If you could only choose 3 lenses.... Canon ef mount

rokvi

TPF Noob!
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
629
Reaction score
97
Location
Queensland
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
MLeeK said:
85mm f/1.2 But the 1.8 would do
70-200 f/2.8 L IS II
24-70 F/2.8

Omg someone actually answered the question, don't see that often.
Why don't you take a flying leap? I have answered your questions repeatedly. AND I go into detail as to why my answer is what it is. You didn't like my answers. How 'bout you GTFO?

Misconstrued is the word here, I think.
 

KenC

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
5,700
Reaction score
1,472
Location
Philadelphia
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
Mine is different from most, which goes to the point that everyone needs to figure this out for themselves.

28/2.8, 50/1.8 and 100/2.8 macro

I also use the 70-300 IS quite a bit, but if I had to choose between it and the macro, I would have to have the macro lens.
 

3bayjunkie

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
576
Reaction score
12
Location
United States of America
Website
www.colbyjack.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
KenC said:
Mine is different from most, which goes to the point that everyone needs to figure this out for themselves.

28/2.8, 50/1.8 and 100/2.8 macro

I also use the 70-300 IS quite a bit, but if I had to choose between it and the macro, I would have to have the macro lens.

The 50/1.8 is a horrible lens. Why wouldnt you pick the 1.4?
 

MLeeK

TPF Noob!
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
6,761
Reaction score
1,380
Location
NY
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
KenC said:
Mine is different from most, which goes to the point that everyone needs to figure this out for themselves.

28/2.8, 50/1.8 and 100/2.8 macro

I also use the 70-300 IS quite a bit, but if I had to choose between it and the macro, I would have to have the macro lens.

The 50/1.8 is a horrible lens. Why wouldnt you pick the 1.4?
The 50 f/1.8 isn't a HORRIBLE lens. For it's price? It's really pretty amazing. It's cheap as hell and produces a sharper quality than the consumer grade lenses. Sure, the 1.4 is a much better lens and a huge improvement on the build, but to say the 1.8 is a horrible lens is just not true. It is what it is and if you expect it to be the same as the 1.4 at a hundred bucks? Well, then you might want to re-think that.
I'd much prefer it to some much "better" zoom lenses for image quality.
 

3bayjunkie

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
576
Reaction score
12
Location
United States of America
Website
www.colbyjack.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
MLeeK said:
The 50 f/1.8 isn't a HORRIBLE lens. For it's price? It's really pretty amazing. It's cheap as hell and produces a sharper quality than the consumer grade lenses. Sure, the 1.4 is a much better lens and a huge improvement on the build, but to say the 1.8 is a horrible lens is just not true. It is what it is and if you expect it to be the same as the 1.4 at a hundred bucks? Well, then you might want to re-think that.
I'd much prefer it to some much "better" zoom lenses for image quality.

I have the 1.8 and I've owned a nikon 1.4 so i know the difference. My whole point was he could pick any three lenses. Why would you pick an inferior lens when its just a theoretical list...
 

KenC

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
5,700
Reaction score
1,472
Location
Philadelphia
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
MLeeK said:
The 50 f/1.8 isn't a HORRIBLE lens. For it's price? It's really pretty amazing. It's cheap as hell and produces a sharper quality than the consumer grade lenses. Sure, the 1.4 is a much better lens and a huge improvement on the build, but to say the 1.8 is a horrible lens is just not true. It is what it is and if you expect it to be the same as the 1.4 at a hundred bucks? Well, then you might want to re-think that.
I'd much prefer it to some much "better" zoom lenses for image quality.

I have the 1.8 and I've owned a nikon 1.4 so i know the difference. My whole point was he could pick any three lenses. Why would you pick an inferior lens when its just a theoretical list...


Theoretical and "price is no object" are not the same, and I didn't assume I had unlimited funds. For me the 1.8 is just fine - I've used it constantly for more than four years without any problem and it provides very good IQ. I've heard the bokeh is not good, but if I'm looking for a blurred background I'm going to use a longer lens, so not an issue for me.
 

ronlane

What's next?
Joined
Aug 3, 2012
Messages
10,192
Reaction score
4,911
Location
Mustang Oklahoma
Website
www.lane-images.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I would pick:

24-70 f/2.8L II USM or 24-105 f/4L IS USM
70-200 f/2.8L IS II
100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM or 400 f/5.6L USM

I haven't tried the 24-70, 100-400 or the 400 but from reviews and reading I believe that a combination of these lenses would suite my needs and style of shooting.
 

sovietdoc

No longer a newbie, moving up!
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
1,142
Reaction score
75
Location
rest of the world
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Upcoming 14-24 f/2.8, 24-70 II f/2.8, 70-200 II f/2.8. Good luck covering the same focal length with anything else with that IQ and low-light performance.
 

tedyun

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I have the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8, 70-200 mm f/2.8 and the 50mm f/1.4. I'm pretty happy with these for what I shoot. If I wanted to keep the option for upgrading to a FF, I would get the 24-70 f/2.8 instead of the 17-55.

