# If you could only have three lenses...



## bleephotography (Jun 2, 2013)

If you could only have three lenses to shoot video *AND* general photography on FF cameras, (including sports, portraiture with or without flash, macro, etc.), which would you choose?

Base on my limited experience, I would probably go with the Tamron 24-70 VC, Canon 70-200 IS II and Canon 50 f/1.2. Why the Tamron instead of the Canon 24-70 II? I've used both briefly and although the Canon produces sharper images, the Tamron comes pretty close, especially in the center, and also has VC; throw on some extension tubing and you've got yourself a decent macro lens. The Canon 70-200 is an obvious choice for most of the above purposes, and is the sharpest zoom in the range; combined with a TC, you've got yourself a highly versatile, but heavy piece of glass. Lastly, the 50 f/1.2 is the fastest in the current L lineup and is an alright general walk-around lens, but is really meant to be shot wide open; I would use this mostly for low light photography when I just don't want to carry around a big, heavy zoom and/or flash.

_What about you?_


----------



## bleephotography (Jun 2, 2013)

bleephotography said:


> If you could only have three lenses to shoot video *AND* general photography on FF cameras, (including sports, portraiture with or without flash, macro, etc.), which would you choose?
> 
> Base on my limited experience, I would probably go with the Tamron 24-70 VC, Canon 70-200 IS II and Canon 50 f/1.2. Why the Tamron instead of the Canon 24-70 II? I've used both briefly and although the Canon produces sharper images, the Tamron comes pretty close, especially in the center, and also has VC; throw on some extension tubing and you've got yourself a decent macro lens. The Canon 70-200 is an obvious choice for most of the above purposes, and is the sharpest zoom in the range; combined with a TC, you've got yourself a highly versatile, but heavy piece of glass. Lastly, the 50 f/1.2 is the fastest in the current L lineup and is an alright general walk-around lens, but is really meant to be shot wide open; I would use this mostly for low light photography when I just don't want to carry around a big, heavy zoom and/or flash.
> 
> _What about you?_



I also have the Sigma 35 f/1.4 and it would be a tossup between it or the Canon 50 f/1.2.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 2, 2013)

bleephotography said:


> If you could only have three lenses...



...I'd freak out. Totally.


----------



## jVillaPhoto (Jun 2, 2013)

I currently own the 35L, 50L, and 135L. Absolutely Love the three, but might sell off the 35L for the 24L eventually. I really love the 35L though, and it definitely feels wide enough so I have to really think it through


----------



## bchernicoff (Jun 2, 2013)

Of everything I own, the Tamron 24-70 VC, Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II, and Sigma 35 would be the ones to keep I had to give the rest away.


----------



## distant.star (Jun 2, 2013)

.
Normally I view these hypothetical questions as silly, but this one seems to have a purpose. It made me look at what I'm using.

At this point, I rarely use more than three lenses. Canon 17-40, Sigma 35 f/1.4 and Canon 135 F/2.0. Once in a while I'll mount the 70-200, but I don't seem to have much interest in focal lengths beyond that. Once in a while, I'll mount the 60mm macro on the T2i, but that's about it.

For most of what I do, the Sigma 35 is so perfect it has replaced the Canon 24-105 and the pancake Canon 40.

I keep meaning to sell off the 100-400. I've begun toying with the idea of selling that and the 24-105 and maybe getting the Canon 24-70 f/2.8, but then I think if I do that I've got nothing with IS.

Anyway, thanks for asking. Makes me think.


----------



## docholliday (Jun 2, 2013)

Three lenses? Yeah, I'd freak out, and quit shooting...otherwise, for video and stills, 17 TS-E, Zeiss 50/2 Makro-Planar, Zeiss 135/2 APO Sonnar...and a 1Dx Body.


----------



## Pi (Jun 2, 2013)

I often take only three lenses with me, so this is a meaningful question. Those are: the 24-105, the 35L and the 15 fisheye. The 100L, the 135L and the 70-200/4 IS are not used so often. Even if When I buy more lenses, I will still keep using those three the most, I guess.


