Canon 5d mark ii advice...

God

God

Messages
723
Name
Vaughan
Edit My Images
Yes
SO...

Ive made the decision to get a canon 5d mark 2 to replace my 1000d, a big jump I know, but the way I figure it is if Im going to make the jump to a better camera, I might as well jump to one thats at least semi future proof instead of buying half way then again in another year etc.

Anyway, for lenses I currently have an 18-55mm efs, which I know isnt compatible with the 5d so not to worry on that one, a 75-300mm ef and a 100mm 2.8 Macro USM (all Canon).

I know to really utilise the new cam im going to need some decent glass, and dont get me wrong I will be saving and getting L grade lenses as soon as I can, but in the meantime what would you all recommend as good lenses to get that are within a decent budget - sub £400ish. I know that there arent that many amazing lenses for under that amount, and they dont need to be Canon (I dont at all mind 3rd party lenses).

As a heads up I have already earmarked the canon 50mm 1.8 for when the cam arrives...

Any help will be much appreciated! :thumbs:
 
God said:
SO...

Ive made the decision to get a canon 5d mark 2 to replace my 1000d, a big jump I know, but the way I figure it is if Im going to make the jump to a better camera, I might as well jump to one thats at least semi future proof instead of buying half way then again in another year etc.

Anyway, for lenses I currently have an 18-55mm efs, which I know isnt compatible with the 5d so not to worry on that one, a 75-300mm ef and a 100mm 2.8 Macro USM (all Canon).

I know to really utilise the new cam im going to need some decent glass, and dont get me wrong I will be saving and getting L grade lenses as soon as I can, but in the meantime what would you all recommend as good lenses to get that are within a decent budget - sub £400ish. I know that there arent that many amazing lenses for under that amount, and they dont need to be Canon (I dont at all mind 3rd party lenses).

As a heads up I have already earmarked the canon 50mm 1.8 for when the cam arrives...

Any help will be much appreciated! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

28-135 IS is a nice lens would compliment the 100 macro.
Matt
 
Thanks a million guys, definitely something to think about.
 
it all depends what you are shooting really.

i had the 100mm macro and had to sell it to fund another lens but it's a great lens for all sorts of subjects. razor sharp.

i've recently acquired the sigma 85 1.4 which is a great lens for portraits, absolutely magical on the 5d, well worth looking into if you want a fast prime for such things.

however, if you want an all around lens that won't ever be off your 5d2 for long, then i'm afraid it's time to give that credit card a bit of a hit and go for the 70-200 f2.8 (i've got the non is version). it's a fantastic lens. if you don't use the macro function of the 100mm macro then you could sell that to help fund it.

again, it comes down to what you shoot. i'm into portraits and a little bit of nature and scenery so my 24-70 and 70-200 pretty much cover me for everything and i've got the 135 f2 and 85 f1.4 for very narrow dof stuff.

so, really, my recommendation is not to splash on any cr*p like the 50 1.8 (your 5d2 deserves better) and go for the big boys. you'll end up regretting it otherwise.
 
Last edited:
cuthbert said:
it all depends what you are shooting really.

i had the 100mm macro and had to sell it to fund another lens but it's a great lens for all sorts of subjects. razor sharp.

i've recently acquired the sigma 85 1.4 which is a great lens for portraits, absolutely magical on the 5d, well worth looking into if you want a fast prime for such things.

however, if you want an all around lens that won't ever be off your 5d2 for long, then i'm afraid it's time to give that credit card a bit of a hit and go for the 70-200 f2.8 (i've got the non is version). it's a fantastic lens. if you don't use the macro function of the 100mm macro then you could sell that to help fund it.

again, it comes down to what you shoot. i'm into portraits and a little bit of nature and scenery so my 24-70 and 70-200 pretty much cover me for everything and i've got the 135 f2 and 85 f1.4 for very narrow dof stuff.

so, really, my recommendation is not to splash on any cr*p like the 50 1.8 (your 5d2 deserves better) and go for the big boys. you'll end up regretting it otherwise.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this. I very much shoot the same, so its a great comparison. I get what youre saying about the 50, but im thinking that I need to at least get a prime to work with the 100mm.

