5DIII + what lenses?

[domino1999]

Come the end of October I'll have around £3.5K to spend on new toys. At the moment I'm using a 350D, but decided I want to go FF, since this will be my last purchase for a number of years (or forever if my wife gets her way!).

I'd considered a 5DII, but although still a great camera, it's getting on a bit now and I'd much rather have something a little more up-to-date that's going to last me the next 5+ years. My heart (and head) is utterly set on the 5DIII.

I'd also like some decent glass that's going to make subjects pop, produce lovely bokeh and be pin sharp.

It'll be for portraits, kids (still & moving), macro and general indoor & outdoor shots. Not really into landscape, but that might come in future. I don't do indoor sports either, unless it's the kid running around!

If I go the grey import route, I could probably get a 5DIII for around the £2K mark. This'll leave £1.5K for lenses + accessories.

My existing Tammy 17-50 is used heavily, along with the nifty-fifty, but of course the Tammy won't fit FF. So I guess the 24-105L would be the best bet?

Also, when I'm out & about I'm not the sort of person who'll carry a bag of lenses and start changing them, but I do appreciate what a good prime will give me and I'm quite keen to get one.

Macro is covered, since I believe my Sigma 105 will be fine on FF - please correct me if I'm wrong.

I do like a bit of reach from time to time, so am considering the 70-200 f4, which could be pushed to the f4 IS or f2.8 non-IS...but this would give me an overlap with the 24-105...:bang:

So really I'm just after lens suggestions/recommendations for how best to spend that £1.5K....primes, zooms, bit of both?

cheers in advance
Darren

 

[aethelstan927]

with regards to the lens options, have you considered the 3rd party options?

If your not after 'the best of the best' the new tamron 24-70 f2.8 IS (what ever their version is called) gets good reviews compared with the canon equivalent, and its image stabilised?

I couldnt afford the canon 70-200mm options so when for the sigma variant, which i have been very happy with, i know it might not be as sharp but hey it was a quarter of the price and and web/ normal print sizes i cant tell the difference. I would however recommend that if you can get an IS version sooooo much of a benefit, i never realised how unstable i was its defo on my upgrade list (what isnt though )

also if you've used a 200mm lens on a crop body dont forget your going to loose a lot of length on the FF 5DIII, I know someone who upgraded and had to instantly buy a 1.4 teleconverter to get that length back, so i would defo look into that!

The sigma 50mm f1.4 often gets better than its canon rival so an option?

Also if you fancy a bit of manual focus I'm really keen on trying a samyang 35mm F1.4 a nice prime but maybe not for everyday photos of sprinting kids

also i am sooooo jealous of your spending ability LOL i was hoping to be able to make a reasonable upgrade with some money id saved but then i got a massive tax bill :rules: which wiped that out. . . hence why i researched a lot of nice gear i have no way of getting

anyways hope that gives you a few ideas? let us know what you get its nice to fantasise

 

[woof woof]

Personally I'd probably choose f2.8 zooms over f4 zooms especially if it's a "standard" walkabout zoom that'll see a lot of use, but I'm more into primes really... The Sigma 50 amd 85mm f1.4's are both very good lenses.

 

[pridash]

Personally I'd probably choose f2.8 zooms over f4 zooms especially if it's a "standard" walkabout zoom that'll see a lot of use, but I'm more into primes really... The Sigma 50 amd 85mm f1.4's are both very good lenses.

+1 on getting 2.8 zooms if possible. You should be able to pick up a used 24-70L, 85 1.8 and 580ex (if you don't have a flash yet) and still have a couple hundred left over to spend as you wish - maybe stretch enough to get a Siggy 50mm. Your Sigma 105 is fine for FF - so with that, it's an awesome line up with the 5D3.

 

[domino1999]

with regards to the lens options, have you considered the 3rd party options?

If your not after 'the best of the best' the new tamron 24-70 f2.8 IS (what ever their version is called) gets good reviews compared with the canon equivalent, and its image stabilised?

I couldnt afford the canon 70-200mm options so when for the sigma variant, which i have been very happy with, i know it might not be as sharp but hey it was a quarter of the price and and web/ normal print sizes i cant tell the difference. I would however recommend that if you can get an IS version sooooo much of a benefit, i never realised how unstable i was its defo on my upgrade list (what isnt though )

also if you've used a 200mm lens on a crop body dont forget your going to loose a lot of length on the FF 5DIII, I know someone who upgraded and had to instantly buy a 1.4 teleconverter to get that length back, so i would defo look into that!