----------



## dirtcastle (Jun 2, 2013)

Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 L
Canon 50mm f/1.2 L
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L II

This is a tough question because I shoot mostly in the 16mm to 70mm range. A 24-70mm lens would seem like the obvious choice for me, but it has so much crossover with other worthy lenses (and so many great fast primes). If I pick the 24-70mm, then I'm sorta forced to go with a 14mm and a 135mm. But then the 135mm is redundant with a 70-200mm, and the 14mm is not very versatile, but a 16-35mm is redundant with the 24-70mm and not the best performer in this cadre. 

Ah, the classic lens choice dilemma. I deal with this all the time.


----------



## TexasBadger (Jun 3, 2013)

Easy:
Canon 24-70 L II
Canon 70-200 L II
Canon 135 L


----------



## Click (Jun 3, 2013)

My choice:

Canon 16-35 f/2.8 L
Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II


----------



## nWmR12 (Jun 3, 2013)

At this moment in time it would be: 21ZE, 35L, and 135L.


----------



## that1guyy (Jun 3, 2013)

24-70
70-200
and either 100-400 or maybe a nice fast prime. 50 1.4


----------



## bleephotography (Jun 3, 2013)

jVillaPhoto said:


> I currently own the 35L, 50L, and 135L. Absolutely Love the three, but might sell off the 35L for the 24L eventually. I really love the 35L though, and it definitely feels wide enough so I have to really think it through



Are you considering the 24L because the 35L is so close to the perspective of your 50L?



bchernicoff said:


> Of everything I own, the Tamron 24-70 VC, Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II, and Sigma 35 would be the ones to keep I had to give the rest away.



+1 



distant.star said:


> .
> I keep meaning to sell off the 100-400. I've begun toying with the idea of selling that and the 24-105 and maybe getting the Canon 24-70 f/2.8, but then I think if I do that I've got nothing with IS.



Have you considered the Tamron 24-70 instead? Although it's not quite as sharp, it does have VC!



docholliday said:


> Three lenses? Yeah, I'd freak out, and quit shooting...otherwise, for video and stills, 17 TS-E, Zeiss 50/2 Makro-Planar, Zeiss 135/2 APO Sonnar...and a 1Dx Body.





Click said:


> My choice:
> 
> Canon 16-35 f/2.8 L
> Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II
> Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II



Interesting variation here: one would choose entirely manual focus lenses whilst the other would choose zooms...


----------



## DJL329 (Jun 3, 2013)

I have often gone out with just 3 lenses: the 50mm f/1.4, plus the 28mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8. They're small, light and fast, cover most of what I like to shoot and easily fit into my old Lowepro Off Road waist bag without needing the 2 side lens cases.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jun 3, 2013)

24-70 f/2.8 II
70-200 f/2.8 IS II
200-400 f/4 IS 1.4X


----------



## verysimplejason (Jun 3, 2013)

Tamron 24-70, 100mm macro usm L, 135mm L. I can't live without macro.


----------



## gary samples (Jun 3, 2013)

I don't shoot video
600mm f/4.0
200mm f/2.0
24/70mm L II 2.8


----------



## curtisnull (Jun 3, 2013)

Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
Canon 300 f/2.8 L IS II


----------



## docholliday (Jun 3, 2013)

bleephotography said:


> docholliday said:
> 
> 
> > Three lenses? Yeah, I'd freak out, and quit shooting...otherwise, for video and stills, 17 TS-E, Zeiss 50/2 Makro-Planar, Zeiss 135/2 APO Sonnar...and a 1Dx Body.
> ...



Coming from Hasselblads and Wisners, there ain't much that I need autofocus for...and, it would be a toss up between my 17 TS-E and 21ZE Distagon


----------



## Grumbaki (Jun 3, 2013)

like 90% of responders
-24-70 L II
- 70 200 2.8 IS II
- random fast prime of choice (for me it'll be 35 1.4)

Would a 14-24 exists it would make a very probable trio too to cover 14-200.


