Comments on: What lenses should I buy?

By: eirikso

eirikso — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:44:49 +0000

Would be a nice combo. A 5D2 as the main camera and a used 5D as backup. And a full range of EF-lenses…

By: Chris Noble

Chris Noble — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:14:49 +0000

I have the 17-55mm IS (EF-S) lens on my 50D right now. When I upgrade to the 5D MkII I’m gonna find it hard to justify keeping it on my 50D as a backup camera and lens. it’s a lot of $$$$ to keep as a backup…

Maybe its time to buy a 5D MkII and a cheaper 5D as backup?

By: eirikso

eirikso — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 20:18:29 +0000

I would have waited if you don’t really need it NOW… Rumor:
http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/07/new-is-lenses-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/06/ef-24-70-f2-8l-is-cr1/

100mm Macro as a prime. Yes, indeed. I’ve borrowed the current 100mm f2.8 non IS non L Macro for a while. It is an amazingly sharp lens at all distances. But I don’t like the build and I miss the IS. So now when Canon decided to add L build and a brand new IS system it looks like a very nice one. The nine blade circular aperture will probably give it a beautiful bokeh as well.

By: Rodrigo SEPULVEDA

Rodrigo SEPULVEDA — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 19:28:52 +0000

aha! “rumors says that Canon is working on a 24-70 f2.8 L IS” – any link to that rumor ? maybe I should wait a bit then

as far as the 100mm goes. i understand how you can use it for macro work. But does it also work well as a prime lens / tele lens ?

By: eirikso

eirikso — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 19:19:41 +0000

@Rodrigo:
If you record using the internal mic you can clearly hear the noise from the stabilizer. And all the noise from whatever buttons you press on the camera. So the internal mic isn’t really useful anyway.

When recording video I use an External Røde Mic. That doesn’t pick up the noise from the stabilizer. And really: the stabilizer on the 24-104 is very, very good. And I use it all the time. Both for stills and video.

But: rumors says that Canon is working on a 24-70 f2.8 L IS… Sounds interesting.

And I will buy the new 100mm f2.8 L IS as soon as it is available. Looks fantastic. Both for portraits and for macro work.

By: JinZ

JinZ — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:59:01 +0000

No you hear no sound from the IS at all. That’s teh purpose of USM for soft focus and IS. The IS is so small u literally had to place your ear on the lens to hear it rotate. The sound recording from the camera isnt internal after all. Therefore, you wont hear it especially when ambient sounds are louder. =D You dont need IS really, the 24-70 is just fine the way it is.

By: Rodrigo SEPULVEDA

Rodrigo SEPULVEDA — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:50:12 +0000

eirik, don’t you get a brrrr… sound when you shoot video with IS ? so unless you’re dubbing it afterwards, I tend to put IS off.

also, do you need IS at 24-70mm ? shouldn’t move too much? You can always use either a tripod, or image stabilization on Movie afterwards ?

By: JinZ

JinZ — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 06:52:08 +0000

I also do a bit video now and then, but i went with 24-70, just because I thought if I needed the reach, I might as well switch to 70-200 for that long steady reach. I kind of want my 2.8 set haha. 85mm 1.2 is no doubt many people dream lens. 24mm 1.4 im not as tempting because Im more tempted by the 35mm 1.4. Many might tell you the 35 and 85 go together like siblings, one is wide enough to not get a lot of distortion and one is far ebough for clean portrait. =)

By: eirikso

eirikso — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 19:54:07 +0000

Thank you. Some interesting thoughts on the 85 vs 135 here. I ended up with the 24-105 because of the IS. Not for stills, but for video. Because I actually use my 5D MkII for quite a bit of video work.

And I know that I will probably end up with some very fast primes for that low light and high quality work.

The 85 f1.2 and 24 f1.4 being very interesting…

By: JinZ

JinZ — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:27:46 +0000

I own the 5DmarkII along with 70-200 2.8IS, 85 1.2II, 50 1.4, 12-24 f4 Tokina, and few others. Ive had experience with 135 f2L,24-70, 24-105, 200 1.8 prime many others. But from what Ive seen as result on the 5Dmark2, you will hate not going 24-70. 24-70 is a superior lens for standard zooming with 5Dmark2 hence the 2.8, the f4 IS does no justice for the mark2. You dont really need IS on 24-70. If you go in deeper you would pull out the 70-200 IS by now. Some claim the 135mm quality is the same as 85mm 1.2, let me tell you that its not, Canon will never make a lens 1000$ more for no reason. 85mm1.2 is far softer “dreamier” looking than 135mm. To me the 135mm is only really soft bokeh whereas the 85mm is dreamy (mark that term dreamy because its the only lens out there in any brand can do such thing.) Wide I would go with a 16-35 or wider. If im going wide i really want it wide, if not I can survive with 24mm from the 24-70. Thats my opinion. You may find a better set up if you wish.