Lens for Mk3

New_Zealand

New_Zealand

Veteran
I'm thinking of getting the Mk3 but was wondering should I get it with the kit lens or would I be better off getting just the body and a different lens? What have you MK3 owners done?
 
I opted for the 24-70mm and am pleased with my choice. I can live without the IS that the 24-105mm offers at this range but during some circumstances, I can see how it'd be helpful. Again, the question becomes - what type of stuff do you shoot? I assume you'd like an all purpose lens and don't plan on getting primes?

Kegan
 
you'd have to give people some more info... for example: what are you shooting? you can go for primes for narrative, but for weddings a couple of f/2.8 zooms might be better...
 
I should have been more at the point. I'm working on a feature film and finished all the present day scenes and now will be working on all the past scenes (1777 A.D.) I have a Tamron 17-50 lens but was told that it won't work with the Mkiii - Thanks
 
Indeed, the tamron 17-50 won't work on the 5D3, it's an amazing lens but only work on APS-C sensors

I would suggest one of the following:

A) A set of vintage Leitz lenses for Leica-R mount. That's what I have, and they're awesome. Sharp, with amazing bokeh, and with great image all-round.
Something like: Elmarit-R 35mm f/2.8, Summilux-R 50mm f/1.4, Elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8, Elmarit-R 135mm f/2.8
Only downside: vintage is kind of a lottery - http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsc.html
Plus: vintage wide angles are not usually great, so consider filling that gap with something like a Canon 16-35 f/2.8L (or 17-40 f/4L if your budget doesn't allow for the more expensive one; but they're not the same...) (the tokina 16-24 is interesting too) (you'll probably only use any of these as a 17-24 anyway: the Elmarit-R 35mm f/2.8 is a truly amazing lens)
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
on an even tighter budget, the canon 24mm f/2.8 can fill that gap too; it's not too wide or too fast, but it's sharp (for a cheap lens that works on full frame):
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...LensComp=246&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

B) A set of cheap vintage primes (cheaper than the Leicas above), for an "old" look. But I usually prefer to get my images pristine in-camera, and kill them later, in post, in a controlled environment.
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsv.html
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html

C) A set of Samyang primes, with a Canon 50mm to fill that gap
Samyang 35mm f/1.4, Canon 50mm f/1.4 (or Nikkor 50mm f/1.4), Samyang 85mm f/1.4
Plus Canon 70-200 f/4L IS (sharper than the f/4L non-IS, and I think also a bit better than the f/2.8 non-IS), and maybe Samyang 24mm f/1.4 (jury still out on this one) or Canon wide angle zoom

D) A Canon 24-70 f/2.8L. I like overthinking everything, but that should actually be enough for most things, including this.
 
Last edited:
I have the Canon EF 24-70 f2.8 L USM, EF 24-105 F4 L IS USM in the wide end. Am currently testing a Canon EF 16-35 f2.8 L II USM. I find this lens is pretty sharp and am able to handhold it better than the EF 24-70 f2.8 L USM lens. I am yet to test the new Canon EF 24-70 f2.8 L II USM lens.

The Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM is a very sharp lens with great image stabilisation. The IS is great help when handholding.

I am also testing the Canon EF 100mm f2.8 L macro IS USM on loan from Canon. It is great for filming handheld. The IS is terrific. The lens is light and won't harm you as well. I am not sure why I haven't seen many people filming with it. On a full frame body, 100mm shouldn't be an issue.
 
Yeah, the 100mm f2.8L macro is awesome. I've been actually using it on the Canon 7d. A bit tele. But awesome! Focus can be slightly difficult for moderate distances as it's more tuned to macroshots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top