----------



## verysimplejason (Jun 3, 2013)

docholliday said:


> Three lenses? Yeah, I'd freak out, and quit shooting...otherwise, for video and stills, 17 TS-E, Zeiss 50/2 Makro-Planar, Zeiss 135/2 APO Sonnar...and a 1Dx Body.



Why use a 1DX body for manual focus lenses? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of having 1DX? Why not a 5D3 instead? With ML, you can get some very good raw video aside from high resolution stills.


----------



## FTb-n (Jun 3, 2013)

Assuming FF, specifically 5D3:

EF 70-200 f2.8L IS Mark II
EF 24-105 f4.0L IS
EF 35 f2.0 IS

...and that new 40mm pancake body cap ;D


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 3, 2013)

Bob Howland said:


> 24-70 f/2.8 II
> 70-200 f/2.8 IS II
> 200-400 f/4 IS 1.4X



This.


----------



## RGF (Jun 3, 2013)

Canon 70-200 F2.8 II
Canon 200-400 F2.8

Macro is the challenge - can I have diopter w/o counting as a lens or an extension tube.

If not, 180 macro

If so, 24-70 F2.8 II


----------



## applecider (Jun 3, 2013)

canon 600f4 is ii usm
canon 300f2.8 is ii usm
canon 24-70 f2.8 ii

More of a wildlife package
Extenders, extension tubes count as lenses?


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 3, 2013)

I use to think:
1. 16-35 f2.8 II
2. 24-70 f2.8 II
3. 70-200 f2.8 IS II

Well, now I'm working on 2nd set, primes:
1. 50L
2. 135L 
3. 85L II - next on my purchase list 
4. 14L - might replace my 16-35 f2.8 II with this lens


----------



## RC (Jun 3, 2013)

Click said:


> My choice:
> 
> Canon 16-35 f/2.8 L
> Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II
> Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II



Yip, I'd have to go with these 3 if I was forced to choose only 3. (I'm assuming the 16-35 is also the mk II)


----------



## florianbieler.de (Jun 3, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> I use to think:
> 1. 16-35 f2.8 II
> 2. 24-70 f2.8 II
> 3. 70-200 f2.8 IS II



I'm more of a prime guy but when I had to go with three this would be the clear decision.


----------



## cycomachead (Jun 3, 2013)

Assuming full frame:

Versatility: The MkII zoom trinity.

I might replace the 24-70 with the 50 1.2, though.

If I'm doing primes:
24 1.4L II, the 50 1.2L and the 200 f2L.
(I could possible swap the 24 for the 14… Tough choice!)

Crop sensor:
Would probably be the same, except I'd use the 10-22, and definitely the 14mm over the 24. (The others would probably be the same. Maybe the Sigma 35mm instead of the 50…).

Fortunately, I don't have to restrict myself to only 3 lenses… (Not that I even own all of these!)


----------



## Dick (Jun 3, 2013)

3 lenses...

1. Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG A - The best 35mm lens? Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but I like it!
2. Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM - The versatility is mind boggling!
3. (no idea... most likely a tele, which I don't have yet)




cycomachead said:


> Fortunately, I don't have to restrict myself to only 3 lenses… (Not that I even own all of these!)



On the other hand limiting yourself to 3 lenses could actually mean that you can carry all your main gear with you and not randomly leave lenses behind. I often find myself in a situation where the lens I'd need is at home.


----------



## kbmelb (Jun 3, 2013)

16-35 2.8L II, 50 1.2L, and 70-200 2.8L II.

I don't own the 70-200 but in the scenario that I could only have 3 lenses I'd pick it up as the the 3rd.

If I had to go with what is already in my kit the 135 2.0L would replace the 70-200.


