[superkoax]

I need pro advice here. I'm buying a canon 5d, but I want a really fantastic starter lens with it. Money is an issue, but i want the Luxury lenses from canon...Is there anybody out there with any experience with these lenses?
I have heard good stuff about 24-70 2.8 L , but want to have some honest feedback!

Thanks, guys and girls!


Gerry

[Ant]

Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

Used to be that a lens like that was too tele, but nowadays, they are going even closer for portrait lenses. I find 135mm to be ideal. You will sacrifice sharpness with a zoom. Stick with fixed.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/...howtopic=24351

[superkoax]

thanks, Ant...I have the 85mm 1.8 I feel that is nice, but I miss sometimes to be more "zoomalistic" if we can say that...But I will look upon that lens on photosig...cheers


Gerry

[DiamondsDr47]

I have Canon EF24-70 2.8 L; luckily my copy is very sharp, nice color rendering and bokeh.
If you go for this lens make sure you do testing, beautiful lens btw.
Canon EF 70-200 2.8l also great lens.
They are not cheap
Also don’t overlook canon EF 85 1.8 relatively inexpensive portrait lens.
It’s all subject matter only you know what focal lens you really need, for example Canon EF 35 1.4L, a little extreme but can be beautiful results
Best regards,
Edgar

[DWThomp]

The Canon 24-70 f2.8 L is my main lens and I would highly recommend it. IMO you won't find a better lens in that focal range. Of course, on my 20D I get the crop factor, but I do most of my stuff in that range. For wider I use the efs 10-22 but that wouldn't work on the 5D. My brother also uses the 24-70 quite a bit on his 5D. The ef85 f1.8 is a very good lens and would work nicely for portraits on full frame.

A lot of it depends on what you're planning on shooting and the focal range that you need to cover.

[superkoax]

Diamonds: Thanks for input...I feel maybe the 70-200 is a bit to much zoom for me atm...I like to get it close, I really am trying to get my pictures in new directions with model on different backgrounds...so therefor I think zoom within the 24-70 is the right one...But the 35mm looks interesting to me as well...

Gerry

[superkoax]

DW: thank you for clearing stuff up here I'm really excited about getting my new gear...so I want to absolute sure...Thanks!

[DWThomp]

Originally Posted by superkoax

DW: thank you for clearing stuff up here I'm really excited about getting my new gear...so I want to absolute sure...Thanks!

No problem. You'll love the 5D. Puts out great images and ISO-800 is very usable. The 5D or its replacement is high on my list, especially if something happens to my 20D.

I don't have the 35mm, but hear it's an excellent lens as well.

Enjoy!

[Ant]

If you don't need a super fast lens, the Canon 180 3.5L Macro is pretty good if you get a good copy. It's a pity that there are so many poor lenses in the Canon line and that there are even bad ones if you spend loads. Back when I shot that format, I was a Nikon guy and nowadays it's all Zeiss. If I pick up a MKIII DS or the 5D replacement I'll probably throw down for the Zeiss lenses there too.

[CaptainHook]

Gerry, i have a 5D and the 24-70. I like it but for portraits, listen to Ant and go
for a fixed focal length. The 135 is great. Remember generally a lens
it's at it's sharpest 3 full (not 1/3) stops over it's lowest possible so
depending on what you like to shoot at, this could affect your selection also.

70 is much too short for me with most portraits and i use the lens more
for it's wide angle and distortion.

Good luck.

[skydog]

I also have a 24-70 f2.8. A great lens. I'd also like the 135f2. I too want a 5D, but I keep reading rumours that the next generation 5D will be out this soon? Hasn't the 5D been on the market almost 2 years now?

[cricket1961]

The 85 1.8 is a great lens for portraits. Ant is right about the 135. Not so sure myself about the fixed part though. The 24-105 is also a fantastic lens for Beauty and Portrait.

Having only an aging Rebel 300d, the best I can hope for is a nifty-fifty.
Thinks seriously about that new 450 though!
Good luck with whatever you go with.
Chris

[zganie]

I Agree with Chris ,105 is a classic portrait lens.Also buy the best you can afford its an investment which will last.Also do not buy slow lenses you will eventually be sorrow,but the fastest lens they have,I know some people may disagree buy sorry ,I know on this sublect I am right seen this happen a 100 times
zganie

[superkoax]

okey, let's sum this up here:

Everyone is agreeing on the 135mm 2/L ? But can we all agree that maybe 24-70 2.8/L is a very good substitute? I've been down to the local photo shop in Bergen, Norway and I got to try the 24-70 out with a 5d...REALLY NICE!!! I'm so in love with the luxury lenses

The thing is I'm going for composite images and not so much beauty atm...I'm also settling for either the 50m 1.2 or 1.4...1.4 is cheapest and gives good results...Me and a friend are building up a studio on a long term plan...so next year we are all ready...good equipment is very expensive But I will look out for the 135mm 2/L and see if I can try that out as well

Thanks guys! Much appreciated!

WHat do people say about wideangle here? Any good pointers?

Gerry

[girlsfather]

Hi Superkoax,
the 24-70 2.8/L is a good lens - thats for shure.
Shooting Portraits I would use lenses from 50mm to 200mm.
It depends on the subject - the person - and the picture I want to create.
I use a lot my 85mm 1.2/L on 1Ds Mark II full format. It has maximum sharpness at f5.6-8 and I like selective sharpness at portraits.

I am not really satisfied with the wide angle lenses.
O.K. for general use I own the 24-70 2.8/L.
If I have to deliver high-end results I use large format or alpa medium format with schneider digitar lenses on leaf aptus 75. No distortion, no need to retouch the poor quality of the lens ;-))) ...

So it all depends on what the use of the pictures is.

Michael