The sigma 50mm f1.4 often gets better than its canon rival so an option?

Also if you fancy a bit of manual focus I'm really keen on trying a samyang 35mm F1.4 a nice prime but maybe not for everyday photos of sprinting kids

also i am sooooo jealous of your spending ability LOL i was hoping to be able to make a reasonable upgrade with some money id saved but then i got a massive tax bill :rules: which wiped that out. . . hence why i researched a lot of nice gear i have no way of getting

anyways hope that gives you a few ideas? let us know what you get its nice to fantasise

Thanks for your input Ben

I hadn't considered 3rd party lenses, purely on the basis that I wanted to go for Canon L glass, since you hear so many good things about it and this'll be my last upgrade for a long time. However, if there are 3rd party equivalents out there that are comparable, then I'll take a look.

I've used a cheap Canon 75-300 on crop, so realise I'm going to lose some reach with a 70-200 on FF. I've been considering a 1.4 tele in this case, but also been considering the Canon 70-300L to try a claw a bit of reach back.

I was thinking of keeping the nifty-fifty as I've heard it performs pretty well on the 5DIII, but was considering an 85mm prime - not sure I could justify the 1.2L though.

So, I guess I'm thinking about it too much, as there are sooooo many options, hence my cry for help....

 

[domino1999]

Personally I'd probably choose f2.8 zooms over f4 zooms especially if it's a "standard" walkabout zoom that'll see a lot of use, but I'm more into primes really... The Sigma 50 amd 85mm f1.4's are both very good lenses.

I can see the sense in that, but I'm wondering if I'm also being lured by primes, it's more and more appealing to me - so maybe 1 really good walkabout and a prime?

+1 on getting 2.8 zooms if possible. You should be able to pick up a used 24-70L, 85 1.8 and 580ex (if you don't have a flash yet) and still have a couple hundred left over to spend as you wish - maybe stretch enough to get a Siggy 50mm. Your Sigma 105 is fine for FF - so with that, it's an awesome set line up with the 5D3.

The 24-70 had crossed my mind, though not sure you can still buy them new anywhere? The mkII is out of reach for me. A used 24-70 is a possibility, but I'd much rather buy new - it's just a bit of a thing with me.

The 85 is a distinct possibility, I've heard good things about the 1.8 and the 1.2L seems rather expensive for what would be gained over the 1.8. I might be wrong of course

I already have flash - a 430EX, a Yonguio(??) 565 and for indoor portraits I have a Lencarta Ultrapro 300, with various modifiers, wireless triggers etc., so no problems in that department.

Good to hear the Siggy 105 will be fine

 

[futureal33]

If it was me and £1.5k

1) Tamron 28-75 2.8 = £250
2) Canon 135L = £650
3) 70-200 f4 IS = £650

£50 overbudget.

 

[domino1999]

Cheers Nick

Don't know anything about that Tamron 28-75. Have you got one and if so, what's the IQ and bokeh like?

I've heard good thing about the 135L and if I do go down the primes only route, then this will defo be on the shortlist.

 

[domino1999]

Just had a thought....

Will my RF-603 C1 triggers work on the 5DIII?

Had a quick google and it appears I'd need the RF-603 C3 version...

If so, that'll eat into my budget a little bit

 

[woof woof]

I can see the sense in that, but I'm wondering if I'm also being lured by primes, it's more and more appealing to me - so maybe 1 really good walkabout and a prime?

Yes, personally I'd want a zoom or zooms available for occasional use even when, as I do, I mostly use primes.

Just a quick thought on Canon L lenses. Personally I have no brand loyalty as such and I believe in buying the best lens for me at the price I'm willing to pay. If for example, I consider a Sigma 85mm f1.4 to be the best lens for me at the price I'm willing to pay then that's what I'd buy. In fact I did I really don't see the sense in buying a product because of the make/badge, just buy the best for you is my advice.

 

[domino1999]

Yes, personally I'd want a zoom or zooms available for occasional use even when, as I do, I mostly use primes.