I think you should go over the EXIF info from your photos and figure out what focal length you generally use, and go from there. But in general, I think Big Mike's Holy Trinity would give you a lot of versatility.


I am new to the hobby and just purchased a new t3i to get started. I have the 18-55 that came with it and a i have a 75-300 ef III that i purchased with a digital rebel many years ago. what I want to know is if you could only have 3 lenses for the canon ef mount, which ones would it be? Please include any L series lenses in primes or zooms. I will eventually own FF camera, so i want my lenses to be able to move to the new camera when that time comes. I shoot everything that seems of interest. ie the moon, flowers, my motorcycle, landscapes, im kinda like an adhd photographer....lol.

thanks for the input
 

ScubaDude

TPF Noob!
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
176
Reaction score
22
Location
Waveland, MS
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
If I could have only three lenses:
EF 300mm f/2.8L II
EF 500mm f/4L II
EF 800mm f/5.6L
 

TCampbell

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
3,614
Reaction score
1,556
Location
Dearborn, MI
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
The first is easy:

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II -- this is a bread-n-butter lens. Just about every professional has this lens (or an equivalent of it) in their bag. I own the original, not the "II" (tragically, they released the II within a year of me buying the original... <sigh>). The original is a fantastic lens but the II has even better detail resolution at the extreme edges of the frame.

The second is a toss-up:

Many pros or enthusiasts will EITHER own the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L -or- the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS. The EF 24-70mm f/2.8L just got rev'd to a "II" which seemed to be a myth until they finally started shipping in various countries are should be shipping in most countries within about a month. Expect supplies to be constrained as there are a lot of people on the waiting list for it. The "II" is a bit different than the original. The original (which I own) is a "reverse zoom" meaning when the lens is extended it's in the wide-angle length and when it's retracted it's zoomed. I understand the "II" is not a reverse zoom. I actually prefer the reverse zoom from a lens-hood perspective. The II has an 82mm filter diameter (vs. the 77mm on the original.)

The 24-105 is slightly more convenient as a "walking around" lens and it offers image stabilization (the 24-70's are not image stabilized) but IS only helps when the camera is moving... when the subject is moving then having a lower focal ratio has the advantage. You can also push more background blur with an f/2.8 focal ratio than you can with an f/4.

The third lens will really depend on what you like to do. It's always nice to own a very low focal ratio prime, but possibly you want a true macro lens. So you could go with the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro, or you could go for a lower focal ratio prime such as the 50mm f/1.4 or the 85mm f/1.2L. I own the 100mm macro but I find myself doing several events so I decided I really wanted the EF 135mm f/2L.
 

pixmedic

I am the Lord thy Mod
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2012
Messages
15,377
Reaction score
7,637
Location
Central Florida
Website
www.flickr.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
i would say the majority would pick the trinity...for obvious reasons..a REAL interesting exercise would be to pick three lenses NOT in the Trinity. alternative setup to the big three. pick THREE lenses that are NOT in the trinity....GO GO GO
I would go 50mm 1.4, 24-105 f4, and 200mm f/2.8 (and if you want to call the 24-105 f/4 a cop out, then I would go 100 or 135mm f/2.8)
 

sovietdoc

No longer a newbie, moving up!
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
1,142
Reaction score
75
Location
rest of the world
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
i would say the majority would pick the trinity...for obvious reasons..a REAL interesting exercise would be to pick three lenses NOT in the Trinity. alternative setup to the big three. pick THREE lenses that are NOT in the trinity....GO GO GO
I would go 50mm 1.4, 24-105 f4, and 200mm f/2.8 (and if you want to call the 24-105 f/4 a cop out, then I would go 100 or 135mm f/2.8)

Okay:

105 f/2.8L macro IS
24mm f/3.5L TS-E II
50mm f/1.2

Screw the tele end.
 

bratkinson

No longer a newbie, moving up!
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
1,643
Reaction score
318
Location
Western MA
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
My favorite trio is the 16-35 f2.8 L II, 24-105 F4 L, and 135 f2.0 L. These three lenses are 95% or more of my shooting.

Before the OP decides on "this must be the magic (aka "perfect") combination, it should be noted that what I mostly shoot is probably NOT what he is/wants to/will be shooting. I do most of my shooting in church, and the bulk of everything else, downtown city scapes (I spent Monday in downtown Chicago shooting away...).
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

ClickASnap
Top