# Next Lens



## dpedro (Oct 16, 2012)

OK, I have the 24-105 (haven't used it and may sell it for something else like a 24-70 ii) I also have the 35L, the 85 1.8, the 100 L macro 2.8, the 70-200 F4L. My EF-S lenses for my T4i are the 17-55 2.8 and the 10-22 Wide.

Thinking of the 50 1.2 or upgrading the 1.8 to the 1.2. Not sure I can justify the 85 upgrade, as the 1.8 is pretty sweet. Leaning toward the 50. I love my T4i and 35L combo, so on my new 5D3, the 50 will be close. 

Or, do I stick with what I have since using a combo of my ASP-C and FF with current lenses, covers most focal lengths. 

If it helps, I am an event photographer, I shoot models and families too. Looking to get into weddings and have already been asked to shoot 2 in 2013.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 16, 2012)

If you can get the 24-70 II and pair that up with your new 5D III, I think you are set with wedding.

I'm on the same boat, 35L or 50L??? I'm leaning more to 50L.


----------



## dpedro (Oct 16, 2012)

On FF, I'd say 50, but it all depends. You have all focal lengths covered, but with focal length are you getting your best wedding shots from? Not reception, but the ceremony money making shots? If you have a target in which you get the best results, get the prime for it.


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 16, 2012)

dpedro said:


> OK, I have the 24-105 (haven't used it and may sell it for something else like a 24-70 ii) I also have the 35L, the 85 1.8, the 100 L macro 2.8, the 70-200 F4L. My EF-S lenses for my T4i are the 17-55 2.8 and the 10-22 Wide.
> 
> Thinking of the 50 1.2 or upgrading the 1.8 to the 1.2. Not sure I can justify the 85 upgrade, as the 1.8 is pretty sweet. Leaning toward the 50. I love my T4i and 35L combo, so on my new 5D3, the 50 will be close.
> 
> ...



You may want to read this first section of my review on fast primes. The 50L is a love or hate lens IMO.

http://ramonlperez.tumblr.com/post/33253428138/fast-prime-shoot-out-pt-1-85mm-1-2l-ii-mini-review


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 16, 2012)

Really depends on how much you want to stay with your current two body system. If you're willing to stay with two bodies, then you don't need to get any additional lenses. Going (nearly) exclusively to FF will require more lenses to retain the focal length flexibility you currently have. It's much cheaper to cover 10-22 and 17-55 in crop than it is 16-35 and 24-70 in FF.


----------



## Menace (Oct 16, 2012)

You have a good selection of lenses - how about upgrading the 70-200 f4 to the 70-200 f2.8 IS II? 

Keep the 35L for low light etc and sometime in the future upgrade 24-105 f4 for the new 24-70 f2.8 II - sweet combo IMHO.


----------



## AudioGlenn (Oct 17, 2012)

Menace said:


> You have a good selection of lenses - how about upgrading the 70-200 f4 to the 70-200 f2.8 IS II?
> 
> Keep the 35L for low light etc and sometime in the future upgrade 24-105 f4 for the new 24-70 f2.8 II - sweet combo IMHO.



+1


----------



## SteveCSmith (Oct 17, 2012)

Menace said:


> You have a good selection of lenses - how about upgrading the 70-200 f4 to the 70-200 f2.8 IS II?
> 
> Keep the 35L for low light etc and sometime in the future upgrade 24-105 f4 for the new 24-70 f2.8 II - sweet combo IMHO.



+2


----------



## SJTstudios (Oct 17, 2012)

I'd go for the 24-70 ii, it is a perfect 1 lens setup for weddings and portraits.

Regarding the 50mm vs the 85mm, a 50 would go really well with FF, and the 1.2 is great. It is a necessary step up from the 1.2. The 85 is great for bokeh, but is a specialty lens. The 1.8 85 is swell, and gives you an ok depth of field, as well as fast focusing. My friend has the 85 1.2, and I have the 100mm l as well, so we did a comparison. The dofis amazing on the 85, but the 100's telephoto capabilities reall blew out the background and gave great image compression. The 50 is a better lens for weddings, especially since that is where you'd need it most (since you have the 1.8 now) and the 85 1.8 is stellar, carrying around the 1.2 at a wedding will really be a hindrance, because you'll see a perfect moment, and then have to switch to another lens.

Get the 50, once you get more into static portraiture, get the 85.


----------



## 7enderbender (Oct 17, 2012)

dpedro said:


> OK, I have the 24-105 (haven't used it and may sell it for something else like a 24-70 ii) I also have the 35L, the 85 1.8, the 100 L macro 2.8, the 70-200 F4L. My EF-S lenses for my T4i are the 17-55 2.8 and the 10-22 Wide.
> 
> Thinking of the 50 1.2 or upgrading the 1.8 to the 1.2. Not sure I can justify the 85 upgrade, as the 1.8 is pretty sweet. Leaning toward the 50. I love my T4i and 35L combo, so on my new 5D3, the 50 will be close.
> 
> ...