Just a quick thought on Canon L lenses. Personally I have no brand loyalty as such and I believe in buying the best lens for me at the price I'm willing to pay. If for example, I consider a Sigma 85mm f1.4 to be the best lens for me at the price I'm willing to pay then that's what I'd buy. In fact I did I really don't see the sense in buying a product because of the make/badge, just buy the best for you is my advice.

The Sigma 85 1.4 does get favourable reviews and I must say I love my 105, so I'll throw that into the ring for consideration. I agree totally with your thought process when it comes to buying a lens

 

[gpc1]

the 85 1.2l is stunning. I have one on my 5dmk2 and it produces some amazing colours and the Bokeh is silky.

But its SLLLLLOOOOOOWWWWW to focus and heavy.....

I would still go the classic route
24-70 F2.8 - Great allrounder
70 - 200 F2.8 - another allrounder
50 1.4 fast and lightweight

Then a nice wide 17mm (or less) for landscapes should you choose to take them..



I

 

[futureal33]

Cheers Nick

Don't know anything about that Tamron 28-75. Have you got one and if so, what's the IQ and bokeh like?

I've heard good thing about the 135L and if I do go down the primes only route, then this will defo be on the shortlist.

Darren,
Its quite a hard one for me to answer this because, although I do own the Tamron 28-75 2.8, it is my least used lens... NOT because of anything wrong with it, but I generally stick to primes. I shoot a lot of low light stuff, weddings, christenings etc, and will use the 35L / 85mm 1.4 combination.
That said, the Tamron when used has been faultless. Sharp at 2.8, accurate focus (not the fastest in the world, but its OK) and nice bokeh.
Here's a quick example at ISO 3200 and f2.8 with it


IMG_6475.jpg by futureal33, on Flickr


IMG_6476.jpg by futureal33, on Flickr

I have both the 135L and 85mm 1.4 Sigma and both are fantastic lenses

 

[modchild]

If I'd got that much to spend I'd go for a 5D3 and Canon 70-200 2.8 IS MkII from Panamoz. You might even have enough change for a second hand 50 1.4 or 85 1.8. All three lenses are fantastic on my 5D3 and although the primes don't get as much use as the zooms do generally, when I have a portrait shoot anywhere the primes are all I use.

 

[rossomck]

I would buy the 5DII and save myself another grand. Unless you are shooting a moving subject and|or need the higher frame rate, the 5dII will be just as good.

 

[narcotiks]

First of all, smart move to the full frame domain, you will not regret this decision.

Secondly you're right to have your heart set on the Mk3 over the Mk2. without offending anyone, if anyone recommends the latter they either don't own one or respectfully do not know what they're talking about. The MK3 is improved in every single aspect over the MK2 as far as i can deduce. In fact the MK2 feels handicapped when you use the mk3 for any period of time

Lens wise, L glass is the only way to go. The 24-105 is absolutely perfect as a walk around lens and reacts fast enough to capture moving targets, even kids. The calls for the 24-70 are negligible when you get the MK3, the additional speed is off-set by the iso performance, the sharpness and contrast are not worth the additional £300 imo and the IS is more useful than people think.

The Tamron you currently own is a wonderful lens for cropped bodies but i would sell it so it can add to the funds for something more useful.

the 105mm sigma is perfect as a macro lens and you wont get much better for the price, stick with it.

the nifty 50 you currently own is just fine as a start up lens, all of my trainees use it with their mk2 bodies and they get perfectly fine results. the next logical step would be the 1.4 which is faster in every way and much more pleasant.

The most important portrait lens in your arsenal will be the 70-200 f4 IS. you need the IS, saving IS and going for the non IS 2.8 is not a good move imo. at 200mm that stabilisation is a total life saver and I couldn't live without it.

Lastly, if you have any money left over, Upgrade to the 580ex2 or 600rt. this piece of equipment will be your most used piece of kit. it trumps the 430ex in every way and makes life much more easier under difficult conditions.

 

[KathG]

One little Lens I love is the Canon 40mm F2.8 pancake. Not an L lens but can be bought for a Great price, is very light and a great addition to any kit.
Kath

 

[sl888]

Lens wise, L glass is the only way to go. The 24-105 is absolutely perfect as a walk around lens and reacts fast enough to capture moving targets, even kids. The calls for the 24-70 are negligible when you get the MK3, the additional speed is off-set by the iso performance, the sharpness and contrast are not worth the additional £300 imo and the IS is more useful than people think.

x2
The often overlooked 24-105 is a very good and sharp L lens. If you're not the person to be changing lenses all the time then this will suit you perfectly.

