Lens advice required

[F1.2]

Hi , I have just purchased a D5 MK2 Canon body and now require some decent glass

I would like 3 lenses to cover as many photographic situations as possible

I like zoom lenses so no problem with that

so need wide angle up to about 300mm

must all be good quality as I cant afford to buy them twice

reason for only 3 lenses is weight in my camera bag ;)

so any advice most welcome :D

[Peter10d]

I think you would need to give a rough guide of how much you are prepared to spend.

[AnnaV]

Yes, definitely depends on budget

[pragmatist]

The new 16-35mm F2.8 mk2 is a cracker, Check out the reviews here

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=313&sort=7&cat=27&page=1

[coldpenguin]

Also, are you sure about the 300mm? Or was this what you used on crop?

[DizMatt]

16-35 L f2.8 or 17-40L f4
24-105 2.8 L
100-400 L

in my inexpert opinion
and a flash
that's sauce for every occasion
however, then you'll want an 85mm or 50mm :)

[RicherSea]

Money no object...

16-35 f/2.8 L
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 EX DG HSM or canon 24-104 f/4 IS L
70-200 f/2.8 IS L
1.4 Extender - extra reach and weighs nothing

[mini_mad216]

16-35mm f2.8L (maybe, you are full frame so may not need to go this wide)
24-70mm f2.8L
70-200mm f2.8L IS
Canon 2x Extender Mk II

A set Like that will probably do you for a very long time, you will probably replace bodies a number of times but the lenses will be keepers.

[david1701]

16-35L 24-70L 70-200 f2.8L IS

either a 1.4x tele (v light) or a 300f4 (slightly sharper)

how much do you wanna spend

a 17-40 24-105 and 100-400 is f4 (up to the 100-400 which is f4-5.6) and is a lot cheaper but fast glass rules

also is 24mm ff wide enough for you? it was 17mm on crop (a 16-35FF is a 10-24 ish crop lens)

[david1701]

Money no object...

16-35 f/2.8 L
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 EX DG HSM or canon 24-104 f/4 IS L
70-200 f/2.8 IS L
1.4 Extender - extra reach and weighs nothing

why the sigma if money no object?

[EdBray]

If weight is an issue I would go:

17-40L f4 (Much lighter than the 16-35L f2.8 II, although I would probably plump for that)
24-70L f2.8 (heavier than the 24-105L f4 IS but a better lens)
70-200L f4 IS (half the weight of the f2.8 IS)
1.4x Extender II

[patrickeaton]

16-35L 24-70L 70-200 f2.8L IS .........

16-35mm f2.8L (maybe, you are full frame so may not need to go this wide)
24-70mm f2.8L
70-200mm f2.8L IS .........

These also get my vote.

[F1.2]

No limit on price , as i say I cant afford to buy them twice

The reason I say 3 lenses maybe 4 , previously I used and still have a Pentax 6x7 MK2 system , and carting that lot around 7 years ago was taxing :D and I am now 55 so not getting any younger for tracking around :D

O and I am not mr money bags :( Just had a inheritance and wanted to get something nice to use and as a constant reminder of the person who passed away and left me this gift :thumbs:

[nickwatson]

My choice (with a £1500 ish secondhand budget) would be ...

17-40
50 f1.4
70-200 f2.8 non IS

That would cover a multitude of photographic options from landscape, low light, portrait, etc.

[AliB]

Depends what you want to shoot :)

If you mainly require f4 as a bottom end aperture wise then
17-40mm f4 is a cracker
24-105mmf4 is a belter of a walk about lens
I've heard some not bad reports about the 75-300 if you really need 300mm or any of the 70-200's, they are all good :)

If you really need faster glass then
16-35mm f2.8 MKII
24-70mm f2.8
70-200 f2.8 or f2.8IS

Then add a couple of primes simply because they are fab! But you can add them later, the 85mm f1.8 is a belter at £250.

[ianmarsh]

I'd go for a 24-70/2.8, a 70-200/2.8 and then see where you need the extra. I've heard great things about the 16-35 if you need to go wider. If you want length the 300/4 prime is great but a 1.4x teleconverter on the 70-200/2.8 might do the job.

Ian
p.s. if you are after a 70-200/2.8 I've one up in the for sale section. And I'm in London if you want to take a look at it...

[maarten.dhaese]

I have all of the below but use them on a 5D MkI. This is what I would bring if I were to go travelling with my 5D and could only bring 3 lenses:

Canon 17 - 40 f/4 L -> relatively light
Sigma 50 f/1.4 -> for the low-light ability and razor sharpness from 1.4 onward; fairly heavy actually
Canon 70 - 300 f/4-5.6 IS USM -> light, affordable, very good optically

If you really want the lowest weight possible, you could replace the Sigma with the Canon 50 f/1.8 MkII. I would definitely have a fast prime as one of the 3 lenses in your lineup.

[akr]

Depends what you want to shoot :)

I've heard some not bad reports about the 75-300 if you really need 300mm or any of the 70-200's, they are all good :)



Hi ALI

Did you mean the 70-300 as opposed to the 75-300? Had neither but thought the 70-300 had the better reputation.

If you need something longer for birds the 400mm f5.6 has a good rep as well...

Sorry for your news and hope you enjoy the kit

Al

[F1.2]

OK

Thanks for your help

looks like the first must have lens is the 16-35mm f2.8 MKII as so many of you have recommended this lens

One question , as the 5D mk2 is full frame , is this too wide or will it be OK

Thanks again for your help

Allen

[dazzajl]

One question , as the 5D mk2 is full frame , is this too wide or will it be OK

Compared to the old school days where 24 was a wiiiiide lens, it's almost obscenely wide. In reality, it's a lovely working range and will allow you to do things like shoot interiors and play with perspective in fabulous ways.

It will feel a tad wild to begin with but within a week you'll wonder how we managed before this new breed of wide.

Have a play with the sigma 12-24 on a FF sometime, it's very silly but good fun. :)

[EdBray]

Update on Canon 70-200L f2.8 repair/service. (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=2084435#post2084435)