Fantasy 5 Lenses

[Daan Stam]

it is hard but i think
70-200 f2.8 is usm mkII
24-70 f2.8 usm mkII
100mm f2.8 L is usm
300mm f2.8 is usm mkII with extenders
11-24 usm

 

[Hector1970]

My 2 Cents

70-200mm II - Just an incredibly reliable lens - perfection
100mm Macro - Superb
50mm 1.2- I love 50mm, I love shallow depth of field and creamy bokeh
16-35 F4 - A great lens for landscapes - very sharp
24-105mm F4 - Time and again it proves to be very solid and reliable lens.

Ones that nearly made the list
Canon 100-400 II - A great lens too
Canon 85mm 1.2 - special but difficult
Samyang 14mm - Great for Astro and relatively cheap.

 

[JonAustin]

I'll play:

1) 16-35/4L IS
2) 24-70/2.8L IS II
3) 70-200/2.8L IS II
4) 100/2.8L IS Macro
5) 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS II

All of these lenses are already in my kit, except the 24-70. I'm on my 2nd 24-105/4L IS, and it will get me by until either Canon releases a 24-70/2.8L IS or the rumored (announced?) 24-105/4L IS II turns out to be all that (and fixes the zoom creep).

Sadly, the lens among these with arguably the greatest reputation (70-200) is the zoom I use the least.

Other than a newer/better standard range zoom with IS, the only other lens for which I pine is the elusive Canon/ahsanford 50/1.whatever (optional) IS (true ring) USM, to replace my ancient, buzzy (but ever sharp!) 50/2.5CM.

 

[Jerryrigged]

I shoot almost exclusively people: Family Events, Portraits and Weddings

What I've got:

1) 24-70 f/2.8L II (Least used L lens. OK, but kind of boring)
2) 70-200 f/2.8L IS II (Tied for my favorite lens... Awesome!)
3) 35mm f/1.4L II (Tied for my favorite lens - beautiful!)
4) 100mm f/2.8L Macro (Very nice for details - and is a surprisingly good portrait lens)
5) 85mm f/1.8 (Got it for the focal length and fast aperture - OK lens, but rarely used)
6) 50mm f/1.4 (Poor, poor stepchild to the 50mm f/1.2 - more on this below)


What my perfect set would be:

1) 70-200 f/2.8L IS II (One of the very best portrait lenses, fastest AF system, very sharp, image stabilization)

2) 35mm f/1.4L II (Color / contrast are beautiful, one of sharpest canon lenses, almost no CA, and YES it is used as a portrait lens)

3) 50mm f/1.2L (I've used this lens for a few weddings. it is NOT the sharpest lens, but has decent sharpness in the center, creates beautiful images. Bokeh is very nice. Low light champ).

4) 85mm f/1.2L III (?) (I'd love to try out a NEW Canon 85mm lens... maybe once they give it some of the 35mm f/1.4L II love (blue refractive stuff). Don't want the current lens, but maybe version III.

5) 135mm f/2L (Never used it, but gets rave reviews as a portrait / people lens. This is next on my list to buy)

 

[pooly]

I don't have a full list, but here is the starting point.

#1. 15mm Fisheye f/2.8 II
Not sure why the production stopped. I don't want the 8-15mm zooom but I want f/2.8. I'm already shooting at 6400 iso with my copy. With faster AF please

#2. 14-24mm f/2.8
I know, I know, Canon has release a 11-24mm. But it's f/4. And the 16-35mm f/2.8 is not wide enough.

#3. 24-70mm f/2.8 IS
Versatile, wide aperture, but also need IS.

 

[jd7]

Sticking with lenses that really exist, and as someone whose primary interests are portrait/people, landscape and travel photography, I think my choice is:

Canon 70-200 2.8L IS II
Canon 35 1.4L II (although I haven't used it, and I've been happy with my Sigma 35 Art)
Sigma 50 1.4 Art
Canon 85 1.2L (although I haven't used it, and I've been pretty happy with my Sigma 85 1.4 EX)
Canon 24-70 4L IS (and will see about the 24-105 4L IS II when it's out)

although it's tempting to swap out one of the last three (probably the 50) for a Canon 16-35 4L IS.

 

[meywd]

Well, having both the 1DX II and the 7D II is a fantasy by it self, but if I have them then the lenses to match are:

1: 300mm f/2.8 II
2: 85mm f/1.2 II
3: Zeiss Otus 55mm f1.4
4: 35mm II f/1.4
5: 100mm f/2.8 IS

 

[GMCPhotographics]

My choice would be:

ef 400 f2.8 LIS II for the long end...assuming tele-converters aren't actually considered lenses but accessories.
ef 16-35 f2.8 II L for the wide end.
ef 35mm f1.4 II L for wide portraits / available light work
ef 85mm f1.2 II L for head shot portraits and available light work.
either the ef 135mm f2.0 L or the ef 100mm USM Macro L. That's a more tricky choice.

