Getting a Mark III - Can I get some Lens Opinions

A

Alexander1310

New member
Alright so I'm finally getting a 5D Mark III but having my experience in Panasonic and Sony camcorders, I'm new to the DSLR world. I've been doing my far share of internet research and have seen what people are saying about glass, what lens for what situation, etc, etc, but I'm limited to purchasing only Canon Glass through a pretty deal at the moment.

I understand lens selection is widely based on shooting style and work, but I do everything from interviews, action sports, landscape, time lapses, and weddings, so I definitely need a good range; and of course there's never a one size fits all.

So here are the lenses I'm looking at getting on my tight budget. I'm probably only going to be able to get 3 and maybe possibly a fourth, but I'd like to hear some feedback on what you have or what 3 or so you'd choose if you were in my shoes so I can understand this world a little bit better.

All Canons of course:
- EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
- EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
- EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
- EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
- EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
- EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
- EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
- EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
- EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
 
- EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
- EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

I would suggest this two ones, then start shooting and see what's missing based on real-life experience, if I may say so.

L.
 
novoluc said:
- EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
- EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

I would suggest this two ones, then start shooting and see what's missing based on real-life experience, if I may say so.

L.
Click to expand...

That's pretty prudent and sound advise. Thanks


Samuel H said:
* the 40mm f/2.8 is great for stills, but basically useless for video because of the awful focus ring (it's fly-by-wire, and it has its own mind)
* apart from that one, all the others are very fine lenses, there are lots of people shooting awesome stuff with them
* the samyang 35mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 would be very high on my list http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html#samyang
Click to expand...

Good to know.
 
I bought the 24-105 f4 and with iso range so wide, it's been working fine. But if I was choosing between f2.8s I'd spend my money in the24-105. But depends on how much tele you use. I would likely add a fixed 14mm. I like wide. Often shoot with a 10mm Sigma. Not much on tele though I have the f4 version of the 70-200.
 
Last edited:
If you are also doing photography and you need autofocus, I would advise to get a Canon set like this:
EF 24-105 mm f4 IS
EF 70-200 mm f4 IS (amazing and cheaper-lighter than the 2.8)
EF 50mm f1.8 (version 1, metal mount, focus ring, value for money)
EF 85mm f1.8 (value for money)
And then an ultrawide that could be the older EF 20-35mm f2.8 (to save some $$), or the 16-35mm f2.8, the Samyang 14mm f2.8, or the fisheye EF 15mm f2.8 (amazing lens).

However, if you are doing only video, the Samyang-Rokinon lenses would be very serious candidates (14mm f2.8, 24mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4)
 
kostas said:
If you are also doing photography and you need autofocus, I would advise to get a Canon set like this:
Click to expand...

For the most part I'll only be doing video (at least on the work side of things). I imagine I'll use such a nice photobox for some personal stuff, but not for work.
 
F-stop is key. You don't want to be limited with that one F4 lens and you'll often need to shoot at F2.8 in lower light.

I have ten L-series lenses, all very good, but if I only could pick three it would be the 16-35/24-70/70-200 set.
 
Depends on what you shoot - but I like the 24-105 for IS and the extra range, the one stop over the 2.8 hasn't limited me with the 5d3 so clean at 3200+. If I were going f2.8 zoom I'd look at Tamron, sharper than the V1 Canon 24-70 and IS.

I also have the Sigma 35/85 f1.4's for low light. I went Sigma over Samyang for the AF. F1.4 means you can pretty much see in the dark with the 5d3 and not shoot obscene ISO's. YMMV...
 
If you shoot handheld at all, then don't overlook the IS on the 24-105. Also as a kit with the 5D3 it's really cheap compared to the 24-70. Another thing going for the 24-105 is that you get that little extra zoom range meaning you won't have to switch over to the 70-200 as much. For $100 you can get a 50mm 1.8 to keep in the bag for that one shot that needs to be really wide open.
And now for some unsolicited advice... Since you're only going to be shooting video, have you considered a C100? Way more like a video camera that you're used to and a much nicer video image (not counting raw, but the raw workflow may make that less attractive for you). If I were in your shoes, I'd take a good look at the C100. I know if I wasn't shooting stills half the time I would have gotten it instead of my 5D3 (which I absolutely love).
 
+1, as I said before.
Andrius Simutis said:
If you shoot handheld at all, then don't overlook the IS on the 24-105. Also as a kit with the 5D3 it's really cheap compared to the 24-70. Another thing going for the 24-105 is that you get that little extra zoom range meaning you won't have to switch over to the 70-200 as much. For $100 you can get a 50mm 1.8 to keep in the bag for that one shot that needs to be really wide open.
And now for some unsolicited advice... Since you're only going to be shooting video, have you considered a C100? Way more like a video camera that you're used to and a much nicer video image (not counting raw, but the raw workflow may make that less attractive for you). If I were in your shoes, I'd take a good look at the C100. I know if I wasn't shooting stills half the time I would have gotten it instead of my 5D3 (which I absolutely love).
Click to expand...
 
Good suggestions guys for the OP. I'm in a similar boat :)

I own a Canon 50 1.8
Rokinon 85 1.4


I'm primarily looking to do video but also a decent amount photography/time lapse (70/30)

I am not knowledgable enough on the pro/con between prime vs. zoom.

Considering my current lenses and needs would you guys suggest 24-70 (Tamron) or 70-200 (Tamron or Canon)? Or just go completely prime?

Thanks
 
Skip the 50mm
Get a 35mm 1.4 L
24-70 2.8 II L is great, but no IS - so for video, I notice much more shake. But I love the flexibility of this lens, and the newer version by FAR outperforms the original, and the price is somewhat justified, albeit very expensive still. It's a lens I plan to have for the long haul
70-200 2.8 II L is my baby. It's a workhorse, like the 24-70L and I am in love with the optics and solid build.
 
My suggestion for a bit more cost effective solution would be:

- EF 24mm f/2.8 IS for your wide and stabilizer work. This lens is amazing by the way and has a better image than the 24mm f/1.4 II I also own.
- EF 50mm f/1.4
- EF 70-200 f/4 IS

This combo allows me to film virtually any scene needed with a much lighter and compact setup. In the end of the day there really aren't any lenses in the Canon lineup that offer better image quality than these three for their respective focal lengths.

Cheers,
Pete
 
Andrius Simutis said:
If you shoot handheld at all, then don't overlook the IS on the 24-105. Also as a kit with the 5D3 it's really cheap compared to the 24-70. Another thing going for the 24-105 is that you get that little extra zoom range meaning you won't have to switch over to the 70-200 as much. For $100 you can get a 50mm 1.8 to keep in the bag for that one shot that needs to be really wide open.
And now for some unsolicited advice... Since you're only going to be shooting video, have you considered a C100? Way more like a video camera that you're used to and a much nicer video image (not counting raw, but the raw workflow may make that less attractive for you). If I were in your shoes, I'd take a good look at the C100. I know if I wasn't shooting stills half the time I would have gotten it instead of my 5D3 (which I absolutely love).
Click to expand...

I shoot a lot of action sports so I still need to be able to get 60p albiet it's only in 720p and the C100 only does 60i.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top