May 28, 20169 yr Canon choices for APS Lens Focal Length F stop Price Canon 24 2.8 $149 Canon 35 1.4 $1,799 Canon 50 1.4 $399 Canon 50 1.2 $1,449 Canon 85 1.2 $1,999 Canon 85 1.8 $419 Canon 135 2 $999 Canon 200 2 $5,699 Canon 17-55 2.8 $879 Canon 70-200 2.8 $2,099 Rokinon 12 2 $314 Sigma 50-100 1.8 $1,099 Sigma 30 1.4 $499 Sigma 50 1.4 $949 Sigma 18-35 1.8 $799 Tokina 11-16 2.8 $479 Rokinon 50 1.2 $449 Rokinon 85 1.4 $299 Rokinon 135 2 $549
May 28, 20169 yr Nikon choices for APS Lens Focal Length F stop Price Nikkor 24 1.8 $747 Nikkor 35 1.8 $196 Nikkor 50 1.4 $446 Nikkor 85 1.4 $1,596 Nikkor 135 2 $1,391 Nikkor 200 2 $5,695 Nikkor 17-35 2.8 $1,951 Nikkor 70-200 2.8 $1,951 Sigma 50-100 1.8 $1,099 Sigma 30 1.4 $499 Sigma 50 1.4 $949 Sigma 18-35 1.8 $799 Tokina 11-16 2.8 $479 Rokinon 135 2 $549
May 28, 20169 yr Sony choices on 6300 Lens Focal Length F stop Price Rokinon 12 2 $314 Sigma 50-100 1.8 $1,099 Sony 20 2.8 $348 Sony 28 2 $448 Sony 50 1.4 $448 Sony 50 1.8 $248 Sony 55 1.8 $998 Sony 85 1.4 $1,798 Sony 16-50 2.8 $798 Sony 28-75 2 $898 Sony 70-200 2.8 $2,998 Sigma 30 1.4 $499 Sigma 50 1.4 $949 Sigma 18-35 1.8 $799 Tokina 11-16 2.8 $479 Rokinon 50 1.2 $449 Rokinon 85 1.4 $299 Rokinon 135 2 $549
May 28, 20169 yr Fuji mirrorless choices Lens Focal Length F stop Price Fuji 16 1.4 $999 Fuji 56 1.2 $999 Fuji 50-140 2.8 $1,599 Panasonic 25 1.7 $247 Rokinon 12 2 $314 Rokinon 50 1.2 $449 Rokinon 85 1.4 $299 Rokinon 135 2 $549
May 28, 20169 yr Mirrorless 4:3 choices Lens Focal Length F stop Price Olympus 12 2 $799 Olympus 25 1.8 $399 Olympus 45 1.8 $399 Olympus 50 1.2 USED Olympus 75 1.8 $899 Olympus 40-150 2.8 $1,499 Panasonic 15 1.7 $597 Panasonic 25 1.7 $247 Panasonic 42.5 1.2 $1,597 Panasonic 35-100 2.8 $1,297 Panasonic 14 2.5 $297 Panasonic 20 1.7 $297 Panasonic 12-35 2.8 $997 Rokinon 12 2 $314 Sony 55 1.8 $998 Voigtlander 17.5 0.95 $899 Voigtlander 25 0.95 $799 Voigtlander 42.5 0.95 $799 Rokinon 50 1.2 $449 Rokinon 85 1.4 $299 Rokinon 135 2 $549
May 28, 20169 yr Obviously you can see I am playing with all variables. The Fuji is the most complete non-Nikon/Canon system in a small body but I think that its future will be limited since it is unique. Considering Sony's propensity to put some much tech into the body, if Sigma and others start to focus on converters for glass it could the right long term solution. Yes, aargh!!!
May 28, 20169 yr All prices B&H or Adorama. Only listed lenses that potentially I could own. I did no research on the quality of many of them, just the Fstop and range. Next step in my process is to put together option packages and then research them. If I weren't scared of the Sigma reliability it would be easier.
May 28, 20169 yr The 70-200 Canon is sick though. Do you hear the autofocus motor much in video Matt? I couldn't hear it at all in the store.
May 28, 20169 yr Just now, dem beats said: I think you are having a dilemma of what paradigm you want to be in. Yes, but the dilemma is straightforward. If I can do what I need with something smaller and long term not give up anything that is the route I will go. That is not today, but I am willing to adopt a little early to wait for the bodies to catch up. Bodies are disposable, glass not. I realize I can flip lenses as well, but if there is no lens then there is no system.
May 28, 20169 yr Playing with the kit lenses from Canon/Olympus/Fuji yesterday really nailed home the point. They are all basically useless. I didn't try the Nikons but even if they are better it isn't enough to warrant using. AF was slow as dirt, couldn't lock in light that isn't good, and zero bokeh. I would MUCH rather have a camera with a 50mm 1.4 equivalent and nothing else than all the range in the world with lesser glass. Exactly why I am drawn to the 50-100mm 1.8. I don't really "need" the 200 and using a TC to get there and only stepping up to F3.6 will make those shots worse, but if the others are better it would be worth it to me. Of course that lens will fit on my current camera and eventually scale to mirrorless which would mean I would keep the 70d atm.
May 28, 20169 yr Of course on a Sony body it would have image stabilization though which is sorely lacking on the Canon/Nikons While I also generally prefer the lens stabilization, there is no reason to not have it in both locations.
May 28, 20169 yr Sorry Ryan. Realize this is the opposite of what you wanted. ....and how I feel during the gun talk, although I find it interesting as specialty tools of any type I find wicked cool
May 28, 20169 yr Hopefully those shopping lists helped you MK. A 24mm 2.8 STM for video and wider shots and a 50mm 1.4 will buy you 90% of what you need. Landscape will require stitching or a wider lens and you'll have nothing long, but you can take great shots.
