canon 5d mk3 what lens ?

[bass]

Hi Guys,

Thank you for your attention.

I have a query. I have a canon 60D with Canon 10-22mm , Canon 50mm 1.8ii, Tamron 17-50 OS VC 2.8 and Canon 100mm 2.8 macro, i have recently purchased the Canon 5d mk 3. Now my ideal setup would be to get a 17-40mmL , 24-70L 2.8 ii, 70-200L 2.8 ii and possibly a 50mm 1.4 however all i can afford is the 1 lens for now. Which would be more ideal and i plan on shooting events , engagements , family portraits both indoors and outdoors but mainly people. could you advise on the next choice on lens as i am torn between the 24-70 or the 70-200. I know i have the middle range covered on the crop sensor however thinking of the 24-70 on a full frame could that be doubling up and just go with the 70-200 ? Your thoughts are much appreciated thank you !

Bass

 

[yablonsky]

get the 24-70 II to start with. You will use it 80% of the time. The 70-200 II will follow later. The 17-40 is great for landscape, if you need that some day.

 

[RGF]

Might want to consider the 24-105, nearly as sharp as the 24-70 II, wider zoom range but loose a stop, lighter, adds IS, and save around $1000.

The 24-105 is my favorite walk around lens. ON a tripod when I go for maximum sharpness I will take out the 24-70 II.

 

[bass]

I know i have the mid range covered on the 60D however i feel like im going to get better imagery with the 24-70ii as i will be doing alot of strobist style shoots and to be honest i dont have any particular style at the moment i like shooting all types of photography and have no preference, but for some reason the 70-200ii has such great reviews and i have seen what it can do which is why im a little confused ! Arghhh

 

[Random Orbits]

Would you use one or two bodies at a time? If you primarily use one, then a 24-70 makes sense, and the 60D would become your backup system. When the time comes that you could get the 70-200, then sell the 17-50. If you would use two at the same time, then having the 17-50 on the 60D and the 70-200 on the 5D III is an intriguing possibility.

How much do you use the 17-50's vibration control? If a bit, then you might want to consider the Tamron 24-70. It's a lot less expensive than the Canon, and selling the 17-50 would get you partially there.

 

[infared]

unless you are going to be carrying two cameras around all of the time..you are basically starting from scratch with the full frame...get the 24-70mm first and then incrementally move forward.....Once you start shooting full frame you will probably sell off your other equipment to set yourself up nicely..because once you get a taste of the 5DIII files...there is no turning back!!!!
You have also answered your own question by making this statement: "i plan on shooting events , engagements , family portraits both indoors and outdoors but mainly people."
The 24-70mmII is perfect for all of the above.

 

[shutterwideshut]

If you can afford one lens for now then get the 24-70mm f/2.8L II. You will never go wrong. It's a versatile, everyday walk around lens.

 

[jdramirez]

top shelf huh? I ditto the 24-70 first. I have a 24-105 and I will admit, it isn't as good as my primes, but it is versatile and I use it when when I'm not sure of the distance of my subject.

 

[Dylan777]

I have both lenses and they both WONDERFUL

I would go for 24-70 II first. This lens will serve your needs just fine - from landscape to family portraits. 70-200 might be too tight for indoor group shots.

Below is a shot I took with 5D III + 24-70 II (f2.8, 1/125, ISO1250) - no flash.

 

[Dylan777]

unless you are going to be carrying two cameras around all of the time..you are basically starting from scratch with the full frame...get the 24-70mm first and then incrementally move forward.....Once you start shooting full frame you will probably sell off your other equipment to set yourself up nicely..because once you get a taste of the 5DIII files...there is no turning back!!!! You have also answered your own question by making this statement: "i plan on shooting events , engagements , family portraits both indoors and outdoors but mainly people."
The 24-70mmII is perfect for all of the above.

+1 with infared - sell all your crop gear and use that money toward to 24-70 II & 70-200. The IQ on 5D III is way better when compared to 60D.

You can always add a fast prime for extreme low light situation - 35L or 50L when you ready. New sigma 35 seems to be a great lens for the money. Many owners claimed is out perform 35L.

 

[Dylan777]

Might want to consider the 24-105, nearly as sharp as the 24-70 II, wider zoom range but loose a stop, lighter, adds IS, and save around $1000.

The 24-105 is my favorite walk around lens. ON a tripod when I go for maximum sharpness I will take out the 24-70 II.

Unless you plan to shoot outdoor only @ f8 to f11

 

[jdramirez]

Might want to consider the 24-105, nearly as sharp as the 24-70 II, wider zoom range but loose a stop, lighter, adds IS, and save around $1000.

The 24-105 is my favorite walk around lens. ON a tripod when I go for maximum sharpness I will take out the 24-70 II.

Unless you plan to shoot outdoor only @ f8 to f11

nearly can indeed be debated, but the value of getting an l lens with its versatility and image stabilization at a third of the price cannot be argued.

