Which Lens for 5DMKII?

Scott MacKenzie

Halloo Gang;
I am curious.
I am currently working with a Canon 30D, usually with a 70-200 F2.8L IS USM, but I'm freaking out because I have finally saved enough for the 5DMKII.
Since I primarily shoot location portraiture and sports with the zoom, I am wondering which might be the most versatile lens to get with the 5DMKII.
I know that some lenses that can be used with the 30D simply cannot be used with the 5DMKII.
But autumn is coming and it is time to roll.
I would like a wider lens for more of an "ad" look, but not enough to totally distort the images if you know what I mean.
I figured I would ask you guys and then go from there.
It's worked in the past, ho ho...And Thanks!

Richard

Scott MacKenzie wrote:

Halloo Gang;
I am curious.
I am currently working with a Canon 30D, usually with a 70-200 F2.8L IS USM, but I'm freaking out because I have finally saved enough for the 5DMKII.
Since I primarily shoot location portraiture and sports with the zoom, I am wondering which might be the most versatile lens to get with the 5DMKII.
I know that some lenses that can be used with the 30D simply cannot be used with the 5DMKII.
But autumn is coming and it is time to roll.
I would like a wider lens for more of an "ad" look, but not enough to totally distort the images if you know what I mean.
I figured I would ask you guys and then go from there.
It's worked in the past, ho ho...And Thanks!

First of all, congratulations on the 5DII.

I think the 70-200 may be just fine for portraiture--assuming you have enough room--but on a FF body it's going to be a little short for sports. Consider the Canon 100-400L. Unless you want to go really wide, the 24-105 f/4L is a great choice for a walk-around and portrait lens, or if your budget and muscle tone permit, the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L. If 24 isn't wide enough, consider the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is a good value and would complement your 70-200 nicely. No shortage of great lenses to choose from.

ziggy53

The EF 135mm, f2L USM is a wonderful, almost magical combination with the 5D MKII. Head shots are a primary consideration unless you have some room to shoot, like an outdoor setting.

The EF 50mm, f1.4 USM is another good choice and works well for full length portraits.

Other fast aperture primes are very good candidates and give you some diversity of choice.

The EF 24-70mm, f2.8L USM is a very nice standard zoom for the FF Canon cameras and can cover some portraiture as well as some fairly wide landscape applications. (I use the older EF 28-80mm, f2.8-f4L USM.)

The 70-200mm zooms can indeed serve for some portraiture as well as the narrower landscape views.

Another favorite of mine is the EF 17-40mm, f4L USM. Great for vista landscapes and some interior views. Not quite as good for people stuff except large group images in smaller spaces.

Third party primes and zooms are another consideration, but the Canon "L" lenses and Canon primes really are awfully sweet. Third party true "macro" lenses may be the exception in that they are usually extremely good optics, but generally slow to focus.

I suppose if I had to choose one, the 24-70mm range is pretty important and you would probably appreciate the combination of your existing 70-200mm with it.

Scott MacKenzie

Thank You!
Thank you guys so much for your info.
I'm all over the place online, checking out samples from the lenses you suggested.
I'm pretty excited about it.
Thanks Again!

craig_d

Richard wrote:

I think the 70-200 may be just fine for portraiture--assuming you have enough room--but on a FF body it's going to be a little short for sports.

Well, on a 1.6x body, 200mm has the field of view of 320mm on FF. On FF, 200mm f/2.8 plus the Canon 1.4x Extender becomes 280mm f/4. The loss of a stop isn't ideal for sports photography, but it may do until he can buy a longer lens -- and the Extender, at about $300, is affordable.

craig_d

ziggy53 wrote:

Third party primes and zooms are another consideration, but the Canon "L" lenses and Canon primes really are awfully sweet. Third party true "macro" lenses may be the exception in that they are usually extremely good optics, but generally slow to focus.

I suppose if I had to choose one, the 24-70mm range is pretty important and you would probably appreciate the combination of your existing 70-200mm with it.

Yeah, the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L and the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS are a great combination. Then you add the 17-40 f/4 L (or, for double the price, the 16-35 f/2.8 L) and you've got excellent coverage of the most common focal lengths in three lenses.

Canon's non-L primes are often very good (with a few glaring exceptions like the EF 28mm f/1.8, for which new superlatives need to be invented to describe its extreme corner softness and CA) and quite affordable.

As my signature below indicates, I use a Tokina 100mm f/2.8 macro, which is a razor-sharp true 1:1 macro lens that costs only about $400. Its only weak spot is that focus is a bit on the slow side. I am currently considering replacing it with the new Canon 100mm macro with IS, but I'm waiting to see what the reviews say. If this happens, I will have gone from owning four third-party lenses to zero in the space of a year.

Scott MacKenzie

Thanks Much again, you guys...
I appreciate it very much.

I just ordered the 5DMKII and the EF 24-70mm, f2.8L USM!

I spent a great deal of time studying images from the lenses described, and I think I'm all set.

I think I'll go wait by the door...

Thx AGAIN!

pwp

Scott MacKenzie wrote:

I appreciate it very much.

I just ordered the 5DMKII and the EF 24-70mm, f2.8L USM!

I spent a great deal of time studying images from the lenses described, and I think I'm all set.

I think I'll go wait by the door...

Thx AGAIN!

You'll be very pleased! This body and lens combo is one of my favorites right now!!