May 28, 20169 yr I think Maybe I can chime in with some data points here that might help others too. I went extremely safe and traditional. I rarely go wide so I have the 16-35 2.8 L. The 11-24 would be awesome... But being more than the lens I use the most, I can't justify. The next lens is the 24-70mm 2.8. I chose Tamron. The Tamron has IS and at the time it was the only option that did. I'll go into more on that later. The next lens is the 70-200 ISii 2.8 L. This is the best lens. It has so much intangible value that I would use it even when it's not the ideal focal length. It's so capable I'll get more usable shots even when it's not the right took specifically. I suplement my kit with a 50mm 1.2 and the 2x extender. The extender and the big whitey gives me a range from 16mm to 400mm and further on a crop sensor in one bag. The 50mm 1.2 is the most affordable hyper low light lens and it means I can shoot in moonlight and get completely usable images. If I ever wish to do video it's also a real brute.
May 28, 20169 yr I had to have a philosophy and truely set priorities. So what are the pillars and paradigms? My goal was to not have equipment hold me back without spending for the sake of spending. I'm known for trying to buy my way out of problems and I didn't want to spend more for things that won't help me.... Like a noctilux or similar. So what helps me get shots? 90% of the time I just want more light. IS is extremely helpful, but I shoot action normally and shutter speed is ends up being too fast for IS to be the only answer. I drink less caffeine now and I have noticed my hands are more steady as I get healthier too... So I really look for the widest aperature. I could focus on flash, but that is more for staged shots IMHO so I'm not going to rely on that either. So the primary focus points are..... #1) Wide Aperature. If it's not f2.8 capable I'm going to be really frustrated. Not only do I get better isolation and bokeh I get more shots that are usable. In Rome and PR I could not have done the weddings without it. #2) Focus speed and acuracy. This is why the 70-200 is the God lens for my kit. With that lens my confidence is unparalleled. Dynamic capability is key, and big whitey does way more than any other lens and usually more than a combination of lenses. Its frustratingly good because the only lenses that could beat it are other more expensive Canon white lenses. #3) Stabilization. I'm glad I listened to Sean about this. I didn't think I would need it so much. Its absolutely needed if you are holding your camera. Even when using fast shutter speeds it gets about 15% more usable shots when under crazy dynamic situations. That's an insane amount. Absolutely nuts.
May 28, 20169 yr 1 hour ago, ///M5 said: The 70-200 Canon is sick though. Do you hear the autofocus motor much in video Matt? I couldn't hear it at all in the store. Silent enough for anything I'm going to do. If it's not ok in some silent situation I best those foam lens jackets would shut it up.
May 28, 20169 yr For the record I could replace the wide zoom and the standard zoom with primes. I could not replace the 70-200 With primes. No primes are as good when you take into account the AF and amazing image quality at the moment. Having only 4 lenses to keep track of us really nice for me. Even with a second shooter using the wide or standard zoom, I still feel confident having the 50mm and the 70-200. As my only go to. Not perfect for group shots but I can make it work with a FF. Also as to why I went FF. I don't think it's specifically better, but it's a larger landing zone for light. Its also nice when I really want to make some shallow DOF. Edited May 28, 20169 yr by dem beats
May 28, 20169 yr On an APS sensor the 12-35 1.8 and 50-100 1.8 with an extender may be enough. The only caveat is I would want a stabilized body then
May 28, 20169 yr Sean can you help with how a 1.8 on those sensors works? Our cellphones are 1.8 I think, My concern is that it's still not going to be sensitive enough or deal with ISO well enough to Make images as nice as my FF with 2.8. I don't know enough about how that math works, but I feel like I get more light with the bid camera. :-D
May 29, 20169 yr Sensor size on the phone is TEENY, gathers shit for light Your Rebel has a 1.6 crop. If you put your 70-200 on it the FL will go to 1.6*(70-200) or 112-320mm and the light gathering goes from 2.8 to 2.8*1.6 or 4.5. Depth of field of the lens is not altered at all, you may perceive it differently though since you have to move to get the same picture in the field of view thus changing your overall dof as it is based not on the lens but its position to the target you are shooting. 1.8 on an APS is equivalent to 2.8 on a FF. If you have a sensor that has the equal noise curve the light capabilities should be within some reasonable minimal uncertainty. I used a lot of assumptions there, but just trying to explain how it works not be uber specific.
May 29, 20169 yr So if you cell phone has a crop factor of 8 (no idea what it is but I would guess even more) you get to multiply that great under 2 fstop by a HUGE number So yeah, phones are not good at all in low light
May 29, 20169 yr Exactly why I was hoping Samsung would stay in the camera market. The tech they make for their phones applied to an APS sensor would be the bomb. Also part of the reason I think long term the winner is going to be Sony or another tech company to eventually own the removeable lens camera market
May 29, 20169 yr 1 hour ago, ///M5 said: Sensor size on the phone is TEENY, gathers shit for light Your Rebel has a 1.6 crop. If you put your 70-200 on it the FL will go to 1.6*(70-200) or 112-320mm and the light gathering goes from 2.8 to 2.8*1.6 or 4.5. Depth of field of the lens is not altered at all, you may perceive it differently though since you have to move to get the same picture in the field of view thus changing your overall dof as it is based not on the lens but its position to the target you are shooting. 1.8 on an APS is equivalent to 2.8 on a FF. If you have a sensor that has the equal noise curve the light capabilities should be within some reasonable minimal uncertainty. I used a lot of assumptions there, but just trying to explain how it works not be uber specific. This is what I needed. I'm kinda proud I had that as a general theory in my head though! Lol :-D
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.