 

[rumorzmonger]

The EF 24-105 f4L is a nice lens, and very versatile - if I had to choose just a single lens, that would probably be the one I'd pick.

However, once you try the 24-70 f2.8L II, it's difficult to settle for anything less...

 

[jdramirez]

The EF 24-105 f4L is a nice lens, and very versatile - if I had to choose just a single lens, that would probably be the one I'd pick.

However, once you try the 24-70 f2.8L II, it's difficult to settle for anything less...

Ditto... when I don't know what to expect... 24-105 gets the call... with a 430ex mkii flash so I can bounce the light. But if I can plan for the situation, the 100mm f2.8L IS Macro gets the call... or if it is dark, the 50mm f/1.4, or if I am shooting sports I'll be rocking my soon to be 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkii. But I haven't gotten it yet... so I'm guessing at this point.

 

[bholliman]

I'd start with the 24-70mm II first and add the 70-200 later. I love my 70-200 2.8 II, but I don't use it nearly as much as my shorter focal length lenses.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

I want to get a 24-105 for travel again for my 5d3. Once you shoot with the 24-70 ii. Everything just does not seem as sharp and the colors are amazing. Is is great but you cannot open up that extra stop like the 24-70. I had the 60d with 15-85 efs then 17-55 efs 2.8 then 5d3 with 24-105 but once i got the 24-70 you feel everything else is just not as good. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Dylan777]

Might want to consider the 24-105, nearly as sharp as the 24-70 II, wider zoom range but loose a stop, lighter, adds IS, and save around $1000.

The 24-105 is my favorite walk around lens. ON a tripod when I go for maximum sharpness I will take out the 24-70 II.

Unless you plan to shoot outdoor only @ f8 to f11

nearly can indeed be debated, but the value of getting an l lens with its versatility and image stabilization at a third of the price cannot be argued.

I don't see ur your points
1. This lens almost can't be used at f4
2. "IS" will be become handy ONLY your subject(s) is not moving(-1/30 or slower)

I don't have any problem cropping 70mm into 105mm in post with my mrk III. IQ still better. Can the 105 open to f2.8 or gain in shutter speed when needed?

 

[bass]

Things have changed now, i won't be getting anything until mid September of this year does that mean there is something else to concider around this time other than these 2 ? the 24-70ii or 70-200ii ?

Photogeek, the more i think about it the more im re-thinking the 70-200ii like you said and others have said i have the 17-50 on the crop which could act as a 24-70 for the time being until i can afford the 24-70ii. The 60D focus with the Tamron i find to be great and the Tammy puts out really tac sharp images provided i stay below 800 ISO , but 800iso on the 5D3 is not even noticable and low light the 5d3 win's but in saying that i use off camera flash (and sometimes on camera) quite abit as i love the creative side to it.

Regarding primes i think i can leave without the creamy bokeh of the 1.2-1.4's and utilise the versatility of the 70-200ii 2.8.

Ok more thinking deeper thinking !

say the budget for this year is $2000

What would be the best option here:

(Am i really going to see the difference)

Say my budget is $2000

Should i get a Canon 24-70 2.8 ii this year
and early in to next year (when i can afford it) get the Canon 70-200 2.8 ii

Or

i can get 3 lenses like a 24-105 F4, 70-200 F4 IS and a little extra a Sigma 50.14 ?

I want to shoot portraits, small groups, product, landscape and events ie. engagements or weddings ?

Any information is much appreciated as well as critique !

Bass

 

[bholliman]

Should i get a Canon 24-70 2.8 ii this year
and early in to next year (when i can afford it) get the Canon 70-200 2.8 ii
Or
I can get 3 lenses like a 24-105 F4, 70-200 F4 IS and a little extra a Sigma 50.14 ?
I want to shoot portraits, small groups, product, landscape and events ie. engagements or weddings ?
Any information is much appreciated as well as critique !

I see your point in favor of adding the 70-200 now instead of later. Since you don't have any lenses above 100mm now, adding the 70-200 would make sense. If landscapes and outdoor photography were your #1 need, you would be more than happy with a 70-200 f/4.0 IS, but since portraits and events are higher on your list, I think the 2.8 II will meet your need much better.

Personally, my thought process for lens purchases now is to buy the best glass I can afford. Quality over quantity . I have a 24-105L, and its a very good lens, but I wish now that I'd spent the extra $$$ for the 24-70 2.8 II (which I will buy in the next few months).

So, my recommendation would be to by the 70-200 2.8 II or 24-70 2.8 II depending on if you feel your greatest need is for the normal zoom or telephoto.

 

[bholliman]

Another lens to consider is the incredible 135L. I bought this lens in February and absolutely love it! Fantastic portrait lens, maybe the best. I have also been using it for shooting my sons junior high golf tournaments and have found it to be a great focal length for golf, basketball (close to the court) and wrestling. Its not as versatile as my 70-200 2.8 II, but a whole lot lighter.