What would you do if you had $2000, a 5DII and no lenses?

[pini]

Please say what do you use to photograph before the answering the question!
I just want to know what would you guys do if you were me!

Thanks!

[RGF]

What I photograph is not important, what you want photograph is important.

[meenanm]

Depends on what you want to shoot.  For me, in order I'd likely look at the following and decide which one I would use the most and benefit the most from using.

Canon 70-200 F 2.8L II IS
Canon 24-70 f2.8L II

[pini]

I am curious to know what people that photograph other things would do too! Thats why I said that.

But if you want to know, I like to photograph people working, not rich people, people from deep Brazil, where I live now. In the farms for example.

(I'm talking about $2000 in US prices, of course).

[RLPhoto]

28mm 1.8

50mm 1.4

135mm F/2L

[Random Orbits]

I like to do portraiture, kid sports, travel, and ocassionally macro and landscapes.

If it's in antipation of being able to buy additional lenses down the road, then it's the 24-70 II.  It's a winner over its entire focal length but isn't long enough for sports.

If 2000 was the budget forever, then I'd opt for the Sigma 35, refurb 50 f/1.4 and refurb 70-200L f/4 IS.

[distant.star]

.
First, I'd be thankful -- lots of folks would love to have a 5D2 and $2K!!

I suppose for general shooting, I'd get a 24-105L and a 70-200 f/4.0L IS. That should leave a few bucks for a flash, even a 270 would be useful. And if I still had $150, I'd get a 40mm pancake lens.

No matter what, have fun -- and do justice to those good working folks!!

[georgecpappas]

Greetings, Pini..

Because you want to photograph people and their environments, I would focus on two or three prime lenses rather than a zoom.  I would start with a 35mm/85mm combination and consider either a 50 or 135 depending on your perspective...

I would choose the primes over the zoom because of lens speed.  The new 35mm/F2 IS would be an excellent candidate.  Faster lens speed will allow you to work in natural light and opens up a variety of out-of-focus techniques for your subjects..

Best of luck

[duydaniel]

sell your 5D2 on ebay.
Give that money and $2000 to the poor

[sdsr]

But if you want to know, I like to photograph people working, not rich people, people from deep Brazil, where I live now. In the farms for example.

When you photograph such people do you like to do so from a respectful distance?  If you do, and if you tend to do so in pretty good light, I would suggest you get a 70-300 L (or 70-200 f/4 IS if you really think you don't want the extra 100mm), plus a 40mm pancake if you need something wider.  They will cost well under $2000, less if you buy a used or refurbished zoom.  But don't buy anything else yet - see if you end up with a need/want that that these two lenses don't satisfy - which may be nothing at all.  (You would probably have enough left over for a refurbished/used 100L or 135L; they would tempt me, at any rate.)  I own all five of these lenses (plus others), as well as a 5DII and 6D, as it happens....

[Eli]

I'd get a 24-105 f4L (one separated from a kit) and a Fuji x100s!

[tron]

I would get 24-105L and 135L.
Actually I used to walk with my 5D2 and these 2 lenses in my Think Tank Urban Disguise bag.

[TAF]

Re: What would you do if you had $2000, a 5DII and no lenses?

Be both very sad and very excited?  After all, a body without a lens is like frying pan without a stove.  It may have some alternative use, but for its main purpose in life...

I would buy a 24-105L, put the remaining $1300 in the bank, and start taking pictures.  After say 6 months, you'll know if you need for your next lens to be a telephoto lens or a wide angle one.

If you need a wide one, buy the 17-40L, and you'll still have $600 for something else.  If you need a longer one, I'd recommend the 70-300L IS, which will be about it (you might even need a few dollars more).

As I've posted before, my order of priority was:

24-105L
70-300L
40 pancake
50 f1.4 Zeiss

and next on the agenda is either the 17-40L or the 16-35L MkII, then a 100 macro L

But that's just me 

[eml58]

Probably I'de Cry a bit, A Camera Body, pocket full of Money, and no Lens, I can think of a few worse situations in life of course, but none springs immediately to mind.

Or

Race out & buy a 24-70f/2.8 L II second hand on eBay.

[Barrfly]

 There are many good suggestions in this thread, my 2 cents : Get a 70-200 2.8 IS L II.
Since I took the plunge on that lens all my others are gathering dust.  Never before has an inanimate object made me so happy.