Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 3, 2011, 7:32 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oakland county Michigan
Posts: 121
Default option lens..to choose

ok. i have been put on the fence again.. sorry to do this.. really debating hard 24-70 2.8 canon. or should i do the 24-105 IS canon.. everyone says that its a really good match up for the 5d MkII .. so i have the 7d also..

i do portraits. some sports.. and i have to do a couple of weddings this summer.. so i am all around.. but i have the 70-200 2.8 Is, and a 50mm 1.4. and i have a 17-50 2.8 but not a es model. so only works on the 7d.. but also looking at the 85mm. 1.8 to add. but i could use some advice.. again.. this site ROCKS.. with some alsome people on here..
lonefeather93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 4, 2011, 12:43 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

I dont know if you really need either of the lens here. If you want something fast and wide on the 5D for just wide angle shots get the 16-35 instead of either of these lenses.

You already have the lenses for portraits including 50mm, 70-200 and the 17-50.

For this lens collection adding the 24-105 which acts as a perfect walkaround on the 5D makes more sense.

I say 24-105
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2011, 4:56 AM   #3
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

I reckon the put the 7D + 70-200 together, and 5D2 + 24-105.

This setup would play to the strengths of each camera and would be extremely versatile and involve no lens changes.
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog

Last edited by peripatetic; Mar 5, 2011 at 5:04 AM.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2011, 8:21 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

The 17-50/2.8 that you already have for your 7D is as good as the 24-70/2.8 on the 5D2, so the 24-70/2.8 doesn't buy you anything.

I like the idea of the 24-105/4 IS on the 5D2.

The 85/1.8 would be a great portrait lens on either body.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2011, 11:52 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

If you want a FF back up for the 17-50, then the 24-70 2.8 makes good sense. If you want a walk around lens for the 5D the 24-105 works nicely.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2011, 9:32 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oakland county Michigan
Posts: 121
Default

i thought that also. then i saw an 85mm 1.4 from sig.. and thought that might be an ok lens to add for a prime to have.
but yes i was thinking of less lens changes for some of the stuff that is coming up..
lonefeather93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2011, 8:00 AM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lonefeather93 View Post
i thought that also. then i saw an 85mm 1.4 from sig.. and thought that might be an ok lens to add for a prime to have...
IMHO It's the one to get: http://www.lenstip.com/277.5-Lens_re...berration.html
-> It's more than OK as it exceeds both Canon and Nikon offering in every measurable parameters
__________________
photos (ϕοτοσ), light
graphos (γραϕος), painting
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2011, 7:50 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
deterpawson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 393
Default

hello
i maybe way out in my comment but gotta give it anyways
it seems you have coverage from 17-200mm
ever consider a canon 10-22 or tokina 11-16
i mean go wider rather than double up in the mid range area
borrowed one and got some great angled wide shots and the images really "popped"
just a thought
peace
pete
deterpawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2011, 9:01 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oakland county Michigan
Posts: 121
Default

i did think about that.. But i was looking at the Tokina 16-35 2.8. it was half the price of the canon. But for what i shoot. sports and some senior portraits. i don't know it i would benefit from it. i was told that i could use it on my 5D mkII tho. but i have been really contemplating on it tho..
lonefeather93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 29, 2011, 7:23 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oakland county Michigan
Posts: 121
Default

right now still watching and debating.. but right now i'm just leaving the 50mm on the 5d mkII and the 17-50 on the 7d for the time. but i put the 70-200 on the 5d more. It seams now that i have that i keep going to that camera more then the 7d unless i am doing some sport shots.. I think i really am heading into the 85mm prime tho.. everyone is right i am covered, and i think that if i can pick up the 24-104 then i might, but not right now..
lonefeather93 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:42 AM.