Which Lenses for our 5D's

MKD

MKD

Messages
100
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
At the start of the month my girlfriend and I got a 5D each with 28/105 lenses, tomorrow we are off to Hong Kong to get some expensive lenses pretty sure I am going to get the new 16/35 L and my girlfriend 24/105 f2.8 L (not sure about getting the f4 IS version).

Seems to me the IS versions weight almost double the same version without IS, and not sure IS is going to be so useful on the 24/105!

Any idea's .......

We generally travel to beaches along the south coast and wide angle and detail shots.
 
I used to have a 28-135 with IS and sold it and bought a 17-40 without IS. Also has a f/4 instead of f/3.5 and didn't really miss the IS to be honest.

I'd personally go for a 2.8 over a 4 with IS. Even if you look at something like the blur the lens creates instead of just crisp images, it's gonna be much nicer wide open at 2.8 than 4.

Oh and the 16-35 is a good choice, it's gonna be stupidly wide on a 5D, I would have got it instead of my 17-40 if I had the money.

I'v tried my 17-40 on a 5D actually, it's insanely wide.
 
Canon don't make a 24-105 f/2.8 L, to my knowledge. Are you thinking of the 24-70 f/2.8 instead?

The 16-35 f/2.8 L is a splendid piece of glass, and perfect with the 5D for wide angle stuff.
 
The 24-70 is a spot on lens & I'd definitely highly recommend it - that & the 70-200 lived on my cameras when I used Canon. The sharpness means you have to sort out a lot of pore problems when shooting portraits though (as you can see every one!)

I traded my 24-105 in for it & was much happier.
 
I have the 24-70 for my 5D and they really work well together, a little weighty but it's a nice weight :)
 
Yeah the 24-70 is good, another one I was thinking of getting but didnt because it was too expensive and not wide enough for what I needed it for.

Looks like an awesome lens, wide open at 2.8 is soooo much better than 4. Makes such a big difference.
 
Don't ignore the IS on the 24-105 and opt for the 24-70 because it has a stop more speed. I use the 24-105 at exposure times down to 1/10 second and the IS keeps the image sharp even hand held. (OK breath held propped up against a wall ect). Doesn't help when something is moving though. To be honest either would be great additions to the 5D.
 
I have the 27-70mmL on my 5D and also used on the 350D. I chose this lens because of the f2.8 factor. I have also got the 70-200L F4 and have done sports. I really missed the option of stopping down to 2.8 even on a flood lit pitch. Ive never tried IS and dont really think i would need it , but do you need the function of IS at 105mm?
 
we went for the 24 to 105 precisely because of the IS.
were wedding togs , so the IS is a real bonus. often getting quick shots as they present themselves. and the extra bit of range makes a difference to, when we havent got time to mess with lens changes.
chappers has a good point.
talking to another wedding tog yesterday with the same setup. he bought for the same reason as us.
you know you realy want a 100 to 400 IS usm L.:clap:
we bought one of those too.oh my aching wallet.
oh. the 24 to 105 is cheaper too.
 
All done, my girlfriend went for the 24/105 F4 IS and I went for the 16/35 F2.8 II, we have been out in town and the docks area and are very pleased with the results so far, but still getting used to them. Glad we finally made the decision!!! Will put some pictures up when we have a few more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top