Help me decide (or convince me) which lenses to use for 5diii

<p>I am a Nikon user. Sold my D700 and D800 is nowhere in sight. So I settle with 5dmkiii for temporary. I still keep my nikon lenses.<br>

<br />The first lens I bought was 135/2.0L. Very good lens. Sharp wide open center to border. I might keep the canon just because of this lens. Nikon doesn't have anything like this. Second lens was 40/2.8 STM pancake. Also sharp wide open, center to edge, but a bit slow. We are going to have family vacation in two weeks, and i need to add a few more lenses. <br>

<br />For primes, I have considered:<br>

85/1.8, 100/2.0, or 200/2.8. I read very good reviews about these lenses from various sites. Below 85mm, not so good reviews. All the 50mm family (nikon, sigma, canon) don't impress me. Sharp at center but lousy at edges. Edge sharpness is important for me. Canon new wide primes, 24/2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS seems nice. But I haven't seen a single thorough review on these lenses yet. So i am not convinced on these 2. <br>

<br />For zoom, I only consider tamron 24-70/2.8 VC right now. i wouldn't buy canon 16-35 or 24-70mk1 right now because they are not good performers comparing to nikon versions. I can't settle for less. Tamron is not a better performer either but at least it has VC and cheaper (than canon). Reading the MTF diagram, tamron is a bit better than the canon.<br>

For ultra wide zoom, I still don't have a candidate yet. <br>

Since AF is important feature for me, i wouldn't buy an adapter for nikon lenses. <br>

<br />Anyone has any insight / thought about canon (or any third party) lens selection? I'd appreciate it.</p>

 

<p>From your needs I would recommend 100 F/2.8 IS, 70-200 F/2.8 IS M2, 85 F/1.8 is a very good lens especially for sharpness and resolution. If you like BOKEH in portraits 85 F/1.2 is the best there is in 35mm format. I personally prefer 100 to 135 and I have both. I would be willing to bet that the new 24-70 F/2.8 M2 is one heck of a lens if you've got the money and can find one. I think this should give a a heck of a running start. Good luck with your poor excuse for a camera, compared to D800 but still one of the best bodies in the world, for its purpose.</p>

<p>For family vacation, you could do a lot worse than the 24-105 L zoom, with IS and constant f/4. I know all about the advantages of fast prime lenses (especially of the L category, like the 24, 35, 50, 85), but for vacation nothing beats a good zoom.<br>

A quick run through Lightroom's lens correction module, and the 24-105 can really shine. If you really prefer primes, than the new 24 and 28 IS lenses will be nice.</p>

<p>50mm lenses 'lousy at edges'? Have you considered the 50mm macro lenses like Canon's 50/2.5 or Sigma's 50/2.8? They're usually pretty good across the whole frame even wide open, and stopped down are painfully sharp. They also cost less than the fast f/1.4 lenses.</p>

<p>I'd certainly try the 24-70/2.8 VC first. Wider than that? 17/4 TS or 21/2.8. Both will give you top-IQ but alas, no AF. Though I am an AF lover like you, in this specific case I'd make an exception.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim. </p>

<p>Honestly, I think your plan for biding time with the Canon outfit (while awaiting the D800) is utter lunacy. You must be ridiculously wealthy.</p>

<p>If you want to spend lots of money right now, buy Leica. If you ultimately want the D800, why not just wait for it? If you need something/anything to use for the family vacation snapshots until then, why not pick up an older crop Nikon used -- just to use until you can buy the D800?</p>

<p>There's nothing slouchy about Canon optics, by the way!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>All the 50mm family (nikon, sigma, canon) don't impress me</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh dear - then you have two options: the Zeiss ZE 50mm macro or get a Leica M9 with APO Summicron 50 or 50 Summilux ASPH. I have to say, I agree with Sarah: you must have $$$$, but in addition feel you are very dogmatic and rather unrealistic. The Nikon and Canon 24-70s are much of a muchness taking their performance as a whole. Have you actually tried them? We have to wait and see whether the new 24-70II L will really stand out from the crowd - it may not. I think your quest for ultimate sharpness is an impossible dream and from the way you write may actually stand in the way of you getting good photos.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>From your needs I would recommend 100 F/2.8 IS, 70-200 F/2.8 IS M2, 85 F/1.8 is a very good lens especially for sharpness and resolution</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The macro 100/2.8 IS? I don't shoot macro. People say dedicated macro lens AF is slow. Nikon 105/2.8VR is rather slow so I tossed it away. I don't know about the canon. 70-200/2.8 is too overkill in size, weight and price for vacation. And the color...uhhh...there is no way i use that white lens. lol. I am leaning toward 100/2.0, should I get the tamron 24-70VC.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>For family vacation, you could do a lot worse than the 24-105 L zoom, with IS and constant f/4. I know all about the advantages of fast prime lenses (especially of the L category, like the 24, 35, 50, 85), but for vacation nothing beats a good zoom.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Nikon has a similar lens 24-120/4VR but i never considered getting one. I never consider lenses slower than f/2.8. Speed is essential for me. There are times when slow lens is ok like studio photoshoot, landscape/cityscape on tripod but that's only like less than 20% of my shooting activity. Else, i am moving on my feet, capturing moving object, shooting events in low light indoor, etc.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>50mm lenses 'lousy at edges'? Have you considered the 50mm macro lenses like Canon's 50/2.5 or Sigma's 50/2.8?</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />At f/2.8, all this cheap 50/1.8 has good performance already. </p>

<p>Edward, buy a new or used Nikon body that will use your current superb Nikon glass and will get you through your vacation. Have a nice trip.</p>

<p>Whether Canon, Nikon, Leica, or whomever, f/4 is only a stop slower than f/2.8. It's very easy to gain that stop right back with the higher ISO capabilities of a newer generation of sensor. The reason people are recommending slower optics to you is that you crave only the sharpest images. Slower optics tend to be (very slightly) sharper. Also the reason people are recommending macro lenses is that they have superior edge sharpness, not that they expect you will be photographing bugs on flowers. These are all good recommendations.</p>

<p>If you want a lens that you can shoot wide open at f/1.2 and get a tack sharp image from corner to corner, you will have to use it only at night during your dreams.</p>

<p>I don't understand why you can't get the D800? </p>

<p>Take a look at lensrentals.com and rent a D700 or D800 for the vacation.</p>

<p>Gods, as much as I abhor another one of these "discussions", I must say this- I've used the Nikkor 24-120 f/4 and assure you, it in no way "compares" to the 24-105L. Apples to lemons if you will.<br>

I think you're well advised to rent an appropriate F mount body with your existing gear and steer clear of Canon. I think using some of this inferior Canon gear could create cognitive dissonance.... ;-)</p>

<p> </p>