09-16-2013, 11:57 AM
Quote:Hard to imagine that it is fun to carry this kind of stuff around. Simply too heavy...It is a heavy lens, I agree. Just like a 12-50mm f2 on MFT would be... Not super heavy though.
I am not sure yet about the standard zoom, anyway. I will get the 6D for other (including shallow depth of focus) purposes, together with a 50/55mm f1.2 lens, and possibly a 135mm lens. I already have a 50mm f2 and a 85mm f1.8, and finally can use my 90mm f2.8 macro to good effect with it (don't like it on APS-C). My 70-200mm f4 of course will be a nice lens still, on FF. Whether my 35mm f2 will do (extreme corner wise) I shall have to find out. And of course I still have my two 55mm specialty lenses.
Instead of that 24-105mm f4 standard zoom, I could also consider an EOS 100D with 18-55mm IS STM kitlens. That would cover standard zoom purposes, in a travel friendly and capable package. Camera and lens weigh about the same as the 24-105mm f4 L IS USM on its own.
I am a shallow DOF kinda photographer (at least half of the time), so an FF DSLR is the way to go for me. Talking about shallow depth of focus... I am currently constructing a "camera" with a ~50mm f0.5 FF equivalent lens. That is the same DOF as a 200mm f2 gives, but with a "standard field of view"... Well, the camera more or less is constructed, now I just have to adapt and compile the software side (scanner camera).
"Mirrorless" is no option for me: they lack an OVF. And ergonomics. And yes, I am one of those photographers who will benefit from FF sensor size.