# 5d3 or lenses



## tuankid (Mar 19, 2012)

I currently own the 5dm2 along with these lenses: 135L, 100L, 16-35L, 50 1.8. I shoot mainly portrait and close-up and sometimes landscape as well. 

My question is should I get the 5dm3 or lenses? Any suggestion on lenses?


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 19, 2012)

*Re: 5d3 of lenses*



tuankid said:


> I currently own the 5dm2 along with these lenses: 135L, 100L, 16-35L, 50 1.8. I shoot mainly portrait and close-up and sometimes landscape as well.
> 
> My question is should I get the 5dm3 or lenses? Any suggestion on lenses?



I guess the real question is:

5DIII or 24-70II

They will cost about the same which ever way


----------



## facedodge (Mar 19, 2012)

Seems like you might do better with a new macro lens or 85L, perhaps 35L. I would wait on the 24-70 ii. If it not as sharp as the 70-200, you won't need to wait long for the price to drop.


----------



## Tijn (Mar 19, 2012)

For portraits and landscape, I doubt that the 5D mk3 will offer enough improvements to justify its price. I'd go for lenses, if I were shooting what you like shooting.

- 50mm f/1.4 is a not-too-costly and worthwhile upgrade from the 50mm f/1.8.
- The 24-70 II would be a lens that'll last you, it's supposed to be crazy sharp (and expensive).
I would recommend the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, but you've already got two decent primes in that range so I'd recommend getting more primes instead. Could go for the 200mm f/2.8L (or the 200mm f/2L if you sell your wife), already covering the 70mm with the 24-70 II.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 19, 2012)

tuankid said:
 

> My question is should I get the 5dm3 or lenses? Any suggestion on lenses?



My question is, do you find your 5DII is limiting you? Personally, I find the AF limiting, both in terms of tracking performance (probably not too important to you) and spread of AF points (focus/recompose causes backfocus with fast primes).


----------



## tuankid (Mar 19, 2012)

facedodge said:


> Seems like you might do better with a new macro lens or 85L, perhaps 35L. I would wait on the 24-70 ii. If it not as sharp as the 70-200, you won't need to wait long for the price to drop.


I was about to purchase the 35L and I went for 16-35mm instead. Great versatile. I love the distortion in 16mm and non-distored 35mm. I don't think i need that 1 extra stop though. the 24-70 ii we shall wait and see.



Tijn said:


> For portraits and landscape, I doubt that the 5D mk3 will offer enough improvements to justify its price. I'd go for lenses, if I were shooting what you like shooting.
> 
> - 50mm f/1.4 is a not-too-costly and worthwhile upgrade from the 50mm f/1.8.
> - The 24-70 II would be a lens that'll last you, it's supposed to be crazy sharp (and expensive).
> I would recommend the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, but you've already got two decent primes in that range so I'd recommend getting more primes instead. Could go for the 200mm f/2.8L (or the 200mm f/2L if you sell your wife), already covering the 70mm with the 24-70 II.


I was thinking about 100-400 or 70-300. the 200 f2, oh well!


----------



## tuankid (Mar 19, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> tuankid said:
> 
> 
> > My question is should I get the 5dm3 or lenses? Any suggestion on lenses?
> ...


Not quite of a limitation, I would love to have the extra features though, but I think I can live without it


----------



## acoll123 (Mar 19, 2012)

I would get a good lens. Maybe try a tilt-shift since you like landscape. I just sold my 5DII and have a 5DIII pre-ordered. The only reason I am trading is because I have all the lenses I need and I have started shooting more sports. The 5DII was great for almost everything except action. I expect the 5DIII will serve very well as a second body for action to my 1DIV.


----------



## marcosv (Mar 19, 2012)

tuankid said:


> I currently own the 5dm2 along with these lenses: 135L, 100L, 16-35L, 50 1.8. I shoot mainly portrait and close-up and sometimes landscape as well.
> 
> My question is should I get the 5dm3 or lenses? Any suggestion on lenses?



I would go for more glass --- until you can barely carry all of the lens you want to bring with you for a given task.

I'd suggest a 85L and one other lens. 24-70 mk II. Zeiss 21mm.

Only reason why I'd buy a 5D3: you need two bodies or plan on selling your 5D2. 

I think your 5D2 should last you a while. Using center point for AF and doing manual focus with the matte focus screen are very acceptable with the 5D2.


----------



## RichATL (Mar 19, 2012)

I'd say Glass...
for one.. most of the glass you have won't be able to use the 5d3's AF system to it's fullest...

2...Glass is always a better investment...

I've been shooting rebels for th past 5 years, and investing in lenses instead...

I'm upgrading to the 5d3 because I have the glass to take advantage of the advancements.


----------



## Ricku (Mar 19, 2012)

Why would you want to buy the 5D3 if you already have the 5D2? 

Do you think you'll gett better IQ from the 5D3? If that is the case, then forget it! Whatever improvements they did, it does not include the sensor (dynamic range and image quality.)

Spend your money on glass, or do like me and switch to Nikon for the D800.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 19, 2012)

Ricku said:
 

> Whatever improvements they did, it does not include the sensor (dynamic range and image quality.)



It does, just perhaps not as much as some people were hoping for...


----------

