A 5D body and no lenses. What to get?

[William Michael]

<p>Thank you for your prompt response.</p>

<p>There are many similar questions in the Wedding & Social Events Forum, your cause would be well served to spend a little time researching. I have been vocal on many, you could research my history too.</p>

<p>In a nutshell and as a summary of my many thought on similar questions my thrust is you need to firstly consider what your final kit is to be – chosen from what is available today.</p>

<p>The most important element of this choice, is the format(s) you intend use.</p>

<p>Taken as a given, that you will need at least two bodies, perhaps three, then the first consideration is: Will the kit to be Dual Format or Single Format?</p>

<p>The point is, IMO, the single three incredible advantages of a DSLR system compared to FILM shooting, 10 years ago are:</p>

<p>> Capacity to vary ISO with a dial<br>

> Capacity to shoot simultaneously for B&W and Colour Output<br>

> Capacity to use Two Formats with one set of Lenses</p>

<p>The first two of these advantages were seen by may W&P Studios as they made the change to Digital and taking advantage of the light weight and ever increasing sensor quality at higher ISO, a “second camera” became the “Back Up Camera”.</p>

<p>Whereas ten years ago it was commonplace for a W&P Photographer (and a Newspaper Photographer) to carry at least two WORKING cameras – one with Colour Film and one with B&W, or, maybe one with fast film and one with slow film and Flash.</p>

<p>Also, for Weddings it was common to use 6x6, 645, or 6x7 as a supplement to the 135 format.</p>

<p>But is seems to me that in the transition to Digital the advantage of using a Dual Format and TWO working DSLR’s is often overlooked – you might consider it.</p>

<p>Apropos Lenses - my Full Wedding Kit is:</p>

<p>> 15F/2.8 Fish; 24F/1.4L; 35F/1.4L; 50F/1.4; 85F/1.8; 100F/2.8Macro; 135F2/L;<br>

> 16 to 35F2.8L MkII; 70 to 200F/2.8L</p>

<p>> X1.4MkII; x2.0MkII</p>

<p>> 5D; 20D; 30D</p>

<p>> DSLR (Back up) 400D</p>

<p>> 303b + 45mm (Film Back Up)</p>

<p>> Up until about eight months ago I still did Formal Wedding Portraits (on location) with a Full 645 rig. (Two bodies, five lenses including a Leaf Shutter 80mm)</p>

<p>Of my DSLR, kit about 90% of the Wedding / Social Events images are done with only the following FOUR lenses, TWO working bodies, by exploiting the FoV Leverage of using DUAL Formats:</p>

<p>24L; 50; 135L and 16 to 35L</p>

<p>So I drive (for example) a 30D and the 16 to 35 with one of the fast Primes on the 5D and the other two lenses in my pockets. Even though it is “doubling up” I often take the 85 in my pocket instead of the 135, as the 85 on a 5D is really nice for the proximity within which I like to work (and still keep the 30D with the zoom attached)</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>Suggestions for you:</p>

<p>As you liked the 35-105 then perhaps you should consider looking at either the 24 to 105 or the 24 to 70 . . . as I mentioned there are 76 zillion threads on that debate – for mine I would opt for the 24 to 70, because of the aperture.</p>

<p>But I own neither because I can swing the 16 to 35 onto the 30D and use it as my main working zoom / camera combination. If I were in need to update my APS-C bodies, I would opt for a 7D – with the extended quality ISO of the 7D the 16 to 35 would sing, IMO.</p>

<p>To the Primes – I think that the canon 28F/1.8 is somewhat wanting at the edges on a 5D, and that’s why I have the 24L - also the 24 on an APS-C is more useful IMO. There is no rule which says one needs to full the whole frame – I often use my 24 with the intention to crop to what would be the FoV of a 28mm or even 30mm.</p>

<p>Personally I think that owning a 5D one should have a 50mm lens. Given the extra information I would choose the 50F/1.4 – if not for the 1/3 stop, then for the extra Blades and the FTMF.</p>