----------



## barracuda (Jun 3, 2013)

It would have to be:

16-35 2.8L II
24-70 2.8L II
70-200mm 2.8L IS II

Let me have a fourth lens... then it would have to be the Sigma 35mm 1.4 DG A


----------



## wayno (Jun 3, 2013)

24-70ii, 70-200ii and a 35 1.4- either the L or the Sigma.
I'm a bit bored of UWA and could probably live without it.


----------



## Cannon Man (Jun 3, 2013)

I shoot very little if any video so i'll have to answer my 3 perfect lenses for photography only.

TS-E 24mm 3.5L II
TS-E 45mm 2.8L II (i know its not out yet but its heavily rumoured already)
85mm 1.2L II USM

Can't think of a better 3 lens combo. Perfect image quality out of all of these.
Just waiting for the new TS-E lenses to arrive!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 3, 2013)

1. Canon 24-70 II
2. Canon 70-300L
3. Canon 300 2.8 IS (+ 1.4x TC +2x TC )
4. Canon 100L

I'm glad I can't count . And that I cheat .


----------



## cervantes (Jun 3, 2013)

16-35 f2.8L II
100 f2.8 Macro
500 f4 L II

Because I think it's important not to make the pictures everyone makes.


----------



## docholliday (Jun 3, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> docholliday said:
> 
> 
> > Three lenses? Yeah, I'd freak out, and quit shooting...otherwise, for video and stills, 17 TS-E, Zeiss 50/2 Makro-Planar, Zeiss 135/2 APO Sonnar...and a 1Dx Body.
> ...



I don't like any of the 5 series bodies - too small and too light. The heavier the body, the more steady I can hold it. Notice the "Hasselblad"...I shot a 203FE with 110/2 and 180/4 CFE handheld down to 1/2s. I like the weight, it makes it nice, even after shooting 8 hours. That, and I don't like the mode 'dial' and layout, detachable grips, and other things about the 5's. I also prefer the larger battery and gigabit ethernet of the 1Dx. I also like that I can share my accessories with my 1VHS when needed for B&W work. I shoot tethered a lot, but sometimes do require high FPS, just not focus tracking. If I needed autofocus _and was restricted to 3 lenses_, I'd probably have a bunch of Contax autofocus N lenses converted by Conurus.

I could care less for video...if I did, I'd shoot motion picture - Arri Alexa is my choice if I have to do that. That way, my 3 lenses would be PL mount Zeiss Master Primes - I don't like focus breathing. I actually would like a 40mp 1-series that didn't have any video functions - probably why I'll end up changing systems to Hasselblad H.


----------



## dslrdummy (Jun 3, 2013)

Replace my 24-105 with the 24-70 2.8ii, keep my 70-200 2.8ii and add the 300 2.8ii. With my two extenders, just about does it all for me.


----------



## sanj (Jun 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> bleephotography said:
> 
> 
> > If you could only have three lenses...
> ...



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA


----------



## stolpe (Jun 3, 2013)

1. 16-35 f2.8 II
2. 24-70 f2.8 II
3. 70-200 f2.8 IS II

I need to replace my 24-105 f4 soon...
and get the wide anlge zoom in the future. Let's hope they release the EF 14-24 f2.8 until then.

/ Stolpe


----------



## whothafunk (Jun 3, 2013)

1 - 8-15mm fisheye
2 - 24-70 f2.8 ii
3 - 300mm f2.8 ii


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jun 3, 2013)

Tokina 11-16mm f2.8
Sigma 18-50 F2.8 DC Macro
Canon 70-200 F2.8L

Oh, look at that! ⬇


----------



## Bruno97 (Jun 3, 2013)

Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 L II
Canon 50mm f/1.2 L
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L II


----------



## runninghead (Jun 3, 2013)

My perfect combo would be:

