If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???

[jmanley]

I've seen it already but my kit would be:

24-70 2.8 II
85 1.2 II
70-200 2.8 IS II

I'm a wedding and portrait guy though...if i had more time for landscapes my answer would be different.

[pwp]

Everyone's answer is 100% valid for their  style of shooting. I'm a zooms guy, the flexibility when working quickly or in environments where lens changes are a one-way ticket to sensor grunge makes them a no brainer in my business. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy my primes, the 24 f/1.4II and 300 f/2.8IS in particular, but if I was restricted to just three, here they are:

1. 16-35L f/2.8II
2. 24-70L f/2.8II (coming soon to replace the 24-105L f/4IS)
3. 70-200L f/2.8IS II

-PW

[ecka]

3 lenses may be not enough for FF+primes-only shooter like me, but I'm thinking about
35L+85L+Σ150EX
or maybe
24L+50L+100L

[marekjoz]

The question is not that difficult...

A. If it has to be Canon and they can't be the same, I'd start with:
1. EF 1200mm f/5.6 L USM
2. EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM
3. EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM

B. If it doesn't have to be Canon and they can't be the same, I'd start with:
1. Leica APO-TELYT-R 1:5.6 1600mm
2. Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 1700 mm F4
3. EF 1200mm f/5.6 L USM

Having sold all three and depending upon the set A or B, I'd buy better or worse house or palace, boat and a car with alive driver who'd bring me from his first test drive to downtown three decent lenses: 24 II, 85 1.2, 70-200 II...

[dr croubie]

Fellow Photogs,

Just for the "what if", so if you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they be...& if you want, why?

MC Flektogon 50mm f/4.0 ; MC Biometar 120mm f/2.8 ; MC Sonnar 180mm f/2.8 (on Pentacon Six, hmmm, i've already got this kit...)

Or maybe:
Distagon 35mm f/2.8 ; Planar 80mm f/2.0 ; MC Sonnar 300mm f/4.0 (on Contax 645)

How about:
Summilux 21mm f/1.4 ; Noctilux 50mm f/0.95 ; Apo-Summicron 90mm f/2.0 (on Leica M)

[Goshdern]

The ones in my bag, we have a 5dii and 7d so the 70-200 on the FF and 85 on the 7d (all hail auto iso set to 400!) make for really nice pics.  And the 16-35 just completes our needs... It's perfect!

16-35 2.8L II, 85 1.2L II, 70-200 2.8L IS II

That's where I put my money and I don't regret it.

[davidchang]

16-35L
50L
100L
mostly travel photography here.
i rarely use my 70-200

[mojo0975]

For Crop:
Tokina 11-16
Canon 17-55
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II

For FF:
TS-E 17mm f/4L
24-70 f/2.8L II
70-200 f/2.8 IS II

[DMITPHOTO]

14mm 2.8
70-200mm 2.8
100mm 2.8 Macro

[elflord]

Fellow Photogs,

Just for the "what if", so if you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they be...& if you want, why?

My full frame setup is more or less:

135L,
Sigma 85mm f/1.4
35L

on APS-C, I'd go with
50mm f/1.4,
Sigma 85mm
something wider (not sure what)

[jVillaPhoto]

Pretty much the only three I have now..

50L
24-70L
70-200 f/2.8L II

[Hillsilly]

Initial though is: -

16-35mm f/2.8L
135mm f/2.0L
400mm f/2.8L IS II (Have never used one, but I think I'd have a lot of fun with it).

I've got a Mamiya 6 which only has three lenses - 50 / 75 /150mm.  Sometimes I wish the 50mm was a bit wider, but in theory I don't mind being restricted in lens choice.

[skitron]

If the new 24-70L lives up to the hype, then that one plus a 100L and a 200L F2 IS (and then I'd get a 1.4x teleconverter since it's technically not a lens )

But alas my budget brings me back to the reality of the three in my signature line below...a heck of a good bang for well under $2K but I'd much rather have the dream team above...

[Menace]

24-70 f2.8 II
70-200 f2.8 IS II
400 2.8 IS II

[candyman]

That would be:
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 MKII
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 MKII
Canon 200-400mm (incl. 1.4 ext)
 
But, with a camera that supports a good quality high ISO (so to compensate for not having f/1.2, or f/1.4)