# Which lens lineup for 5D3?



## Cfunkexplosion (Jun 6, 2012)

I have a 5D3 on the way, and I'm pondering which lineup I go with, given that the cost is roughly the same. Any thoughts or suggestions would be welcomed. 

24-105L
35L
100L
Tamron 70-300 VC

Or

24-105L
70-200 V2
100 (non-L)
50 1.4


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 6, 2012)

From your choices, I'd opt for set #2.


----------



## Razor2012 (Jun 6, 2012)

I'm trying for the 16-35L, 24-70II and the 70-200 2.8II combo, and then maybe a prime and tele at each end.


----------



## drjlo (Jun 6, 2012)

Thinking out loud:

Samyang 14mm f/2.8

Canon 35L

Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II IS

280 mm via Kenko 1.4x DGX teleconverter ($180 street and very sharp)

Macro lens via ProOptic extension tubes (preserves AF, electronic connection at $83 for 3 tubes) on 70-200. 
--this setup takes great macro shots, with great IS for hand-held, with nice long working distance at 200 mm.


----------



## preppyak (Jun 6, 2012)

Cfunkexplosion said:


> Tamron 70-300 VC


I think you'd be really disappointed with this lens on full-frame, especially one that has an awesome AF system. Its slow to focus and while the IQ is nice for crop (especially at its price), I don't think it'll hold up to full-frame. If you do go Set #1, I'd either trade the 70-300VC for the 70-200 F/4, and you can decide whether your macro lens or 70-200 lens needs IS more.

Your set 2 basically trades a wide portrait lens and IS for your macro for an awesome tele zoom...if you shoot more macro or wide portraits than you would portraits/action/etc, then it might not be worth the trade. Otherwise, Set 2 covers pretty much all of your needs.


----------



## iaind (Jun 11, 2012)

Set 2 but consider 100L macro and ditch 50 1.4


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 12, 2012)

preppyak said:


> Cfunkexplosion said:
> 
> 
> > Tamron 70-300 VC
> ...



Wrong. If you read some reviews, you will find out that this lens was designed for the FF, having an edge perfomance almost as good as in the crop.

Back to the topic though, I believe that if you buy an amazing lens like the 70-200 MK2, the 50mm and the 100mm might be redundant. I'd sooner buy a Kenko 1.4x and a Samyang 35mm, a very fast, good and cheap lens with a much different focal lenght.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jun 12, 2012)

Set 2 is part of my bag except the 50. I have an 85 f/1.8. The 70-200 v2 is NICE on the mkIII. My 100 is also a macro.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 12, 2012)

My ideal setup on a 5D Mark III would be 35L, 24-105L, 70-200L, shoot with nothing but those lenses until I was really satisfied with my photos. To answer the OP's question, I'd go for more of a #2 option.


----------



## Jettatore (Jun 12, 2012)

I wouldn't buy this all at once. I'd get either a 24-70/24-105 or a 70-200/70-300 depending on your suspected needs and leave it at that for a good while. You can rent and pick up well studied pieces along the way based on specific needs.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jun 12, 2012)

The 24-105 is loved and has a great reputation, but f4 at 24mm is brutally slow.


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Jun 12, 2012)

Rather than the 24-105, consider the new Tamron 24-70 f/2.8. And, instead of the new 70-200, think about the non-IS version.

According to reviews, the new Tamron is supereior to the old Canon, and the non-IS 70-200 is nearly the equal optically of the new IS version. With the money you save from that, you can easily get another L lens that'll give you a lot more bang for your buck.

Actually, what I'd really recommend is starting with just the two fast zooms and waiting until you run into shortcomings before you spend more money. Do you need more reach? Something wider? Something faster? Something with movements? Just those two lenses already cover almost everything photographers do, and you may well discover you don't need anything else.

Cheers,

b&


----------



## Phenix205 (Jun 12, 2012)

Why would you need 3 lenses that cover 100mm? Definitely the 70-200 IS II, and yes you want the IS. Personally I would not pick 24-105. I'd go with 24-70 (or II if you have the money). 50 1.4 is nice to have but I found that I left it at home most of the time. Don't buy several lenses at the same time. Buy one that suits your need the most, then decide which one to buy next. Have fun with your 5D3.


----------



## scottkinfw (Jun 12, 2012)

I just got my kit and have been playing with it along with my lenses.

The 24-105 is excellent.
70-200 2.8 II excellent( be sure to get a good copy).
Be sure to mfa all lenses.
I can't comment on other lenses.

sek



Cfunkexplosion said:


> I have a 5D3 on the way, and I'm pondering which lineup I go with, given that the cost is roughly the same. Any thoughts or suggestions would be welcomed.
> 
> 24-105L
> 35L
> ...


----------



## paulv1958 (Jun 12, 2012)

I have the 
50 1.8
70-200 F4 l non IS
17-40 F4 l

works out best value for money 

Covers all my needs for general use.


