I use a 5D mk4 and my main lenses are the 16-35 f2.8L, the 24-105 f4 L and the 100-400 f4.5 5.6 L. I also have the 50 f1.8 a macro 100 f2.8 L and a 1.4 extender. This covers everything from 16mm to 560mm and works well for me. Very OTT for a hobbyist, but keeps me happy.
Building a system of lenses to cover all shooting styles should start with Canon 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 zooms. Then depending on the style, add to it with the highest quality Canon lenses.
The best part about L Series lenses (many of Canon primes too) is that they are great used since they are almost bulletproof. Only one in my kit was new, the 24-70 F2.8L I, the 70-200 F2.8L IS II and 17-40 F4L used and the 400 F5.6 "open box". The best part is that they 1) work like new every time, 2) retain a lot of value and 3) I am today and will tomorrow keep using them adapted to my M50. If the Canon Mirrorless comes they will be easily adapted. No sense in discontinuing such a large line of EOS lenses. Yes, mirrorless has a small form factor, but an EF- 600mm will never be so any new camera will be easily adapted.
Matt, your choices are good. Now what are my choices (standard zoom, telezoom and portrait) - For full-frame, my choice is Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (Model F016). For APS-C, my choices are Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO OS HSM Contemporary, Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM.
How about lens for the canon aps-c body. I note dxomark dont have any good ones even the signma art lens only has a short zoom range that cannot replace a canon kit lens. Using ef lens on aps-c according to dxomark has no real gains is this true?????????????????????? What do you recommed.
How about separating into EF, EF-S & EF-M in EF I prefer the ef 24-70 L f2.8 and 24-105 f4 L, 100mm f2.8 macro. EF-S 17-55 f2.8 and 35mm f2.8 macro. EF-m 22mm f2.8 and most canon lenses are good performers stopped down a couple of stops
Well since mentioning the red ring around the lens, what's the difference between the red ring and the gold ring?, they both say ultrasonic on them. I'm very curious
Red ring indicates that it is an L lens. That comes with certain advantages, most specifically the actual glass used in the making of the lens. Ultra Dispersion (UD) elements, aspherical elements, and a type of glass called flourite all contribute to what makes an L lens. Sometimes non-L lenses will feature 1 or 2 UD elements and maybe an aspherical, like the 17-55mm F2.8 or the 70-300mm IS II, but I don't think they feature fluorite. These elements all help to increase image clarity while also reducing chromatic aberrations, producing high quality images that have that great color that Canon is known for. A gold ring only indicates that it uses ultrasonic motor focus. I am not sure if it means that it is ring type or just any USM, as there are a couple types. The older DC motor driven USM drive is slower than more modern versions, and is not as accurate either. A good example of this would be the poorly made 75-300mm that Canon often bundles with new cameras, and they should seriously either update or get rid of. (I think the only reason they keep it around it that it is cheap.) Ring type USM is much better, and is also featured in a most if not all L lenses. Now, jsut becasue a lens doesn't have the red ring doesn't mean it isn't good. But if it does have it you can count on two things; it is a good lens and it is expensive. There are most certainly non-L lenses that are quite good. Some that come to mind are the 100mm F2.8 macro, 50mm F1.8 STM (not the older II version), 24mm and 40mm F2.8 pancakes, 55-250mm IS STM, 60mm F2.8 macro, 17-55mm F2.8, and so on. In all actuality I think there is only one Canon lens I would say to flat out avoid, the 75-300mm F4-5.6 (all versions of this lens). There are ones that I might say there is a better version of or a better substitute, or not right for a given situation, but yeah most of their lenses are pretty good from the low end to the high.
The Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM is a good lens for the price, especially since I got a mint copy off eBay for $350. It's light weight, sharp, and the auto-focus and image stabilization have worked well on my 80D and 6D MkII, and also on my old Rebel XD and EOS 7 film camera. Of course the 'L' version is better, but for less money this is a decent lens.
