Need help deciding on some new glass. Shoot landscapes and candids with the occasional office & church events. Canon 5D.
I currently carry the 17-40L & 24-70L but thinking about switching to primes. I'm not sure if I should go all prime though, maybe some combination of both. For landscape I don't think I can let go of my 17-40. Love the pictures I get with it on the 5D. So I'll probably stick with this one.
I'm torn better the 35L, 50mm 1.4L, 85L or 135L. I like all the reviews I'm reading on the 135L so what lens would make a good combination with it?
For candids... either the 85 1.8 (focuses much faster than the 85L) or the 135L... Or compromise the FL (but certainly not IQ and/or AF speed) and get a 100 f/2. Together with the 24-70L makes for a perfect event set-up... I know, because this is what I use for weddings/events primarily
rpkwon wrote:
...Shoot landscapes and candids with the occasional office & church events. Canon 5D. ...I like all the reviews I'm reading on the 135L so what lens would make a good combination with it?
If you'll be getting a 135 to cover the longer end, then no question: the 35L.
I been finding that a combination of a 50 and 135 to be a nice working pair of primes for me. 50 and 85 or 100 has worked in the past. The 17-40 covers wide really nicely and the 24-70L is a great general zoom... I only got rid of mine because I got fed up with the size and weight.
Keep what you have and start adding:135L would be/was me first choice, followed be 35L and then 85L.
Then all you will need id the 1D MkIV and 200L IS and 1.4xII extender.
I'm torn between suggesting the 35L and the 85L II to compliment the 135L.
The 35 is a fantastic lens with a really low MFD, great build quality; out of all the lenses I've owned this one is probably my favorite. The 85 II takes fantastic, sharp and well rendered pictures with a great aperture range. Its MFD is a little long, but that's fine for most intents and purposes.
Your zoom coverage is pretty good on the low end and so you might not gain much from the 35.
I'd rent the 35 and the 85 and see which you like the feel and look of most and then decide
Thanks for all the great advice!
I'm leaning towards letting go of the 24-70 and adding the 35L & 135L to my 17-40L... but then again I might change my mind as soon as I post this reply.
My only concern with the 85L, besides the price, is the slow focusing... but it sure sounds like love at first shot with it.
I've got all the lenses you mentioned. If you're keeping the 17-40L then you might want to consider adding the 50 1.4 and the 135L. I might keep that 24-70L though. It's a very useful lens, especially when you're covering an event. The "canon trinity" is awesome if you can afford it though. All the lenses have exceptional bokeh, speed and sharpness, but the 85L is very pricey and heavy.
it sounds like you feel only L's are good enough for you, but if you let go of the 24-70L you should probably hold your nose and get a non-L 50 or the 85/1.8... the gap from 35 or 40mm @ f4 to 135 is rather huge IMO.
mh2000 wrote:
it sounds like you feel only L's are good enough for you
I got this impression too, especially considering the abundance of praise for the 100 F/2 which many people consider almost as good, if not as good as the 135 F/2L.
That said, I use 50mm and 100mm primes with my 5D. The closest thing to a wedding that I've shot is when I'm volunteering (for the local cat shelter) at the farmer's market. I take pictures of all the people and find that 50mm is great for getting up close and personal and 100mm is great for head and shoulder shots. If the space is cramped, maybe 35mm and 85mm would suit you. 35mm and 135mm is a bit extreme, in my opinion, as the focal length range between 35mm and 135mm covers a lot of ground (requiring a lot of foot zooming).
All of this, though, is skirting the issue that if you want to use primes and you don't feel like constantly changing lenses, you'll want or need to purchase a 2nd body to attach a second lens to (be it another prime or a zoom). If you don't want a 2nd body, then maybe a single, catch-all focal length would suit you, like 50mm.
Unless your needs are very specialized I would not "switch to a prime" from zooms. I'd "add primes" to my selection of lenses. Each has its advantage is different situations, and this is true for the types of shooting that you mention as well.
BTW, what convinces you that you need the 85L rather than the non-L 84mm f/1.8 lens? Or the 35mm L over the non-L 35mm f/2? I'd feel much better equipped with those two lenses plus zooms than I would if I had to give up a zoom to get _one_ of the very expensive L primes. In short, I'd get much more value out of having the 17-40, the 24-70, the 35mm f/2 and the 85mm f/1.8 than I would out of having just the 17-40 and the 85mm f/1.2...
Dan
rpkwon wrote:
Need help deciding on some new glass. Shoot landscapes and candids with the occasional office & church events. Canon 5D.
I currently carry the 17-40L & 24-70L but thinking about switching to primes. I'm not sure if I should go all prime though, maybe some combination of both. For landscape I don't think I can let go of my 17-40. Love the pictures I get with it on the 5D. So I'll probably stick with this one.
I'm torn better the 35L, 50mm 1.4L, 85L or 135L. I like all the reviews I'm reading on the 135L so what lens would make a good combination with it?
^^Seconded. Why are you thinking "of switching to primes"? Be careful. In dynamic situations, you don't want to get caught switching lenses when there is a shot to be had. Know your needs before jumping into anything.
To directly answer your question, I'd go with a 35 or 50 to pair with the 135, before the 85.
mh2000 wrote:
it sounds like you feel only L's are good enough for you,
I really like the build quality of the L's, as do most. Although in my defense I think I'd rather take on the 50 1.4 than the 50L.
Having reading some more GREAT inputs, I may be reconsidering going all prime and just adding a couple of them to my arsenal. Although I want to somewhat limit the amount of lens I own....
gdanmitchell wrote:
Unless your needs are very specialized I would not "switch to a prime" from zooms. I'd "add primes" to my selection of lenses. Each has its advantage is different situations, and this is true for the types of shooting that you mention as well.
BTW, what convinces you that you need the 85L rather than the non-L 84mm f/1.8 lens? Or the 35mm L over the non-L 35mm f/2? I'd feel much better equipped with those two lenses plus zooms than I would if I had to give up a zoom to get _one_ of the very expensive L primes. In short, I'd get much more value out of having the 17-40, the 24-70, the 35mm f/2 and the 85mm f/1.8 than I would out of having just the 17-40 and the 85mm f/1.2...
This is good advice. The 50, 1.4 is relatively inexpensive and would add the speed and shallow DOF that you wouldn't get from your zooms. The 85, 1.8 is a good lens, although mine wasn't all that sharp wide open. Stopped down a bit it held up nicely, but my 85L is sharp wide open.
If you are going to buy some L glass though.... The 135L is the least expensive of the "trinity" and the focal length wouldn't overlap your zooms.
ZE21, 35L, 50L, 85L and 135L is my present lineup of primes. Of these I feel that the ZE21, 50L and 135L has most personality. Would NOT loose any of them. I love the field of view of the 85, though. But as I´m cropped right now, the 135L will give the 85mm view when I go FF (probably with the 5D3, as 7D turns out to be a must have of BIF reasons).
You should not be affraid of the 50L. I find it very satisfying for landscape work AND wide open it has The Magic.
Got my ZE21 only a few days ago. Unfortunatly it makes the L´s a bit pale.
come join the club.
