The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Looking for advice, please.

rayyan

Well-known member
Over 30 years I have been with the dark side. Age and eyesight makes me seek some alternatives. And the lack of lenses at the right weight and FL.

I shoot Zeiss 35 and Zeiss 100mm. My favorite focal lengths.

Manual focus is causing me probles, as is the weight without af.

Thinking about a 5D II, 24-105 L, 24/1.4 L or 35/1.4 L and a 135/2 L

I would be grateful for your experience and advice.

Thank you Kindly.
 

ReeRay

Member
Age and eyesight caught me a few years back and I opted for the 5D MKI and have latterly upgraded to the 5D MKII . I avoided the 24-105 L and opted for a 24mm F1.4L, 50mm F1.4 an 85mm F1.8 and a 100mm F2.8 macro. These are the lenses I use most when staying local but I've since added a 17-40 L and the superb 70-200 F4 L IS for traveling "light" purposes.

I'm really happy with this kit and find it covers all my shooting needs from low light, street, travel and sport. The IQ from the MKII is awesome and you most definitely will not be disappointed.
 
T

tokengirl

Guest
If you are using the 35mm and 100m Zeiss and they are your favorite focal lengths, then the natural choice would be the 5DMkII with the 35mm L and the 100mm Macro L, no?

I have the 24-105 L, and it's a good lens for what it is. It was the first lens I bought. But if I had to do it over again, I would skip that one and just get the two primes.
 

forbar

New member
Hello rayyan,

You kindly gave me some good advice a while ago in the Leica section. I
was debating letting my M8 and lenses go due to aging eyes. I purchased
the 5DMK II and LOVE it...I can see again! :) I enjoy the images from
the 24-105..it is such an easy lens to use and carry. I also picked up the
new 70-200 IS II. I HATE lifting it, won't take it many places but my husband would not let me return it after seeing the images it produced.

Maybe start with the 24-105 before purchasing any primes...you might
be very happy with the results.

I did as you suggested, sold my 35 1.4 and am keeping the 28 and 75 crons... because when I'm having a good day, eyesight wise...they are just lovely.

Can't part with the M8 even though the 5DMK II is so much easier to use. I
actually sent the M8 to Popflash to be sold on consignment but I could not
stand being separated from it and had them ship it right back to me!

Good luck and welcome to the LIGHT! :)

Barbara
 

rayyan

Well-known member
Age and eyesight caught me a few years back and I opted for the 5D MKI and have latterly upgraded to the 5D MKII . I avoided the 24-105 L and opted for a 24mm F1.4L, 50mm F1.4 an 85mm F1.8 and a 100mm F2.8 macro. These are the lenses I use most when staying local but I've since added a 17-40 L and the superb 70-200 F4 L IS for traveling "light" purposes.

I'm really happy with this kit and find it covers all my shooting needs from low light, street, travel and sport. The IQ from the MKII is awesome and you most definitely will not be disappointed.
ReeRay: Thanks for the response. Gives me somethings to think over.

If you are using the 35mm and 100m Zeiss and they are your favorite focal lengths, then the natural choice would be the 5DMkII with the 35mm L and the 100mm Macro L, no?

I have the 24-105 L, and it's a good lens for what it is. It was the first lens I bought. But if I had to do it over again, I would skip that one and just get the two primes.
tokengirl: Hi. Yes for the FLs but was exploring options. Thank you.

Hello rayyan,

You kindly gave me some good advice a while ago in the Leica section. I
was debating letting my M8 and lenses go due to aging eyes. I purchased
the 5DMK II and LOVE it...I can see again! :) I enjoy the images from
the 24-105..it is such an easy lens to use and carry. I also picked up the
new 70-200 IS II. I HATE lifting it, won't take it many places but my husband would not let me return it after seeing the images it produced.

Maybe start with the 24-105 before purchasing any primes...you might
be very happy with the results.

I did as you suggested, sold my 35 1.4 and am keeping the 28 and 75 crons... because when I'm having a good day, eyesight wise...they are just lovely.

Can't part with the M8 even though the 5DMK II is so much easier to use. I
actually sent the M8 to Popflash to be sold on consignment but I could not
stand being separated from it and had them ship it right back to me!

Good luck and welcome to the LIGHT! :)

Barbara
Hi Barbara: So glad things worked out for you with the 28/75. Lovely set hose two. I appreciate your advice. Just like you and the M8, am afraid to let
go. Maybe darkness might be better for me:D

Folks, you have been great taking your time to give me your advice. I truly
appreciate it.:salute:
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
ReeRay: Thanks for the response. Gives me somethings to think over.



tokengirl: Hi. Yes for the FLs but was exploring options. Thank you.



Hi Barbara: So glad things worked out for you with the 28/75. Lovely set hose two. I appreciate your advice. Just like you and the M8, am afraid to let
go. Maybe darkness might be better for me:D

Folks, you have been great taking your time to give me your advice. I truly
appreciate it.:salute:

I am a bit confused....you have posted wonderful fully exposed and focused pics in both the Nikon and Leica threads for months...

ONLY advantage to you with Canon is video...Nikon will still have better AF and less aggressive filter on the chip...Leica with CCD will smoke either of these.