Every Canon shooter should own the 50/1.8 STM. Great lens. The 24, 28 and 35mm IS lenses are excellent, even if the reviews have been a bit cold. They where introduced at a too high price, but are a lot better priced today. Consider the old 35/1.4L as well. The 100/2.8L IS is a great lens for macro, portrait, and medium tele. It’s sharp enough for anyone. I liked the 24-70/4L IS better than the 24-105, especially if paired with a 70-200. For people like me, into portrait, the 85/1.2L and 135/2L are must have lenses. Crazy good even if they are old. The 50/1.2L is fun as well, but too expensive. The 85/1.4L IS is better, but not as magical as the 85/1.2. The 200/2.8L can be found cheap, and is almost as good as the 135/2.
and finally , all my canon lenses were replaced by either sigma , tamron, and even some older zeiss lenses....The ART line of Sigma is absolutely amazing! PS, I shoot ff wildlife, macro, and landscape. Lovely that you ask to us!!!! On the other hand, I still keep my Canon pankake, and old fellow that proved very useful all the time!
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
I use a 5D mk4 and my main lenses are the 16-35 f2.8L, the 24-105 f4 L and the 100-400 f4.5 5.6 L. I also have the 50 f1.8 a macro 100 f2.8 L and a 1.4 extender. This covers everything from 16mm to 560mm and works well for me. Very OTT for a hobbyist, but keeps me happy.
All time favourite. 135 f/2.0L
R.I.P Matt, so sad to hear the news. I loved your channel.
One of my favourites is the Canon FD 135mm f2 with a Lens Doctor conversion.
Building a system of lenses to cover all shooting styles should start with Canon 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 zooms. Then depending on the style, add to it with the highest quality Canon lenses.
My favorite is 35mm f1.4L II, both in crop and full frame
The best part about L Series lenses (many of Canon primes too) is that they are great used since they are almost bulletproof. Only one in my kit was new, the 24-70 F2.8L I, the 70-200 F2.8L IS II and 17-40 F4L used and the 400 F5.6 "open box". The best part is that they 1) work like new every time, 2) retain a lot of value and 3) I am today and will tomorrow keep using them adapted to my M50. If the Canon Mirrorless comes they will be easily adapted. No sense in discontinuing such a large line of EOS lenses. Yes, mirrorless has a small form factor, but an EF- 600mm will never be so any new camera will be easily adapted.
Matt, your choices are good. Now what are my choices (standard zoom, telezoom and portrait) -
For full-frame, my choice is Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (Model F016).
For APS-C, my choices are Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO OS HSM Contemporary, Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM.
50 1.8 simple lens
24.105 and 70.200 F4L for those on a budget definetly ;)
Also 135 f2
Which one i want to buy for upgrading ,,, sigma 17-50mm 2.8 Dx os Hsm or Canon 85mm 1.8 prime.... With me canon T6i ..
How about lens for the canon aps-c body. I note dxomark dont have any good ones even the signma art lens only has a short zoom range that cannot replace a canon kit lens. Using ef lens on aps-c according to dxomark has no real gains is this true?????????????????????? What do you recommed.
How about separating into EF, EF-S & EF-M in EF I prefer the ef 24-70 L f2.8 and 24-105 f4 L, 100mm f2.8 macro. EF-S 17-55 f2.8 and 35mm f2.8 macro. EF-m 22mm f2.8 and most canon lenses are good performers stopped down a couple of stops
The EF-M 22mm is F2 not F2.8. Probably the best lens for EF-M. Nice list.
my bad. It is a great performing lens. I have it on my m50 most of the time. Thanks for pointing out my flub.
With that setup you can almost put that into your pocket!
Kevin Diaz I can put the lens in my pocket easily
I meant attached to the camera, the whole thing can almost fit into a pocket since it is so compact. It was hyperbole, but not by much.