----------



## Wilmark (Jun 12, 2012)

You did not say what kind of pictures or work you plan to do with the 5d. That will make a big difference in terms of what you buy. Do you plan to do video? You seem to be getting the 24-105 L why didnt you buy it in kit? You save about 300$ this way, and there are discounts offered currently that will save you a few hundred dollars on canon lenses until end of June, but only if you bought the cam with the lenses. You seem to be another enthusiasts with a deep wallet ;D.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 12, 2012)

#2...50 f1.4 + 70-200 f2.8 IS II are SUPER. I'm not a big fan of 24-105 nor 100 non L. Save your money for 24-70 mrk II


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Jun 12, 2012)

iaind said:


> Set 2 but consider 100L macro and ditch 50 1.4



The 50mm F1.4 would be the first lens from the list that I would choose. In fact I use this as my walkabout lens. It is very good value and I find that mediocre zoom lenses with max apertures of F2.8 or even less just don't produce the results I am looking for.


----------



## VirtualRain (Jun 12, 2012)

I'm not sure what's worse... asking for lens advice without indicating what you shoot, or giving lens advice without knowing what's being shot.


----------



## EvilTed (Jun 12, 2012)

Start with the holy trinity of zooms:

16-35mm F/2.8 II
24-70mm F/2.8 II
70-200mm F/2.8 II

and fill in with primes in the lengths you find you shoot the most.

Remember, all of these can be stopped down to F4 but F4 glass can never go faster 

ET


----------



## Viggo (Jun 12, 2012)

After spending å couple of months with my 5d3 i find the most used lenses are 24 ,35, 50, with the 50 absolutely most used. After calibration in Reikan it is truly wonderful... 135 was awesome at an airshow I attended, and the 17 does what no over lens on the planet does, but I don't shoot that much landscape. The 85 is soo good I will never sell it again, but it doesn't get used that much.

But this is ONE dude's use of lenses, talk to å sportphotographer and he will love a 70-200 which I absolutely hate. Had the old and mk2 version of the 2,8 but NEVER used it, I find it very boring compared to the 135....


----------



## bornshooter (Jun 12, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> From your choices, I'd opt for set #2.


+ 1 we finally agree neuro lol


----------



## K3nt (Jun 12, 2012)

EvilTed said:


> Start with the holy trinity of zooms:
> 
> 16-35mm F/2.8 II
> 24-70mm F/2.8 II
> ...



This is what I'd do. Add the 50mm f/1.4 (or if money no objection, judging by the 24-70 mk II inclusion) go all out with the 50mm f/1.2L and also add the 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro.

That set should pretty much cover anything you can think of. Spruce it up with extenders and filters as needed.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 12, 2012)

EvilTed said:


> Start with the holy trinity of zooms:
> 
> 16-35mm F/2.8 II
> 24-70mm F/2.8 II
> ...



+1...I have most of the lenses on your list, except 24-70 mrk II(on pre-order). I'm thinking two more L prime lenses will cover most of my shooting - 35L and 50L mrk II.


----------



## Cfunkexplosion (Jun 13, 2012)

Thanks to everyone for their input. I got the 5D3 with the 24-105 and I've been happy with it that lens thus far. I've also acquired by brother's 50 1.4, swapping it for my Sigma 30 since he has a 60D. I also retained the Tamron 70-300 VC. I purchased it awhile ago because I wanted to cover that focal range, though I rarely shoot long. Nice lens for the price, and seems fine for my hobbyist usage. Future upgrade to that would dependent on a need for something faster. I've decided that I am going to replace the 50 with the 35L and I just got a good deal on the 85L. It's absolutely an extravagance, and I did not intend to end up with one, but fell in love with it after playing with it for a few hours. The 35L, 85L, and 24-105L will be my core lineup, with a Tokina 16-28 coming at some point for when I want to shoot ultra wide. 

Thanks again to everyone who contributed. I'm finding the 5D3 and these lenses to be a joy to use. I'm only a hobbyist, and my gear is far more than I need, but I just love these tools.


----------



## Razor2012 (Jun 13, 2012)

EvilTed said:


> Start with the holy trinity of zooms:
> 
> 16-35mm F/2.8 II
> 24-70mm F/2.8 II
> ...



It would be a holy trinity of zooms if Canon came out with a 14-24L.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 14, 2012)

I honestly believe that if the 24-70L II lens is as good as it is hyped up to be, there would be absolutely no reason to buy a 35 or 50 prime lens IMO. Unless you need 35 and 50 at very low lighting conditions, it would be redundant. That's why I'm not buying the 24-70L II lens right now; I have the 35L and 50L already. If money were no object and I were staring out, I'd of course have the 16-35L II, 24-70L II, and the 70-200L II. And that's all I'd shoot with for a very long time. When I first got into digital photography, I only had a 24-105L zoom lens and that's all I used for about a year. It was a great learning experience. I agree with the poster who said to then purchase a prime at a focal length that you shoot a lot but you must also consider lighting and type of photography you do. If you find yourself shooting a lot of indoor basketball for instance, get an 85 f/1.8 and the 135 f/2L and also bring your 70-200L zoom lens along. Of course, most recent cameras have such high ISO quality performance that maybe f/2.8 is wide enough even for that. Things have come a long way since my first 1D Mark III


----------

