# Should I get the 5dmk3 now or wait for possible unannounced 24-70mk2 kit



## squarebox (Jul 12, 2012)

I currently have a trip to Maui planned for the first week in Oct. and my wife told me it would be a great reason to go out and buy a 5dmk3 (Yeah I was shocked too). My issue is that I lack lens to really take advantage of the 5dmk3 if I pick it up. 

Have the following lenses
10-22
18-55
18-200
100 macro (non-usm)
35L
50 1.4

With the idea to fill out the gaps in my kit, I had gone ahead and pre-ordered the 24-70mk2 back in March. Recently, I heard of 5dmk3 24-70mk2 kits on pre-order in Australia and thought that if there is a kit, I might as well get the kit to save a few hundred dollars. With the idea of picking them both up this week and then having 2.5 months to play with the lens and the camera to get a feel for when I go to Hawaii. However, now that the 24-70 has been delayed to the end of Sept. I am concerned that the lens won't arrive in time before i leave, and even if it did and i got the kit, it would only give me a week or two to play with the camera and get used to it.

Now, if there isn't going to be a kit, then I would just go ahead and pick up the 5dmk3 now (or wait at least until after the announcement coming later this month). Though be gimped with my lenses as I really prefer shooting on my 10-22mm. So far this year, this lens accounts for over a 1/3 of all my pictures.


----------



## RC (Jul 12, 2012)

I'd get your body now (before your wife changes her mind ), so you have time to learn, enjoy, and get adjusted to the new feel. I wouldn't gamble on such a kit or even being available in time. If my wife gave me the green light, it would be ordered that minute with next day delivery. 

I would also sell your first 3 lens and use that towards a 16-35II. That takes care of your 10-22 crop range. If you are keeping your crop body, then that can become your "reach" body.



squarebox said:


> ...My issue is that I lack lens to really take advantage of the 5dmk3...


What about your 35L?


Edit: Oh and you could always rent a 24-105 or mkI 24-70 for your trip if you don't have your mkII in time.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 12, 2012)

I really doubt we'll see a Canon kit. What you're likely seeing is retailer 'bundles' where a lens and body are sold together with a discount. 

Sounds like you need a 16-35L II, anyway, unless you're usually shooting the 10-22mm in the 15-22mm range.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jul 12, 2012)

squarebox said:


> Have the following lenses
> 10-22
> 18-55
> 18-200
> ...





squarebox said:


> Though be gimped with my lenses as I really prefer shooting on my 10-22mm. So far this year, this lens accounts for over a 1/3 of all my pictures.



If you shoot ultrawide a lot, the 16-35/2.8 seems a natural choice - or the 17-40/4 if you want to save some $$$, carry less weight and don't depend on the best sharpness.

Did you really think the 24-70ii decision through? Maybe a lens with IS would suit tourism needs better, and after all you already got the 35mm & 50mm primes! Have a second look at the very good 24-105/4 kit (longer on the zoom end, w/o your 18-200 you'll have to tele capability at all) or at the Tamron 24-70vc which is available now if you want f2.8.


----------



## AmbientLight (Jul 12, 2012)

You may also want to check out the 14mm and 17mm primes. I also love to use wide angle lenses, but I do prefer primes in this area (currently owning the 14mm prime and 17-40mm zoom). While the 14mm will give you a focus length similar to a 22mm on crop, you will have a stunning super-wide on full-frame. In this way you will replace using your 10-22mm zoom with something at least somewhat similar, although the optical quality should be different.


----------



## squarebox (Jul 12, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> squarebox said:
> 
> 
> > Have the following lenses
> ...



The decision for the 24-70mk2 was not specifically for tourism. I decided to pick it up because sometimes the 35L would either be too wide or too long in situations where i can't move where I am. I figured I'd get the 24-70mk2 as my midrange zoom and save the 35L for lowlight shots. With the 50 used for portraits.

I thought long and hard about the Tamron actually. I figured i'd be using the 24-70 in general to take pictures of people, and in that case the IS wouldn't be as useful. Also, i'm a brand whore/like having the best. I'll admit it. When possible I go canon. 