I have and love the 70-200 L + 50mm1,8 and the 24mm 👍
thanks for all your videos ☺
Recently picked up the 24-70L F4 and I'm really liking this lens. Next lens will probably be 70-200L F4 or F2.8
Well since mentioning the red ring around the lens, what's the difference between the red ring and the gold ring?, they both say ultrasonic on them. I'm very curious
Red ring indicates that it is an L lens. That comes with certain advantages, most specifically the actual glass used in the making of the lens. Ultra Dispersion (UD) elements, aspherical elements, and a type of glass called flourite all contribute to what makes an L lens. Sometimes non-L lenses will feature 1 or 2 UD elements and maybe an aspherical, like the 17-55mm F2.8 or the 70-300mm IS II, but I don't think they feature fluorite. These elements all help to increase image clarity while also reducing chromatic aberrations, producing high quality images that have that great color that Canon is known for.
A gold ring only indicates that it uses ultrasonic motor focus. I am not sure if it means that it is ring type or just any USM, as there are a couple types. The older DC motor driven USM drive is slower than more modern versions, and is not as accurate either. A good example of this would be the poorly made 75-300mm that Canon often bundles with new cameras, and they should seriously either update or get rid of. (I think the only reason they keep it around it that it is cheap.) Ring type USM is much better, and is also featured in a most if not all L lenses.
Now, jsut becasue a lens doesn't have the red ring doesn't mean it isn't good. But if it does have it you can count on two things; it is a good lens and it is expensive. There are most certainly non-L lenses that are quite good. Some that come to mind are the 100mm F2.8 macro, 50mm F1.8 STM (not the older II version), 24mm and 40mm F2.8 pancakes, 55-250mm IS STM, 60mm F2.8 macro, 17-55mm F2.8, and so on. In all actuality I think there is only one Canon lens I would say to flat out avoid, the 75-300mm F4-5.6 (all versions of this lens). There are ones that I might say there is a better version of or a better substitute, or not right for a given situation, but yeah most of their lenses are pretty good from the low end to the high.
Kevin Diaz thank you
35 mm IS prime USM. Amazing! And great price.
The Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM is a good lens for the price, especially since I got a mint copy off eBay for $350. It's light weight, sharp, and the auto-focus and image stabilization have worked well on my 80D and 6D MkII, and also on my old Rebel XD and EOS 7 film camera. Of course the 'L' version is better, but for less money this is a decent lens.
First 😅 love your vids matt... Keep up the great work!
Every Canon shooter should own the 50/1.8 STM. Great lens. The 24, 28 and 35mm IS lenses are excellent, even if the reviews have been a bit cold. They where introduced at a too high price, but are a lot better priced today. Consider the old 35/1.4L as well. The 100/2.8L IS is a great lens for macro, portrait, and medium tele. It’s sharp enough for anyone.
I liked the 24-70/4L IS better than the 24-105, especially if paired with a 70-200.
For people like me, into portrait, the 85/1.2L and 135/2L are must have lenses. Crazy good even if they are old. The 50/1.2L is fun as well, but too expensive. The 85/1.4L IS is better, but not as magical as the 85/1.2. The 200/2.8L can be found cheap, and is almost as good as the 135/2.
portrait and landscape must haves: 70-200 2.8, 24-105 f4, 10-18, 50mm.... sports: 300mm 2.8, sigma 120-300 2.8, 70-200 2.8, sigma 100-400....
24mm f2.8 stm + 50mm stm f1.8
love your videos
24-70 2.8 😛❤️
and finally , all my canon lenses were replaced by either sigma , tamron, and even some older zeiss lenses....The ART line of Sigma is absolutely amazing! PS, I shoot ff wildlife, macro, and landscape. Lovely that you ask to us!!!! On the other hand, I still keep my Canon pankake, and old fellow that proved very useful all the time!
50 mm 1.2 L is Dope
ef 100mm f2 usm ☺