I agree with the 100mm, ive had some amazing shots from it so far, ironically none of them have been macro shots... :cuckoo:
 
what about the wide end, maybe a secondhand 17-40L ? (or new if you can stretch the budget) then you have the wide end, 50mm and 75-300 covered?
 
and that was the reason why i sold my 100mm macro, it is a great lens, i used it mainly for portraits and since i had the 135 f2 i didn't really use it much.

i'd do think that saving up for a 2.8 zoom like the 70-200 or 24-70 (whichever range you prefer) is probably going to save you a good few quid in the long run.... i'd wished i'd done it yonks ago. the 70-200 is a lens which nearly does it all for me.

i got the sigma 85 for christmas (see a few sample shots here: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=283597) and i'd had it on my camera for six weeks got some wonderful shots, i went back to the 70-200 last weekend and i realised this lens is a marvel.

i won't bore you too much with my own pictures, but here are a couple of my faves taken with the 70-200.

5132747581_2676388abc_b.jpg


5133350288_b1c779a9f5_b.jpg


5166927799_e9efbda60d_b.jpg


5166928485_3187a58488_b.jpg


5215338819_6df88c345c_b.jpg


5187384749_477516860e_b.jpg
 
Beware, the 5D2 will show up poor lenses mercilessly if you start pixel-peeping. You will soon see any softness, particularly at the corners and edges.

I'd spend a few more £'s and go for the 50mm f/.4, which easily holds its own with L lenses in terms of sharpness. The f/1.8 is no slouch either, but you'll get some good crisp shots with the f/1.4. On the 5D2 with its high ISO performance, it's also a killer combo for shooting in very low light.

A.
 
cuthbert said:
i won't bore you too much with my own pictures, but here are a couple of my faves taken with the 70-200.
Click to expand...

Those are some great pics :clap: I especially love the last one with the girl in the red top - it has an almost 3D quality to it. Reminds me of when I used to shoot Kodachrome slides..

A.
 
Anorakus said:
Beware, the 5D2 will show up poor lenses mercilessly if you start pixel-peeping. You will soon see any softness, particularly at the corners and edges.

I'd spend a few more £'s and go for the 50mm f/.4, which easily holds its own with L lenses in terms of sharpness. The f/1.8 is no slouch either, but you'll get some good crisp shots with the f/1.4. On the 5D2 with its high ISO performance, it's also a killer combo for shooting in very low light.

A.
Click to expand...

Pretty much.

Put on some primes on the 5Dii and you'll be wondering where it has been all your life.

Bokeh-tastic, 85mm/1.8 at 1.8

IMG_9834.jpg
 
cuthbert said:
so, really, my recommendation is not to splash on any cr*p like the 50 1.8 (your 5d2 deserves better) and go for the big boys. you'll end up regretting it otherwise.
Click to expand...

I don't know why some people decry this GREAT lens!

For the money you simply can't get a better lens!

At f1.8 it's a bit soft but from f2.8 onwards it's easily as good, optically, as any L glass lens.

And if you don't believe me just look at the charts:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...CameraComp=0&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

And if you add extension tubes it also makes an excellent macro lens:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157625975281497/

And as already said the Canon 28-35mm IS USM is also a good walkabout lens:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157625465964697/

All the ones taken on the 1Ds Mk II were taken using the 28-135mm lens.

And, of course, the 1Ds Mk II is full frame.

.
 
Hmm, I used to use the 50mm 1.8 on my 5D mark II, it did have excellent IQ as far as I can remember. I only sold it to fund for other lenses, otherwise I probably would have kept it!
 
I have a 5D (mk 1).
50 1.8
85 1.8
100 2.8 macro
28/135 Is
70/200 f4 Is L

In order of preference, including price, build and iq quality wise
85
100 macro
50
70/200
28/135

in order of use, so it depends on what you are going to shoot,
28/135
100
85
50
70/200

the 70/200 is a superb lens if you need it, if you dont its a waste of near on £900 and as your budget was £400 I think the order above is valid, given you have the 100 macro I seriously wouldnt sell that to buy the 85 (good as it is) as its a superb lens in its own right at everything it does at that focal length.
The 50 (as has been said) is a brilliant lens, for the money the best in the Canon range (in mine and lots of other people's view), you will get a lot of pleasure and photos from that on a FF camera.

Matt
 
Last edited:
The Canon 70-200L is a great lens on the 5DII. If you are on a really tight budget, the non IS f/4 is reasonably priced, though I'd recommend IS if you can stretch to it.
 
cuthbert said:
i won't bore you too much with my own pictures, but here are a couple of my faves taken with the 70-200.
Click to expand...

Those images are cracking, thanks for taking the time to show! They really show what you can do when the right kit is applied :)

MissV said:
For pricing, http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/ is very good for taking a nosy through and comparing prices :)

I have the 70-200 and it's a great lens.
Click to expand...

Great link, thank you.