I looked at my LR stats and telephoto shots only accounted for 1/6 of all my shots. And all those shots were of the moon, or planes flying overhead. I do plan on picking up a 70-200L 2.8 IS at some point, but will probably wait till next year when i have the money.


----------



## squarebox (Jul 12, 2012)

AmbientLight said:


> You may also want to check out the 14mm and 17mm primes. I also love to use wide angle lenses, but I do prefer primes in this area (currently owning the 14mm prime and 17-40mm zoom). While the 14mm will give you a focus length similar to a 22mm on crop, you will have a stunning super-wide on full-frame. In this way you will replace using your 10-22mm zoom with something at least somewhat similar, although the optical quality should be different.



Yeah, this was another lens i was contemplating for the UWA end. But it is very expensive. This lens is probably where i want to end up. This or the 14mm zoom that Canon released a patent on recently.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 12, 2012)

squarebox said:


> I currently have a trip to Maui planned for the first week in Oct. and my wife told me it would be a great reason to go out and buy a 5dmk3 (Yeah I was shocked too). My issue is that I lack lens to really take advantage of the 5dmk3 if I pick it up.
> 
> Have the following lenses
> 10-22
> ...



What do you need in FF? A 7D would be good for your trip if you already have the lenses to go with it.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 12, 2012)

Go for the body NOW before the wife changes her mind ;D

If you like 10-22, then 16-35L will do it for 5D. Your 35L and/or 50 f1.4 will cover most of shooting.


----------



## squarebox (Jul 12, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> squarebox said:
> 
> 
> > I currently have a trip to Maui planned for the first week in Oct. and my wife told me it would be a great reason to go out and buy a 5dmk3 (Yeah I was shocked too). My issue is that I lack lens to really take advantage of the 5dmk3 if I pick it up.
> ...



I've been wanting to move up to FF for the past few months and the wife gave me the go ahead cause we are going on a trip. It's not necessarily for the trip that i want the camera.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 12, 2012)

What you do in this case is get the kit with the 24-105L lens. This solves all of your problems.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jul 12, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> What you do in this case is get the kit with the 24-105L lens. This solves all of your problems.



That's what I said  ... @squarebox: Maybe have a look at your Lightroom stats again, how many shots did you do with open aperture - so is f2.8 really necessary considering you've already got the primes? And then look at the LR stats for zoom length (you can create a smart filter for this, zoom lenght > x and < y) - is dropping the 70-105 range on the zoom a good idea  ?


----------



## squarebox (Jul 12, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > What you do in this case is get the kit with the 24-105L lens. This solves all of your problems.
> ...



That's a great way to look at it.


Looking at my stats from the 24-100mm range, 80%+ of my shots were at max aperture, which might not help cause we are talking in the range of f3.5-5.6.

The other thing is that moving up to FF should get me a few stops increase in light performance, so when i see apertures i'm thinking how they work for me on the crop sensor and with weaker ISO capabilities. So just by moving to the 5D, F4 might work for me.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 12, 2012)

squarebox said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



Well, then the next question is, what are you shooting? An aperture wider than f/4 is going to give you a pretty darn thin focal plane and your DOF is going to be tiny. If you are outside in Hawaii, it's sunny. If you shoot low-light indoors, don't open the aperture, get a good flash. That way you maintain DOF with a narrower aperture. I'm just thinking out loud here.


----------



## squarebox (Jul 13, 2012)

whichever mid-range zoom i get, would become my walk around lens. Since i was hoping to take pictures of people mostly, i figure the IS wouldn't be as useful as say the small aperture. I do have a 600ex, but have had limited success in using it at bars as the ceilings are all kinds of colors. But this is just lack of experience, and something i plan to practice more with.

I'd save the primes for portraits and low light.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jul 13, 2012)

squarebox said:


> Since i was hoping to take pictures of people mostly, i figure the IS wouldn't be as useful as say the small aperture.



