5DII: Trying to decide on lenses...

[GTaudiophile]

I have sold my 20D and EFS glass and will be ready to buy a 5DII+glass within the next 1-2 months.

I kept my EF 70-200 F4L IS and Speedlite EX430 flash.

I am trying to select 4 lenses out of the following six:

EF 16-35 F2.8L II
EF 24-105 F4L IS
EF 70-200 F4L IS (already own but could be sold)
EF 35 1.4L
EF 85 1.8 USM
EF 135 F2L

 

[GTaudiophile]

If I could wave a magic wand, I would have Canon release a EF 17-50 F4L IS with corner sharpness that is at least on par with the 16-35 F2.8L II.

If Canon did this, I would keep the 70-200 F4L IS and add the 35L and 135L.

 

[randomlinh]

my vote is definitely the 135L of those. Probably w/ the 35L, tho I personally prefer a 50. I also don't shoot wide very often, so the 24-105 would be my next choice on there. And then keep the 70-200.

and I'd settle for an updated 17-40 F4L with corner sharpness.. don't want to pay for IS there =)

 

[Madwand1]

There are rumors of an upcoming 24-70 f/2.8 L IS and 14-28 f/2.8 L. Either of these could be worth waiting for. The new 24-70 could also help drive down the price of the old one.

http://www.canonrumors.com/category/photography/canon-lenses/

The 24-105 f/4 L IS is nice to have as a kit/walk-around lens -- it's discounted when bought as a kit, and can give you very good coverage when you don't want to carry around a lot of gear.

With a 24-70, I'd want to carry around something else in addition at the long end. If you've been shooting crop for some time, don't worry so much about the ultra-wide to start with FF -- it gives you a pretty wide field of view, and going wider is specialty area, unlike with crop.

In that specialty area, you could consider the TS-E 24 II or the 17 II -- these are very sharp when used as straight lenses, and give you some powerful new capability, though at a very high cost, the loss of AF and additional weight. It might still be better to see what Canon (or others) will produce next in full-frame ultra-wides, and live with a 24mm limit for the time being.

 

[GTaudiophile]

The 5DII + 24-70 is too heavy for my liking.

 

[jpeyton]

EF 16-35 F2.8L II
EF 70-200 F4L IS (already own but could be sold)
EF 35 1.4L
EF 135 F2L

 

[xchangx]

It really depends on what you normally shoot. But since you already have something that covers the long end, I'd look into the 16-35

 

[Madwand1]

The 5DII + 24-70 is too heavy for my liking.

If you eliminate that, the 24-105 becomes a simpler choice. The kit works. You could make the other decisions based on experience and new releases down the road. If you decide not to keep the kit lens, you might still be able to recoup its cost in the kit because of the higher price when bought separately.

 

[corkyg]

Of your list, I would choose numbers 1, 2, 3 and 6.

The lenses I use most with my 5D are:

EF 50mm f/1.4 (zoom with feet!)
EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L (Great for social gatherings, party shots, etc.)
EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS (my favorite walking around lens.)
EF 24-105mm f/2.8 L (kit)

For low light work indoors, concerts, etc., EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L
For macro work - Tamron 90mm f/2.8

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Get the zooms out of the way first. You definitely want as wide a FL range as you can get. 24mm is pretty darn wide though, so if you find you don't swap to the 16-35 often then you can sell it and swap to a prime. But an ultrawide is vital for certain kinds of photography IMO. I would not discount the 17-40 f/4L. You could get that and the 85mm/1.8 for less than the price of the 16-35. Going from f/2.8 to f/4 is a decision you're apparently already comfortable with in your choice of walkaround and telephoto zooms, and wide-angles work with longer shutter speeds anyway, so I really don't see that you'd be giving up much by going with the 17-40. Anyway, based on your list, the first three are decided:

24-105
16-35
70-200 f/4L IS

Now you are faced with the choice of primes. Based on your list, I would actually propose a 3rd option: get the 85mm/1.8 and also pick up another crop body. 20D, 30D, whatever. (I would have just kept the 20D, personally.) That way you double your focal length options for every lens you own. The 85 becomes a 135 equivalent. The 70-200 becomes a 112-320, which dovetails nicely with the range of the 24-105. (You won't miss those 7mm between 105mm and 112mm.) Or you can put the 16-35 on the 5DII and the 24-105 on the crop, you have 16-35 covered and the crop becomes a 38-168.... again, a perfect dovetail between the two lenses on the two bodies. Except when I'm travelling and need to keep my kit as lightweight as possible, my 70-200 lives on my 20D and my 24-105 lives on my 5D. I want walkaround, I grab the 5D. I want long, I grab the 20D. It helps not to have to change lenses too.

Don't get me wrong, the 35L is awesome, as is the 135L. I covet both of them. I have actually considered selling my 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 100Macro to get the 35L. That is the lens that I *want* and I think works beautifully on FF and also covers the handy "normal" range on crop bodies. But I can't quite bring myself to give up the awesomeness of the 85/1.8 and 100Macro. So I will just be saving up my pennies until I can afford the 35L.

 

[jpeyton]

Subbing the 17-40L for the 16-35LII is fine if you don't need critical sharpness in the borders (and you typically don't unless you're shooting wide-angle landscapes all the time).

 

[GTaudiophile]

Here are the options I am throwing around the most:

16-35 F2.8L II
24-105 F4L IS
70-200 F4L IS
85 1.8 USM

16-35 F2.8L II
24-105 F4L IS
85 1.8 USM
135 F2L

17-40 F4L
70-200 F4L IS
35 1.4L
135 F2L

17-40 F4L
24-105 F4L IS
35 1.4L
135 F2L

OR SELL ALL MY REMAINING CANON GEAR:

Nikon D700
16-35 F4G VR
24-70 F2.8G
70-300 F4.5-5.6G VR
SB200

Nikon D700
14-22 2.8G
24-70 2.8G
SB200


While I prefer the AF system and other features of the D700, it is a much heavier camera before you even think about adding the 24-70. I also still think that Canon makes better glass and more of it.