Dont get me wrong...I have moved from 1D to 20D to 1Ds Mk ii to Nikon D100/D3/D700 to present A900. and from M6 to M7 to MP to M8 to M8.2.

I shoot H3D II 39 in addition to the above.

Video on the Canon is unchallenged unless you go with GH1 and Tester 13 hack and get a combo with SD card that works.

With grandchildren a newer Nikon D700 or its coming replacement will meet or exceed AF and sharpness for the present Canons...want more pixels then the D3x or D700x (D900?) should match them. Do you want to change all lenses and move to less contrast ... albeit a bit more pleasing skin tones?

For video I am looking at 5DmkII or the upper level camcorders from Canon and Sony. But for stills I do not see this as an upward movement for you...more like a traverse on a moraine with a lot of scree.

Thoughts?

Bob
 

rayyan

Well-known member
I am a bit confused....you have posted wonderful fully exposed and focused pics in both the Nikon and Leica threads for months...

ONLY advantage to you with Canon is video...Nikon will still have better AF and less aggressive filter on the chip...Leica with CCD will smoke either of these.

Dont get me wrong...I have moved from 1D to 20D to 1Ds Mk ii to Nikon D100/D3/D700 to present A900. and from M6 to M7 to MP to M8 to M8.2.

I shoot H3D II 39 in addition to the above.

Video on the Canon is unchallenged unless you go with GH1 and Tester 13 hack and get a combo with SD card that works.

With grandchildren a newer Nikon D700 or its coming replacement will meet or exceed AF and sharpness for the present Canons...want more pixels then the D3x or D700x (D900?) should match them. Do you want to change all lenses and move to less contrast ... albeit a bit more pleasing skin tones?

For video I am looking at 5DmkII or the upper level camcorders from Canon and Sony. But for stills I do not see this as an upward movement for you...more like a traverse on a moraine with a lot of scree.

Thoughts?

Bob
Hi Bob. Thanks for the reply. Each day takes its toll my friend. The Ms Can be managed because of the size/wt; just about. The zf 100/2 is a beast and
after sometime carrying it, my hands are not as steady.

I find that a 135mm would be more suitable at times for me with AF. I have not tried the Nikon 135/2 DC but I want to use it for both portraits and
as a sort of a telephoto. The ZF shines in this. I had heard that the Canon 135/2 is good near and far.

I had the 180mm once and do not think I need that much. The Nikon zooms are not for me due to the wt.

I do not want or need video. I am just exploring my options at the moment
and to be honest, thinking of changing systems was brought about by lens
availability ( e.g f/4 zooms with 70-200mm ).

I do not intend to switch just on a whim, though. If the Nikon 135mm would
do the job, I would buy that.

Best.
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Rayyan,

Understood...I have no experience with the 135 DC so cannot comment on how well it images...however the 135 ZA for Sony receives rave reviews. Not a Canon however.

Bob
 

biglouis

Well-known member
Rayyan, interesting thread because I have also been having similar thoughts. My reasoning is a bit different. The ridiculous price of the M9 means that there is no upgrade path for me from the M8 (which in its day was only slightly less of a ridiculous price). The thing is, to go from a M8 to M9 I would also have to swap my lenses which is an additional cost. When you do the math, a Canon or Nikon ff camera plus at least two (and possibly three) primes comes in less than the M9 body alone. Like you, when I factor in age and eyesight, and financial considerations, I love Leica but there are limits...

Incidentally, the reason for considering Canon over Nikon is the availability of professional quality primes. I don't know if I am right in this evaluation?

LouisB
 

Dale Allyn

New member
Just to add another data point. As mentioned above, the Canon 35mm f/1.4 is a fine lens. For years, the "trilogy" in Canon's line was/is the 35L, the 85L, and the 135L. In my opinion, the Canon 135mm f/2.0 L is one of the best values in the line. It's AF is very fast, bokeh is smooth, colors are great, it's sharp, etc. If the focal length is right for you, it's a great lens to have in the kit.
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I use a couple of different kits depending on the mission:
General travel:
5DII
35 1.4L
24-105

Model shoots:
1DsIII
50 1.2L, 85 1.2L 135 2.0L

But lately I have been experimenting with the following micro 4/3 kit
G2 w 14-140
GF1 w 7-14
GF1 modified for IR w 14-45
and a 20/1.7 in the bag
This is working put pretty well for me and might actually replace my Canon for travel and casual use.

-bob
 
Last edited:

Giorgio

Member
Just to add another data point. As mentioned above, the Canon 35mm f/1.4 is a fine lens. For years, the "trilogy" in Canon's line was/is the 35L, the 85L, and the 135L. In my opinion, the Canon 135mm f/2.0 L is one of the best values in the line. It's AF is very fast, bokeh is smooth, colors are great, it's sharp, etc. If the focal length is right for you, it's a great lens to have in the kit.
Ditto, the 135L is a jewel.