16-35mm f/2.8L II
85mm f/1.2L II
300mm f/2.8L II


----------



## eyeland (Jun 3, 2013)

Being on a very tight budget, right now I am very happy with my 24-105 + 50mm 1.4 and I do feel that once I get my 70-200 2.8 IS, I will be set for a while.
From there I'll change the 24-105 to a 24-70 2.8 IS/VC and after that, possibly change the 50mm 1.4 to get IS or better AF performance.
Alternatively, I'd buy a car and always bring as many lenses as my bank would allow me to accumulate


----------



## Zv (Jun 3, 2013)

That's a tough one. Maybe 17mm TSE, 24-70L II and 135L. Already have one of those! Yay!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jun 3, 2013)

Everyone's needs are different. 
The more versatile the lens, the less good a specific tasks...and vice-versa.
For me, I'd preoably go for uber versatile (master of none) 28-300L, a 35mm f1.4 and an 85mm f1.2L. The latter two I just couldn't be without. If I could have 4 lenses....it would be a tough weigh up between a 100L macro or a 16-35IIL. If it was just wedding work which I was limiting to three lenses then for me that's easy, 16-35IIL / 35mm f1.4L and 85mm f1.2L combo. Works for me 
If it was landscapes, 16-35IIL, 24-70IIL and 75-300L. 
Wildlife, 16-35IIL, 70-200IIL, 400mm f2.8 LIS, plus extenders.


----------



## caMARYnon (Jun 3, 2013)

24-105 + 100macro (L or not) + 70-200 IS (f2.8 II best or f4 excellent)


----------



## TommyLee (Jun 3, 2013)

this is awful...
//////////////

I am about to face the reality though

14L II, 35 sigma and then EITHER 135 f2 (w.1.4x and tubes) or 100L macro.

I would miss macro or closeup ability... and I would long for f2 aperture...
but I bet I choose the 100L macro...just too 'able' a lens...
14L, 35 f1.4 sigma and 100L macro..

that will leave a LOT of lenses packed away....WOW

if only ONE lens ....or a forth lens.....I would add my 24-105 ....so versatile 
if only TWO lenses......14L and 24-105

long is not quite as important to me as ...fast aperture ....and ultra wide


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 3, 2013)

florianbieler.de said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I use to think:
> ...



Yes, indeed. Those are great choices for travel on FF.

Recently I'm craving for primes. Slowly, I added 50L & 135L to my kit - so far, I'm in love with the BOKEHHHHH.


----------



## Click (Jun 3, 2013)

RC said:


> Click said:
> 
> 
> > My choice:
> ...



Yes mk II, I forgot to write the "II" sorry.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 3, 2013)

I'd keep a 17-55, a 70-200, and a 100L. I'd give three lenses to Fluffy the cat and three lenses to Lucky the cat, and trade lenses with them as needed.....


----------



## Zv (Jun 3, 2013)

What camera do we get with our imaginary three lenses? Can we have three bodies too? 

1DX + 135L or 70-200 II (speed)
5D3 + 24-70 II (everything)
6D + Sigma 35 1.4 (low light)

I bet someone here owns that exact kit!


----------



## TheAshleyJones (Jun 3, 2013)

It's a bit brutal having to choose three lenses that cover video and photography. I think, for example, that the 24-105 is a great lens for video but pretty horrible for stills. My main lens for stills is the 85 F/1.2 II but it's really not much use to me for video. I really like having IS for video.

Video me would go for:
16-35 F/2.8L II
24-105 F/4L IS
70-200 F/2.8L IS II

Stills me would go for
35 F/1.4L
85 F/1.2L II
200 F/2.0L IS (I haven't got this one but still have two near-mint kidneys if anyone is up for a swap)


----------



## yablonsky (Jun 3, 2013)

24-70 f/2.8L II
70-200 f/4L IS
300 f/4L IS


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 3, 2013)

Out of my current kit, I would take the:

Tamron 24-70 VC
Canon 70-300L
Canon 135L

Between an extension tube or two and an extender, you could pretty much do everything.

I haven't yet extensively used the 70-200II, so that might replace the 70-300L. 

