First Canon L-Series Lens recommendations

themurgs · Mar 4, 2012

Hi all, I'm looking to make more of a serious leap into photography and it's time to get some serious L-series glass. I'm looking around the $1000-1500 mark and some early considerations are the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L or the 135mm f2 L. Options are further complicated by the new 24-70 mark 2... (worth waiting for it to get cheaper?)

Currently I have a Canon 40D with 50mm 1.4, Tokina 11-16 2.8 and Tamron 17-50 2.8. I'm looking at upgrading to the new 5D Mark III next year and would like to build on my lens collection in the meantime. The 50mm is typically on my camera and I'm a fan of portraiture, low-light and event photography.

Any suggestions/experience/advice would be great.

Cheers!

EIngerson · Mar 4, 2012

If you have $1500, I recommend the 17-55 F/2.8 and the 70-200 F/4 L. I don't think you'll have any complaints with that combo.

Big Mike · Mar 4, 2012

EIngerson said:
If you have $1500, I recommend the 17-55 F/2.8 and the 70-200 F/4 L. I don't think you'll have any complaints with that combo.

That's a bad suggestion IMO. The 17-55mm F2.8, while it's a great lens, is an EF-S lens, and thus is not compatible with full frame cameras like the 5D series. Nor is it an L lens, like the OP said they wanted.

The 70-200mm F4 is a good lens, especially the IS version. Although, you may find yourself wanting the F2.8 version, sooner or later.

I might suggest the 17-40mm F4L. It could be used in place of your Tamron (which could be sold) and then will make a great wide angle when you upgrade to the 5DmkIII.

TheBiles · Mar 4, 2012

You can't go wrong with the 24-70 or the 24-105. The 24-70 II isn't even close to worth the price tag, IMO.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

gsgary · Mar 4, 2012

EIngerson said:
If you have $1500, I recommend the 17-55 F/2.8 and the 70-200 F/4 L. I don't think you'll have any complaints with that combo.

That would be the EF-S lens that would be no good when upgrading to 5D ?

Robin Usagani · Mar 4, 2012

It is really depend what you want to do with photography. I would get a 70-200 f/2.8L IS mk 1 (used) for around $1300.

EIngerson · Mar 4, 2012

Big Mike said:
EIngerson said:

If you have $1500, I recommend the 17-55 F/2.8 and the 70-200 F/4 L. I don't think you'll have any complaints with that combo.

Click to expand...

That's a bad suggestion IMO. The 17-55mm F2.8, while it's a great lens, is an EF-S lens, and thus is not compatible with full frame cameras like the 5D series. Nor is it an L lens, like the OP said they wanted.

The 70-200mm F4 is a good lens, especially the IS version. Although, you may find yourself wanting the F2.8 version, sooner or later.

I might suggest the 17-40mm F4L. It could be used in place of your Tamron (which could be sold) and then will make a great wide angle when you upgrade to the 5DmkIII.

Yup, I didn't catch the "upgrade to the 5D MKIII" part. I was stuck on the 40D and $1500 limit.

table1349 · Mar 4, 2012

Pick the focal length or focal length range you need and go from there. The 300 mm f2.8 and 400 mm f2.8 are as sharp as any L glass on the market. Problem is, they don't sound like they fit your needs. Pinpoint the need then look at what fills the need. From what you mention my first choice would be the 85mm f1.2L. I have it and I love it, especially for portrait work. Not the best low light lens if you are looking at action but otherwise not bad.

Tony S · Mar 4, 2012

So what is your main subject you like to take photos of? This will greatly influence which lenses you should be looking at. Macro, event, portraits, sports, scenic ??? All have different requirements and there is no one "do it all lens".

FWIW, I would seriously look at the 70-200 2.8 IS . For me and my general shooting it's the one that's on my camera all the time that I use the most, after that it's the 24-70 2.8, but I have the luxury of two bodies so they both have full time homes on a camera.

analog.universe · Mar 4, 2012

I'm a prime junkie, so I like your idea of the 135L

You could get the 135 f/2 and the 85 f/1.8 for <$1500...

penfolderoldo · Mar 5, 2012

For me it would be the 24-70 2.8L - I use it pretty much every day for my press work and it's sharp as a tack. I'd go for that and the Sigma 85 1.4, tho that may well take you over the $1500. Killer combo tho.

themurgs · Mar 6, 2012

Thanks for the suggestions everyone. I'm pretty much sold on the 24-70. Mostly as the mark I is a great price at the moment and I can set my sights on a good set of primes + a 70-200 later down the track.