 

[Zeidora]

Zeiss 100 mm Makroplanar ZE: my current go-to lens for nature/natural history.
Canon MPE 65: for small objects.
Zeiss 21 mm ZE: great for environmental portraits.
Zeiss Otus 55 mm ZE: optical correction to match my 5DsR.
Canon TSE 17 mm: tempted to get that one, with my 5DsR, I can crop and get a "free" TSE24, as well.

Only the last one is fantasy, the others are part of my core-kit.

There is just one non-existent fantasy lens I really want: Zeiss Otus 100/2.8 Makroplanar 1:1.
TSE 17 is now in my bag, TSE 24 arriving shortly.

 

[TheJock]

Real lenses

1. 11-24 f4L USM
2. 70-200 f2.8L IS USM II
3. 200-400 f4L IS USM
4. 600 f4L IS USM II
5. 800 f5.6L IS USM

Fantasy lenses

1. 10-400L IS USM = for close up stuff to slightly distant stuff
2. 400-800L DO IS USM = for distant stuff to relatively far away stuff
3. 800-1200L DO IS USM = for relatively far away stuff to stuff on a different continent
4. 1200 F8L IS USM – for fast moving stuff on that different continent
5. 800 F4L IS USM – birds in flight – the flying away from you type! 8)

 

[jolyonralph]

Ok, assuming some level of reality attached to them, here are my five fantasy lenses

EF-M* 50mm f/1.8 STM (* meaning full-frame for future EOS-M full frame camera)
EF 50mm f/2.5 STM Compact Macro (With built-in LED ring light)
EF 50mm f/1.0L USM II
(is that enough 50mm lenses?)
TS-EF 24-45mm f/2.8-4L USM (first tilt-shift autofocus zoom)
EF 16mm f/2.0L USM

 

[Cory]

Canon 16-35 4.0
Sigma 85 1.4 Art
Canon 135 2.0
Canon 200 2.8II
Canon 100-400II

 

[mnclayshooter]

Main goal is to cover almost the full gamut (obviously with some gaps - but let's be honest, how often are you set up, and say to yourself: "Self, you should change to a different lens, that's probably back in the car 5 miles back down the trail..." Does it really matter if you have gaps? I think not... it matters which lens you have with you and how you use it... if I could only spend enough time to figure that part out - how to use them!

MP-E 65 (love that super macro, look at the bug's eyes kind of stuff)
24-70 - good all-around lens for just about everything.
24 TS-E landscapes and architecture (and pano-stitching)
600 for wildlife and spying on people
70-200 other end of the all-around lens for just about everything

IF I could add one more it would be a dedicated ultra wide - mainly astro lens such as the 14mm Samyang or some other similar.
IF I could add two more it would be a 16-35 for quicker (hiking/handheld etc) landscapes - TS-E has some set up and tripod time.

On further review:

My list has changed a bit... and probably always will:

• 16-35 f4 (have it, and will not part with it... man it's sharp!)
• 70-200 f2.8 II (have used it, am shopping for one, but keep getting distracted by the 300!)
• 300 f2.8 II (w/ extenders - do they count as lenses?) <-- this will be likely my next purchase
• MP-E 65 (for those occasions when looking at the bug's left cheek hairs is important)
• 24 TS-E (for those times when fiddling with your lens like a weirdo is what you need to do to look/act the part of being a professional).

After some consideration and time elapsed:

-MPE-65
-16-35 f4
-24-105 II (purely for the range of focal length as a walk-around - if it is leaps and bounds improved on the original)
-70-200 2.8 II
-300 2.8 II + extenders

 

[snowleo]

I thought, we should tell the fantasy lenses, not the 'standard' lenses... ts ts ts...

here my list of real fantasy lenses:

- 9-18 mm L F 2.0 for polar light fotos or as alternative: 10-16 mm F 1.4 (not more than 1 kg/2 pounds) including versatile tripod mount
- 50-150 mm L macro lens, 1:1 to 1:3, + automatic stacking feature (one shot and camera+lens does the rest)
- 150-500 mm L F 2.8-4.0 plus 1.4 teleconverter (instead of the 200-400 L)
- ts-e 20-40mm tilt and shift zoomlens F 4.0
- 24-70 mm L F 2.0 with a special depth of field-feature, let's say including an additional adjustment ring from low to high depth of field, this can be set at each aperture so at low d-o-f the lens reacts like a big tele-lens and at high d-o-f like a normal wide-angle lens)

and maybe as final dream:

12-360mm lens 2.8-5.6, razor sharp, light as a feather, smaller than the 70-300 L including macro, variable d-o-f and 1.4 teleconverter - well I guess thats a bit too much of fantasy

big grin

or roarrrr

snowleo

 

[RGF]

The world's most expensive lens at 2 million dollars... Leica 1600mm @ F5.6

But I'm sure this lens isn't bad either. Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 1700mm, f/4:

Or if we need some low light lens, the Carl Zeiss' 50mm Planar f/0.70

Hard to carry in a bag however, even for a Sherpa.

sek

Comes with customized Mercedes SUV to act as mobile tripod