If I could only have one lens out of my kit, it would actually be the Tamron (the only non-Canon modern lens I own). It does everything competently enough (from landscapes to portraits to narrow depth of field art shots to video) to get by with. Nothing else I own matches its versatility.


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Jun 3, 2013)

24-70/2.8 II, 70-200/2,8 II, 35/1,4L.


----------



## cellomaster27 (Jun 3, 2013)

If I could...

8-15mm f/4 L, 24-70 f/2.8 II L, 85mm f/1.2 L

more into reality...

10-22mm f3.5-4.5, 24-105mm f/4 L, 28mm f/1.8

what I got... let's not talk about it.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 3, 2013)

If I didn't have to pay for it, I'd take three 1200s and retire a lot sooner! ;D

I used to carry the 16-35 II/50L/70-200L II combo. The 16-35 II was the least favorite/used out of the three, but it's range is versatile. The three lenses covered a wide range of photographic situations, but after trying the 24-70 II, that trio will have to be broken up to include the 24-70 II. The 70-200 II stays, so the question is what is the third lens -- fast prime or ultrawide (i.e. TS-E 17). I tend to use fast primes more, so now I would pick the 24-70 II, 85 II and 70-200 II.

If Canon made a 50L II that rivaled the 24-70 II, then I'd opt for that over the 85 II. I tend to use the 50mm focal length a lot more...


----------



## Dantana (Jun 3, 2013)

So, I had to think of this 2 ways:

From my current kit, and still on crop: 85 1.8 (current favorite lens), 35 2.0 (old version), 20 .28 (not the best lens but the widest prime I have right now.

Planning on upgrading to the 6D in the near future when the piggy bank is full, so the realistic 3 after that would be: 24-105 4.0L, 85 1.8, and a tossup between the 35 and the 20, though if I can swing the 200 2.8L for the long end, I'd love to go with that.

I can't even think of what the 3 would be if there were no restrictions.


----------



## Bruce Photography (Jun 3, 2013)

Click said:


> My choice:
> 
> Canon 16-35 f/2.8 L
> Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II
> Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II



+1 to your selection. The new Canon 24-70 is really a joy to use. Since I'm mostly a landscape guy, I would probably substitute the Nikon 14-24mm with the lens converter because I often do manual focus anyway. For any one interested, my favorite Nikon lenses are the same three Nikon focal lengths and using the 14-24 as much as I can whenever I limit my selection to just three. If you had said 4 lenses I would add the 300mm lens as the next most used lens.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Jun 3, 2013)

bleephotography said:


> If you could only have three lenses to shoot video *AND* general photography on FF cameras, (including sports, portraiture with or without flash, macro, etc.), which would you choose?


Canon EF 16-35 f/2.8 L II ... for landscape
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC ... for handheld video
Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II ... for sports & portraiture
Luckily I have all 3 of them


----------



## crank47 (Jun 3, 2013)

For my action sport needs:

15mm 2.8 Fisheye
16-35mm 2.8 L II
50mm 1.2 L

Body - 5Dmk3 + grip or 1Dx


----------



## markko (Jun 3, 2013)

Currently I carry these three with me all the time:
[list type=decimal]
[*]17-40mm 4.0
[*]24-70mm 2.8 II
[*]70-200mm 2.8 II
[/list]

As you can expect I'm very in love with the 24-70 and the 70-200. I had the 16-35 2.8 II, but I didn't like it's fuzzy borders on a full frame, so I replaced it with the 17-40.

Here is hoping for a new super wide-angle @ f/2.8.

Cheers,

Mark.


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Jun 3, 2013)

Well, I only have 4 lenses... but always carry 3 on my bag all the time 

35L, 85L and 135L

the 70-300L stays in home almost all the time


----------



## Trovador (Jun 3, 2013)

For me it is the Canon 17-40L, Canon 24-70 2.8L and the 70-200 2.8L IS II, but shhhhhh will try to sneak the 100 2.8L when noone's looking. :-X


----------



## bholliman (Jun 3, 2013)

These three are my most used lenses.

