frame glass too; the 100mm f2.0 and the 24-105mm f4.

The 100 f2.0 is a superb lens delivering beautifully compressed bokeh and is by far the sharpest of my primes at f2. Had great fun with it at Christmas with all the fairy lights and atmosphere.

The 24-105mm... well you guys probably know enough about this lens already. Not too shabby; nicely built and responsive. Nice one lens solution for trips, where the 17-55mm felt compromised. I wouldn't say its the greatest lens I've owned, but fine. Before purchasing it I had a look at Sigma's new offering which was a little too substantial on my gripped 6D (in other words: a tank), lovely build though! I think I'll allow a 24-70mm f2.8 to break my wrist in the future maybe.

One difficulty I've had was taking Ultra-Wide shots though; 24mm and 28mm didn't cut it. I'm an avid fan of using Cokin square filters (owning 100mm Z-Pro's) and this is where the problems start to creep in. There are quite a few ultra-wide's out there that have fixed petal hoods (I think this is an irritating limitation), which require much more expensive bespoke filter systems (in comparison to the Z-Pros which are pricey anyway). This really narrows down the field of possibilities:

Canon 17-40mm f4L (is this all I need, or can I do better?)
Tokina 17-35mm f4 AT-X Pro (what's it like?)
Canon 16-35mm f2.8L (difficult to find good 'non-warzone' 2nd hand examples)
Canon 16-35mm f2.8L MK2 (pricey, heavier and do I actually need the extra stop?)

Any others? Would greatly appreciate opinions on the above.

Whenever a scene catches you, take a snap!

Canon EOS 6D & 40D w. 24-105mm f4L IS USM + 70-200mm f4L IS USM + 28mm f1.8 USM + 50mm f1.4 USM + 100mm f2.0 USM Canon S95, Canon EOS 300 and Rolleiflex f3.5 TLR

PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:38 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1173
Location: bit east of Melbourne
Hi Wills, I am enjoying my 6D too. The high iso ability makes the impossible possible or the hard easy. I really had to work with the 7D and the primes to get shots that I can get easily with the 6D.
The center focus spot is really good too.

I choose the 24-70 Tamron 2.8 VC to go with the 6D, mainly for the portrait, ability and its actually a useful lens on the 7D. Often we would have the 70-300L on the 7D and the Tamron on the 6D and then swap the lenses over. The 6D with the 70-300 is lovely and so is the 7D with the 24-70 2.8 , its benefits from the 2.8 aperture.

I did a 2month trip with the family and caravan last year and bought the 17-40L just before the trip. Its a lovely match to the 6D, weight and balance wise. The 24-70 can be a bit long thick and heavy. IQ has been fine, but would suggest you shoot in raw and use things like LR4 to fix vignetting. I personally was using it for landscape and general photography, so coupled with the high iso ability I don`t see the point in the 2.8 aperture, adds too much weight, size and price. The slightly better IQ might make it worthwhile, but like I said using a good processing tool and I don`t find the step up worth it. But since I don`t have it I don`t know what I am missing. Having the 24-70 2.8 to fall back on is obviously a bonus.

Basically on most days when travelling, I had the 17-40L on the 6D and the 7D with the bigger 70-300L, that is what I take bushwalking. Around at home etc the 24-70 lives on the 6D.

I dismissed the Tokina because its as big and heavy as the canon 16-35 F2.8L canon and reviews suggest that the 17-40L is better

Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group