Obviously you can't go wrong with any of this and you're already running out of excuses for bad photographs. That being said, the 50L is indeed an obvious choice and exactly what I upgraded to from a 50 1.4 (which by the way is also a great lens - still couldn't bring myself to sell mine). Love it. And no, it is not for everyone. People seem to love it or not at all. I mostly took issue with the build quality of the EF 50 1.4. That being said: the 50L turns out to be worth it not only because it is more sturdy and feels nicer and more solid but the color rendition and contrast wide open are really really nice. And yes it's true that the 1.4 is a bit sharper stopped down between 2.8 and 4 or so.

Don't know the 85L. It's not a focal length that is high on my list. The fly-by-wire design also is rather off-putting to me, but again have never used it. Instead I use the 135L for available light candids during events, and for headshots and chasing around my kids.

I can understand how the 24-105 may be on your for-sale list. I often thought about trading it for a 24-70 (original version). Again, what I don't like about the 24-105 is its plasticky build. And the IS which I don't trust to last all to long. BUT: optically it's rather good and can work very well for both portraits and all sorts of event shooting with flash and in situations where wide apertures are not really helpful anyway. The new 24-70 seems to be killer optically but the build is rather _meh _also it seems. At least no IS. But then again the price seems to be rather hefty for what it is in my book.

One thing to consider about the 50L though is that you already have the 35L which a lot of people argue is very close. I personally prefer the 50mm focal length on full frame though the 35L seems to be the slightly "better" lens in some ways. So frankly, you don't really _need _anything else for what you're doing. For event and wedding stuff I would maybe check if you're all set in the flash department if money is burning in your pocket.


----------



## dpedro (Oct 17, 2012)

I have 2 600 ex rt flashes, but was waiting on a better controller. Might get a 3rd to control the 2 I have. I wanted a strobe system, but people argue that my 600's are strong enough and more portable. I may just wait and see what I can pull off with my current set up. I may use the 5D3 for the entire ceremony and use a combo for specialty shots (10-22) using the T4i. I can then go with 5D3 with flash and 24-105 and use 35L and 17-55 2.8 on T4i. I guess I will see what works. 

I will hold off on a lens for now. Anyone think a new 50 will drop or is this one still way too new?


----------



## Daniel Flather (Oct 18, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> I'm on the same boat, 35L or 50L??? I'm leaning more to 50L.



The 35 and 50 are two different lenses. The 35 is killer sharp wide open, the 50 not so much. The 50 is dreamy wide open and you'll experience a lower keeper rate with the 50 vs the 35 if sharpness is your game. They're both great lenses and I'm glad I have both.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Oct 18, 2012)

dpedro said:


> Anyone think a new 50 will drop or is this one still way too new?



It's too new to be replaced. The 35 is much older and it's still current.


----------



## IIIHobbs (Oct 18, 2012)

Having the 35 1.4L and the 100 2.8L I can understand why you might be disappointed in what the 24-105L offers. I wouldn't suggest changing the 85 1.8 for the 85L, I dont think you will be that impressed with its speed and accuracy compared with the 35L and the 100L.
Better for you would be the 50L, it will give you approx 85 on the Rebel (with the dreamy bokeh you may be seeking with the 85L) and it will provide a very useful normal POV on the 5DIII.


----------



## Axilrod (Oct 18, 2012)

If you want a new 50mm, I'd recommend checking out the Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro. Don't get me wrong, I love my 50L, but in terms of sharpness the ZE is just crushing it, especially on the edges. And it's cheaper.


----------



## Bosman (Oct 19, 2012)

dpedro said:


> OK, I have the 24-105 (haven't used it and may sell it for something else like a 24-70 ii) I also have the 35L, the 85 1.8, the 100 L macro 2.8, the 70-200 F4L. My EF-S lenses for my T4i are the 17-55 2.8 and the 10-22 Wide.
> 
> Thinking of the 50 1.2 or upgrading the 1.8 to the 1.2. Not sure I can justify the 85 upgrade, as the 1.8 is pretty sweet. Leaning toward the 50. I love my T4i and 35L combo, so on my new 5D3, the 50 will be close.
> 
> ...


in case you didn't see my PM my 50L is for sale as of this hour since i came home with an 85L II and the 50 wont be used as my main lens anymore. PM me if you want. Also check your PM messages. Lata


----------



## Bosman (Oct 20, 2012)

50L is sold.


----------