24-105 f/4.0
70-200 f/2.8 II
135 f/2.0

I will purchase a 24-70 f/2.8 II soon and expect that lens to replace the 24-105 on this list.


----------



## archiea (Jun 3, 2013)

bholliman said:


> These three are my most used lenses.
> 
> 24-105 f/4.0
> 70-200 f/2.8 II
> ...



Not so fast, the 24-105 is a great range, albeit at f4. However in studio shoots, one is usually at F5.6, 8 or narrower... and the zoom range of the 24-105 comes in handy to provide the portrait range of 80-100. 24-70 is a great lens but don;t give up so fast on that 24-105.. plus it has IS!!!

My best three?.. well, two that I;m certain of:

16-25mm zoom
70-200mm zoom..

The third.. I'd say the F1.4 50mm... its good to have a prime lens there that stops down to F1.4...


----------



## BrettS (Jun 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> bleephotography said:
> 
> 
> > If you could only have three lenses...
> ...



LOL!!! Ditto.

My 3 favorite lens, however, seem to be my 180mm f/3.5L USM Macro, 50mm f/1.2L USM, and 500 f/4L IS USM.

Were there a disaster, they would be the first three I'd re-purchase.

But I also love my 70-200mm f/4L IS USM and 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. My 17-40 f/4L USM I tend to use less.

Gah! I hate these questions...


----------



## Area256 (Jun 3, 2013)

Of the lenses I currently own:

24-105 f/4L IS
100 f/2.8L Macro
50 f/1.4

If I could only have any 3 lenses and could get anything I wanted:

24-70 f/2.8L II
135 f/2L
200-400 f/4L 1.4x IS

Although it's a close call between the 135 and 100 macro....


----------



## chas1113 (Jun 4, 2013)

Prime Trinity:
EF 24mm 1.4 II L
EF 50mm 1.2 L
EF 100mm 2.8 IS L

Zoom Trinity:
EF 24-70 2.8 II L
EF 70-200 2.8 II L
EF 200-400 4.0 L

My real-life, workaday, weather-sealed IS trinity:
EF 24-105 4.0 IS L
EF 70-300 4-5.6 IS L
EF 100 2.8 IS L

(came in handy this past weekend)


----------



## swampler (Jun 4, 2013)

My main 3 lenses are the 24-105 f/4L, 70-200 f/2.8L, and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L. Do about everything with those, though I do have the 50 f/1.8 and 85 f/1.8 as well.


----------



## spinworkxroy (Jun 4, 2013)

Well, i would love to have:
1) 24-70 II
2) 70-200 F2.8 II
3) 85L

That's only because i do mainly portraits and almost never landscapes…but the 24-70 should really be all i need 90% of the time..that's actually the ONLY lens i bring out these days.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 4, 2013)

24LII

50L

135L F/1.8 IS. 8)


----------



## bholliman (Jun 4, 2013)

archiea said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > These three are my most used lenses.
> ...



You might be right. Once I get the 24-70 I'll be able to answer better. I just imagine I'll be using it for most shots between 24-70mm thanks to its superior sharpness and less distortion, but might miss the range and IS. I plan to hang onto the 24-105.


----------



## gigabellone (Jun 5, 2013)

Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC
Canon 85/1.2L
Canon 200/2.8L


----------



## Mr Bean (Jun 5, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> 24LII
> 
> 50L
> 
> 135L F/1.8 IS. 8)


+1


----------



## 87vr6 (Jun 5, 2013)

I'd keep my 14L II, 24-70II, 70-200 IS II. Can I have an extender?


----------



## Mendolera (Jun 5, 2013)

Canon 24-70 L II
Canon 70-200 L II
Canon 200-400 F4 IS

If I had to reduce inventory of what I currently own already

Canon 24-105L
Canon 100-400L
Canon 85 F1.8


----------