<p>On the longer end I think the 85F/1.8 is one of the best, if not the best consumer grade lenses Canon makes, and it is wonderful on the 5D: better still is the 135L, but it is a different Focal Length.</p>

<p>Personally I would not buy the 100F/2. I have not used this lens, and I have nothing against it, but it seems for a Wedding Kit an erroneous choice to my Business Thinking – the 100F/2.8Macro being the better choice (if I were buying now I would buy the IS version) – especially the 100Macro makes better sense if one also owns the 85F/1.8. If you need fast aperture speed, it is only a very little crop to get to the FoV of 100mm from an image taken with the 85mm lens.</p>

<p>So I guess you are gleaning that my way of thinking is taking the kit as a whole and working backwards from that point.</p>

<p>Also I like having a Purchasing Timeline, if the purchases are to be staggered, and that timeline has Priority Purchases, based upon need – hence my first answer (suggesting two lenses, a 35 and a 50) addressed only “<em><strong>location</strong></em><em> portraits of children and families<strong>”</strong></em><br>

<em><strong></strong></em><br>

<em><strong>*** </strong></em><br>

<em><strong></strong></em><br>

<em><strong></strong></em><br>

It seems there is a slight contradiction in your statements, and I guess that could be that you are thinking this through as you write and digest the feedback thus far: <strong></strong></p>

<p><em>“Also, due to funds, I'm not completely against buying off-brand and getting a Tamron”</em> vs. <em>“I would prefer to start off with high quality lenses and then add on as I re-establish my shooting.”</em><br>

<em></em><br>

I am not suggesting that when considering like to like, Tamron is inferior – I am not starting that debate.</p>

<p>I guess one of the most debated comparisons is the Canon 24 70 F/2.8 vs. Tamron 28 75 F/2.8.</p>

<p>If you want some comment on this, then search posts by <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=271274">Nadine Ohara </a>, mainly in the Wedding and Social Events forum, in summary, and from memory:</p>

<p>> Tamron is lighter (weight)<br>

> gives 5mm more on the long at the loss of 4mm at the wide<br>

> fits smaller hands better<br>

> focus (and zoom rings?) rotate opposite to Canon – (not sure about the zoom ring)<br>

> wide open is sharp at the edges at 28, losses a bit of edge sharpness at 75<br>

> is less expensive<br>

> has 5 years warrantee</p>

<p>I have not used this lens. I trust Nadine’s opinion. She is a very experienced W&P Photographer.</p>

<p>Given the choice, I would not use the Tamron as my main working zoom, because it does not give me 24 at the wide: and by logic I can always move the equivalent of 5mm closer, but when one’s back is against the wall one cannot move the equivalent of 4mm backwards and that would be the deciding criterion for me. But as I mentioned I don’t own a 24 to 70 or a 24 to 105, either.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>When I kitted out the studio for conversion to DSLR I began with a (actually several) blank sheets of paper and listed all the outcomes based on shots <strong><em>we actually took.</em></strong><br>

<strong><em></em></strong><br>

Next I made a list of all the possibilities of the gear required to achieve those outcomes. You could do something like that, I am sure.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>Perhaps, also read this, you will find an exercise at the end, even though doing the exercise might be an exercise in guessometry for you, you will get benefit from doing the exercise, I think.</p>

<p><a href="../wedding-photography-forum/00V98v">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00V98v</a></p>

<p>WW</p>

[kamush1664878711]

<blockquote>

<p>However, I am hard pushed to think of a WORSE Canon L zoom optically - let alone the claim that it's one of the most "optically perfect zoom lenses ever"...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think John is completely right about versatility in usage but I can't agree when it comes to a WORSE L zoom... I didn't tell it's best L zoom but 'one of the' optically perfect lenses... It's an L lens in the end... Though it's drawbacks appear at 24 mm... It's probably impossible to name another lens with this zoom range and comparable optical quality... 24-70 is better at 24mm but not that advantageous at the other end where 24-105 speaks...<br>

there are some links and reasons to buy this lens 'For 5D'...<br>

1-) http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx <br>

If I had only one lens, this would be the one. </p>

<p>2-)http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon24105mmL/index.shtml<br>