 

[woof woof]

The view that upping the ISO can negate the need for wider apertures baffles me. The f2.8 will always give more options. Buy f4 and you'll always secretly regret not buying the f2.8

Actually, buy the zoom and you'll always wish you'd bought the f1.4 prime

 

[DaveRed]

Re the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, I have one and I have to say its my least used lens. The image quality is superb, to be fair. The problem is the focussing. Very slow and very hit and miss in anything other than good light.

It's a budget alternative to the 24-70L, the cost of which I couldn't justify. The Tamron now spends most of its time on my EOS5 film body.

 

[domino1999]

I would buy the 5DII and save myself another grand. Unless you are shooting a moving subject and|or need the higher frame rate, the 5dII will be just as good.

I'd considered this for a long time, but as this will probably be my last upgrade for many, many years, I wanted to go for the latest most recent model and I lova what I'm hearing about the 5DIII and especially the ISO performance.

First of all, smart move to the full frame domain, you will not regret this decision.

Secondly you're right to have your heart set on the Mk3 over the Mk2. without offending anyone, if anyone recommends the latter they either don't own one or respectfully do not know what they're talking about. The MK3 is improved in every single aspect over the MK2 as far as i can deduce. In fact the MK2 feels handicapped when you use the mk3 for any period of time

Lens wise, L glass is the only way to go. The 24-105 is absolutely perfect as a walk around lens and reacts fast enough to capture moving targets, even kids. The calls for the 24-70 are negligible when you get the MK3, the additional speed is off-set by the iso performance, the sharpness and contrast are not worth the additional £300 imo and the IS is more useful than people think.

The Tamron you currently own is a wonderful lens for cropped bodies but i would sell it so it can add to the funds for something more useful.

the 105mm sigma is perfect as a macro lens and you wont get much better for the price, stick with it.

the nifty 50 you currently own is just fine as a start up lens, all of my trainees use it with their mk2 bodies and they get perfectly fine results. the next logical step would be the 1.4 which is faster in every way and much more pleasant.

The most important portrait lens in your arsenal will be the 70-200 f4 IS. you need the IS, saving IS and going for the non IS 2.8 is not a good move imo. at 200mm that stabilisation is a total life saver and I couldn't live without it.

Lastly, if you have any money left over, Upgrade to the 580ex2 or 600rt. this piece of equipment will be your most used piece of kit. it trumps the 430ex in every way and makes life much more easier under difficult conditions.

There's a lot of sense in this post, thank you, it's the same thought processes I've been having. However, I'm not so concerned about the flash, since I'm really only using the 430EX for the bg or hair/rim light and using the Ultrapro for the main light.

One little Lens I love is the Canon 40mm F2.8 pancake. Not an L lens but can be bought for a Great price, is very light and a great addition to any kit.
Kath

Not looked at this at all, but will read up on it, thanks.

x2
The often overlooked 24-105 is a very good and sharp L lens. If you're not the person to be changing lenses all the time then this will suit you perfectly.

It's on my shortlist

The view that upping the ISO can negate the need for wider apertures baffles me. The f2.8 will always give more options. Buy f4 and you'll always secretly regret not buying the f2.8

Actually, buy the zoom and you'll always wish you'd bought the f1.4 prime

My main concern is zooms vs primes. I know primes are generally considered to be sharper, but also know some zooms can be sharper than primes in some cases. The f2.8 vs f4 is also a concern, I do like really shallow DoF sometimes.

Re the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, I have one and I have to say its my least used lens. The image quality is superb, to be fair. The problem is the focussing. Very slow and very hit and miss in anything other than good light.

It's a budget alternative to the 24-70L, the cost of which I couldn't justify. The Tamron now spends most of its time on my EOS5 film body.

Thanks for the extra info on that lens. My sigma 105, although producing really sharp shots, does tend to hunt a bit, so I should say fast AF is a requirement.

So thanks everyone. Maybe I should have just asked people to list their top 3 lenses on Canon FF for best IQ, including one walkabout zoom and 2 primes, but the input so far has been invaluable