All of the canon lenses should be micro adjusted to your camera body before use. Especially if you want sharp in focus pictures at wide open apertures.
 

dseelig

Member
I shoot leica and Canon. The one thing you do not say is what you shoot if outdoors good light 5d mk11 fine but if bad light heavy shade low light the 5d mk11 is not a good camera autofocus wise. The outer focus points do not work in bad light. I would rent a 5d mk11 nikon 700 and a sony a 900 or 850 and try them out. or if resolution does not cut it for you just the sony and canon. If you are use to and like shooting primes stick with them and try zooms later.
 

rayyan

Well-known member
Rayyan, interesting thread because I have also been having similar thoughts. My reasoning is a bit different. The ridiculous price of the M9 means that there is no upgrade path for me from the M8 (which in its day was only slightly less of a ridiculous price). The thing is, to go from a M8 to M9 I would also have to swap my lenses which is an additional cost. When you do the math, a Canon or Nikon ff camera plus at least two (and possibly three) primes comes in less than the M9 body alone. Like you, when I factor in age and eyesight, and financial considerations, I love Leica but there are limits...

Incidentally, the reason for considering Canon over Nikon is the availability of professional quality primes. I don't know if I am right in this evaluation?

LouisB
Louis: Same considerations here my friend..well almost. I shall pass the M9. I am happy with the D700 and the zf35. It is the longer end at 100-135mm which is causing me to look at possible alternatives.

Appreciate your input.
Thanks.
 

rayyan

Well-known member
Just to add another data point. As mentioned above, the Canon 35mm f/1.4 is a fine lens. For years, the "trilogy" in Canon's line was/is the 35L, the 85L, and the 135L. In my opinion, the Canon 135mm f/2.0 L is one of the best values in the line. It's AF is very fast, bokeh is smooth, colors are great, it's sharp, etc. If the focal length is right for you, it's a great lens to have in the kit.
Hi Dale. The 35/135 combo in the Canon lineup is what has got me interested
in the first place.

Regards.
 

rayyan

Well-known member
I use a couple of different kits depending on the mission:
General travel:
5DII
35 1.4L
24-105

Model shoots:
1DsIII
50 1.2L, 85 1.2L 135 2.0L

But lately I have been experimenting with the following micro 4/3 kit
G2 w 14-140
GF1 w 7-14
GF1 modified for IR w 14-45
and a 20/1.7 in the bag
This is working put pretty well for me and might actually replace my Canon for travel and casual use.

-bob
Hi Bob, how you keeping?. The first is a nice. For me a possible. No models for me:cry: And neither an investment in the 4/3.

Thanks and stay well.
 

rayyan

Well-known member
Ditto, the 135L is a jewel.

All of the canon lenses should be micro adjusted to your camera body before use. Especially if you want sharp in focus pictures at wide open apertures.
Giorgio: Yes, by all reports the 135/2 seems a super lens.

Thank you.

I shoot leica and Canon. The one thing you do not say is what you shoot if outdoors good light 5d mk11 fine but if bad light heavy shade low light the 5d mk11 is not a good camera autofocus wise. The outer focus points do not work in bad light. I would rent a 5d mk11 nikon 700 and a sony a 900 or 850 and try them out. or if resolution does not cut it for you just the sony and canon. If you are use to and like shooting primes stick with them and try zooms later.
I am basically an available light shooter. If pushed, I would have to say mostly outdoors. But also indoors in so far as travel photography indoor
might be considered.

Interesting that you mention the af issues of the canon. That is something
that needs to be factored in.

I shoot nikon and M8. I do not enlarge poster size. Just something not too big for family and friends.

Thank you for your thoughts. Much appreciated.
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
hey, I am doing well.
I lost my facility for focus with rangefinders over time as my astigmatism progressed, so I looked for alternatives.
So despite the fact that I loved it, My M8 just had to go.
I do not share Davids's feelings about low light and the 5DII. It is true that all of the AF points do not hold up in REAL low light but the center seems fine to me for most purposes, nonetheless, I find I can focus a ground glass better than a rangefinder anyway some from time to time manual focus is what I use.

I have ben pleasantly surprised with the micro 4/3 stuff, and it is gaining a larger share of my use when I do not expect to need to make prints larger than 16.5 by 22. Best of all it is light and small enough so it tends to stay with me whereas the Canon and Phase gear take malice and forethought.
-bob
 

dseelig

Member
I was just shooting in the day in a heavily shaded outdoors. The outer focus points on the 5d did not work at all. The inner point was hit and miss. I had to go back to my car for my 1d mk1v to shoot the portrait. I am thinking of getting a a brightscreen split image screen and try shootitng manual focus with the 5d. Also the 5d mk11 is a no go for any concert work with a tele lens and af
PS the 35 85 and 135 L lenses are very nice
 
Last edited:

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I was just shooting in the day in a heavily shaded outdoors. The outer focus points on the 5d did not work at all. The inner point was hit and miss. I had to go back to my car for my 1d mk1v to shoot the portrait. I am thinking of getting a a brightscreen split image screen and try shootitng manual focus with the 5d. Also the 5d mk11 is a no go for any concert work with a tele lens and af
PS the 35 85 and 135 L lenses are very nice
True, concerts are way darker than what I usually shoot.
I have shot some ballet and found the stage lighting to be enough for that venue.
-bob
 
Top