Its relatively high list price and the compelling advantages of the quicker EF 24-70mm and cheaper EF 17-40mm ultimately prevent us from awarding it a Highly Recommended, but it remains the best overall choice for most new 5D owners looking for a standard zoom.</p>

<p>3-)http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=295&sort=7&cat=27&page=1</p>

<p>4-)http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/28-105.shtml<br>

24-105 has definitely taken its place in my bag, replacing the 24-70 as my general purpose medium focal length zoom.</p>

[marcie m]

<p>WW, an immense thank you for your post. I will have to come back to read it again later in order to digest it all. On my first read, you hit the nail on the head for the reasons of my OP:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Also I like having a Purchasing Timeline, if the purchases are to be staggered, and that timeline has Priority Purchases, based upon need – hence my first answer (suggesting two lenses, a 35 and a 50) addressed only “</em> <em><strong>location</strong> </em> <em> portraits of children and families<strong>”</strong> </em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have a priority list of equipment purchases:</p>

<ul>

<li>Camera body, check!</li>

<li>Two high quality lenses for location portraits</li>

<li>Build a new purchase fund and re-evaluate camera bag. Then set new purchase list.</li>

</ul>

<p><strong>Thanks again!</strong> <em><strong><br /> </strong> </em></p>

[William Michael]

<p><strong><em>"I have a priority list of equipment purchases:</em></strong><br>

· <strong><em>Two high quality lenses for location portraits"</em></strong></p>

<p>Yes.</p>

<p>Well ensure that <strong><em>YOU</em></strong> define what high quality lenses you buy and that the purchase be predicated on:<br>

your Vision;<br>

your Shooting Style;<br>

you Client Rapport / Interaction;<br>

your Technique (the technical aspect).</p>

<p>Obviously, the two lenses I would choose would be:<br>

> the 35F/1.4L and<br>

> the 50F/1.4,</p>

<p>And (as an insight for you), I would choose those because I quite like:<br>

Working Close;<br>

using Available Light<br>

having a full range from Long Shot to tight Half Shot available to me.</p>

<p>With these two lenses I could work indoors or outdoors and mostly accommodate a Family of Six and the Dog . . . long shot in situ providing enough air around the subjects for atmosphere and location . . . through to an Half Shot Portraiture of only One Person.</p>

<p>YMMV.</p>

<p>Just think it through logically what it is exactly you need now.<br>

Crikey! it might only be a 35mm lens which satisfies your criteria <strong><em>initially</em></strong> . . .</p>

<p>Alternatively, I could argue that a 35 and 85 would be a good pair, or an extreme case for <strong><em>Location</em></strong> portraiture (Emphasis on "Location") a 24 and 50.</p>

<p>Just also bear in mind what the <strong><em>whole kit</em></strong> will be at the end.</p>

<p>You already have the flying hours up, just trust your gut. Just because it is Digital and it is Canon, it is nothing special or new to you.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p><strong><em>"an immense thank you for your post"</em></strong></p>

<p>Well . . . on reading your second post and expanded history . . . it just seemed the thing to do at the time as I understand working for a NewsPaper, we need second job to pay the bills . . .<br>

I am glad my thoughts found a nice home. . . you owe me a beer when we meet at the Jurno's Club :)</p>

<p>Best to you,</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>FYI:<strong><em> “Location”</em></strong> Portraiture example of a 24L on a 5D, an example that it doesn't need to be a long shot: <a href="../photo/9567749">http://www.photo.net/photo/9567749</a></p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[William Michael]

<p >And an example of “Location” Portraiture using a 50mm on a 5D (same Girl).</p>

<p > </p>

<p >There are no rules which say you cannot crop in post production to get really tight: <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/9272173&size=md">http://www.photo.net/photo/9272173&size=md</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >WW</p><div></div>