As you know, the small dof can really an issue if you shoot people - even f4 can be pretty thin, too, considering how much distance there is. The distance data is in Lightroom, too, but you need a plugin (ExifMeta) to dig it out. How good IS is for portraits is debatable, but a fast locking IS shouldn't hurt for "smile in the camera" shots. And of course then there is always the "off" button for the IS  but there is no "extend zoom range to 105" button on the 24-70... most people say the f2.8 on the 24-70 is for low light indoor shooting (weddings, events), otherwise the 24-105 is just fine or use the primes you've got. But it's your money :->


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 13, 2012)

squarebox said:


> whichever mid-range zoom i get, would become my walk around lens. Since i was hoping to take pictures of people mostly, i figure the IS wouldn't be as useful as say the small aperture. I do have a 600ex, but have had limited success in using it at bars as the ceilings are all kinds of colors. But this is just lack of experience, and something i plan to practice more with.
> 
> I'd save the primes for portraits and low light.



Right. I guess what I'm trying to say is that opening the aperture isn't always the way to go. If you open it up too much in the bar, yes it's dark, but most of your photo will be out of focus. If you shoot at f/2.8 at 70mm, I've seen shots where the nose is very sharp and ears are slightly blurred. If it's a general walkaround lens I'd still argue for the 24-105L. If you have the funds and know you only need up to 70mm, then yes of course, wait for the 24-70L II lens. On my FF the 24-105L is my most used zoom, behind the 70-200L. Even indoors I never shoot wider than f/4 because I'm a DOF guy, I like a good amount of DOF. Only time I don't care is portrait shots, which, with the 600EX-RT, is more than sufficient if you get to know how to use it to shoot at f/4. However, I use a prime anyways for portrait shots and wouldn't even use a zoom. 

I still just think that you'd use the 24-105L more than the 24-70L, which is sort of specialized. You need to evaluate closely which shots you'll be taking, what DOF you want, what lighting, and where you'll be. With a 5D Mark III though, you can shoot at higher ISO values than before, so that will allow you to shoot at narrower apertures. Heck I shot a few at 12,800 this past week and was able to do NR and print them on photo paper and looked completely fine, and I was at f/6.3.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 15, 2012)

squarebox said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



Even with 5D III, 24-105 is NOT a right choice for low light shooting, unless you plan to attach external flash( Otherwise, you gonna need f2.8 or faster for night/luau. Your 35L will do just fine on 5D III for night/luau. 

Stay away from new Tamron 24-70. Friend of mine bought one and he returned it back to BH. CA is terrible, slow focus, sharp is ok nothing super, IS is not that good compared to canon 17-55 f2.8 IS. Canon 24-70 mrk II seems to be a right choice. I too have this lens on pre-order.

I think wide angle(16-35 II) would be a great choice for landscape. Save your money for 24-70 mrk II.


----------



## Menace (Jul 15, 2012)

Get the 5d III now and invest in 16-35 II to cover the wide angle. Later 24-70 II followed by 70-200 completing 2.8 trinity


----------



## squarebox (Jul 19, 2012)

Thanx for all the feedback. After hearing everyone's suggestions, I decided to get the 5dmk3 now with the 16-35L, the 24-105L, and with the savings and double rebate i'll get the 100L macro, or stretch and get the 70-200LIS.

What nailed it for me was that the 24-105L in the kit in the u.s. is 1/3 the cost of the 24-70mk2 here in japan. I could also probably sell the kit lens here in Japan for a profit. I was worried about the 24-70 being out in time for my trip to Hawaii in Oct..


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 19, 2012)

squarebox said:


> Thanx for all the feedback. After hearing everyone's suggestions, I decided to get the 5dmk3 now with the 16-35L, the 24-105L, and with the savings and double rebate i'll get the 100L macro, or stretch and get the 70-200LIS.
> 
> What nailed it for me was that the 24-105L in the kit in the u.s. is 1/3 the cost of the 24-70mk2 here in japan. I could also probably sell the kit lens here in Japan for a profit. I was worried about the 24-70 being out in time for my trip to Hawaii in Oct..


 
You might need polarizer filter + nd 10stop filter for waterfall:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/181592-REG/B_W_66_025855_82mm_Kaeseman_Circular_Polarizing.html

http://www.2filter.com/prices/products/bwnd.html


5D III + 16-35L II
http://s1195.photobucket.com/albums/aa384/fifo_warehouse/Balboa%20Pier/?albumview=slideshow


----------