MatBin said:
In order of preference, including price, build and iq quality wise
85
100 macro
50
70/200
28/135


the 70/200 is a superb lens if you need it, if you dont its a waste of near on £900 and as your budget was £400 I think the order above is valid, given you have the 100 macro I seriously wouldnt sell that to buy the 85 (good as it is) as its a superb lens in its own right at everything it does at that focal length.
The 50 (as has been said) is a brilliant lens, for the money the best in the Canon range (in mine and lots of other people's view), you will get a lot of pleasure and photos from that on a FF camera.

Matt
Click to expand...

Thats really helpful, thank you, one of the main reason I want to get some decent primes is because people are constantly raving about them (for obvious reasons) and I feel Im missing out :( lol

Thanks for everything else guys, this is really good advice and Ill be keeping everything in mind when I come to get the lenses. Cant wait for the Cam to be delivered! :D
 
I think the idea of saving of getting L glass is a good idea, but not just L glass, save up and get GOOD glass, period. I wouldn't and didn't waste money on midd of the road lenses. Lenses that are affordable and "cheap", they are cheap for a reason, with compromises made in many areas, areas that affects your results and areas that restrict the performance of the 5Dii. Why spent almost £2k on a camera and feed images through second rated glass? It is like buying a lamboginni and drive it under the speed limit all its life.

When i decide to go full frame, i sold all my lenses, every one of them. Even the 50/1.8. In return, and lucky for me my wedding work took off at the same time (which i feed the monies right back into it by getting equipment), i have been fortunate to get almost every lens that i have ever lust after.

16-35L
24-70L
35L
135L
50/1.4
85/1.8
sigma 70-200 2.8 (i got this because it was cheap and nice to have, i don't really use it)

My next lens is the keg, which will complete my Holy Trinity of Primes. :). If you had asked me 2 years ago i woud have all these glass and bodies, i would have laughed at your face, and i am only a couple of lenses short of everything i wanted.

The point is that get the good lenses, forget the 70-300, forget the sigma 24-70, give the camera the best lens you can afford, even if it means saving a bit longer.
 
Last edited:
buy my gripped-5D2 and sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM for £1690 and spend the money saved on lenses lol

the EF 75-300 is a bit soft on the 5D2 even stopped down to f8, the macro lens is good

God said:
SO...

Ive made the decision to get a canon 5d mark 2 to replace my 1000d, a big jump I know, but the way I figure it is if Im going to make the jump to a better camera, I might as well jump to one thats at least semi future proof instead of buying half way then again in another year etc.

Anyway, for lenses I currently have an 18-55mm efs, which I know isnt compatible with the 5d so not to worry on that one, a 75-300mm ef and a 100mm 2.8 Macro USM (all Canon).

I know to really utilise the new cam im going to need some decent glass, and dont get me wrong I will be saving and getting L grade lenses as soon as I can, but in the meantime what would you all recommend as good lenses to get that are within a decent budget - sub £400ish. I know that there arent that many amazing lenses for under that amount, and they dont need to be Canon (I dont at all mind 3rd party lenses).

As a heads up I have already earmarked the canon 50mm 1.8 for when the cam arrives...

Any help will be much appreciated! :thumbs:
Click to expand...
 
Raymond Lin said:
I think the idea of saving of getting L glass is a good idea, but not just L glass, save up and get GOOD glass, period. I wouldn't and didn't waste money on midd of the road lenses. Lenses that are affordable and "cheap", they are cheap for a reason, with compromises made in many areas, areas that affects your results and areas that restrict the performance of the 5Dii. Why spent almost £2k on a camera and feed images through second rated glass? It is like buying a lamboginni and drive it under the speed limit all its life.

When i decide to go full frame, i sold all my lenses, every one of them. Even the 50/1.8. In return, and lucky for me my wedding work took off at the same time (which i feed the monies right back into it by getting equipment), i have been fortunate to get almost every lens that i have ever lust after.

16-35L
24-70L
35L
135L
50/1.4
85/1.8
sigma 70-200 2.8 (i got this because it was cheap and nice to have, i don't really use it)

My next lens is the keg, which will complete my Holy Trinity of Primes. :). If you had asked me 2 years ago i woud have all these glass and bodies, i would have laughed at your face, and i am only a couple of lenses short of everything i wanted.

The point is that get the good lenses, forget the 70-300, forget the sigma 24-70, give the camera the best lens you can afford, even if it means saving a bit longer.
Click to expand...

This is a really helpful post, thank you. It makes a lot of sense and I agree fully. When I said L lenses I immediately assumed these were the only top of the range lenses - I was mistaken of course.

Thanks for this.
Vaughan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top