Which Canon all around lens to go with the 5D?

[flameangel88]

I'll be getting the Canon 5D and the 100mm macro lens delivered sometime toward the end of the week. After purchasing this set budget will be tight and need a flash also.

Read a few reviews and came to the conclusion that in other to benefit from this camera one must use high quality lens. Someone suggested to get the 17-40mm, 24-70mm f/2.8 lens.

I was thinking in the line of 50mm f/1.4 to get started but then would it made more sense to get the 24-70mm now and a flash then get the wide and tele lens later.

I'm open to any suggestions. Do you think I can get by with the 430EX flash or I should just spend the extra for the 580EX?

Thanks for reading and any suggestions are welcome!

[jwedehase]

Flash: Get the 430. The primary difference in the 580 is master/slave capability, though there is certainly more power in the 580. Even if you want to go master/slave (multiple strobes), you'll be able to use the 430 in the slave configuration.

All purpose lens? That 24-70mm f/2.8L is AWESOME, but pricy. If you can swing it, I'd not even hesitate on that lens, it has a phenomenal reputation. I've used the 17-40, and it's certainly nice, and also a lot cheaper than the 24-70, but it might be a little on the wide side for All-Around.

[spline9]

I'm going to vouch for the 430EX flash. I just picked one up a few weeks ago and absolutely love it. If you're on a budget, definately choose it over the 580EX because you probably wont use what the 580EX offers over the 430EX (not yet at least).

If youre wondering about power, dont. The 430EX has plenty of it. The 580EX is just obnoxious powerful.

Here is a pic I took at Medieval Times last night. Without the flash, it wouldve been a huge blurry mess.


Here is an indoor shot to demonstrate its metering capabilities. Despite the point_and_shooter's experience with flashes, this wont blow out your shots. Especially with the ability to turn the flash head and direct the light elsewhere.
This pic was taken after midnight so thats not sunlight. Just an incandescent lamp and the flash bounced off the wall.

[PL-Reef]

I just picked up the 24-70 and would never look back!! Love that lens. If you can afford it, I'd say go for it.

[beerguy]

You might want to look at the 24-105 IS as well. It's a smaller package (i.e. I love my 24-70 but it's a big heavy beast) but the caveat is that it's f/4.

[flameangel88]

Beerguy,

Thanks for the suggestion on the 24-105 and your remark is exactly what I got from another canon user who opted for the 24-70. I was initially looking at the 50mm f/1.8 to get thru the holidays and the person suggested the minimun I should be using is the 50mm f/1.4 but just seems everyone is suggesting the 24-70mm lens. My dilemma is do I buy the 55mm f/1.4 now and get the 24-70mm later or that would kinda duplicate lens coverage at the 50mm range? I suppose I can sell the 50mm f/1.4 later when I'm ready to spend the big $$ for a better lens.

[PL-Reef]

I'm newer to the hobby and owned the 50 (until someone broke it on me) It was a great little lens, but for my personal preferance I enjoy haveing the zooms, to have more then one focal area, especially for a walk around lens. The nifty is great for portraits, IMO. I don't find the 24-70 too heavy, and I'm not a strong person (5'6" girl) so my suggestion to you would be to go to a local dealer and hold any of the lenses you are considering and figure out which feels better to you. I haven't had the oppertunity to use the 24-105 yet, but I opted for the 2.8 over the 4 because I like to shoot in low light situations, and have yet to purchess an external flash. Though there is the whole argument about the IS, but I don't own any IS lenses so I can't put any input on that. People can give you options, but the only way you'll really know if you like the lens is to go out and try it yourself, just my thoughts.


BTW my husbands the reef person in the family, but I use his name for the photography section. Just so it doesn't seem wierd that the occupation is finish carpenter, but I'm saying I'm not strong...lol

[flameangel88]

Mrs. plreef,

I'm currently using the Nikon 18-200mm vr lens which is 19.8 oz and the Canon 24-70mm at 33.6 oz is certainly a concern. I love zoom lens but looking at getting a lens that can focus fast and good in low light situation without the need of a flash and this was the main purpose for the purchase of the 5D and I'll have the Nikon setup for back up if I need the long range.

I'll definately take your advice on testing the lenses out at a store b4 purchase especially I'll be lugging this thing around.

btw--was the 50mm a f/1.4? How is focus compare to the 24-70mm lens?

Thanks!

[karm40]

Since you stated that you bought the 5D for low light situations, it seems you answered your own question. The 50 1.4 is a sharp and relative to the zoom, cheap lens. What are you shooting in low light? If 2.8 is too slow, then it's a no brainer.

[beerguy]

I consider the 50 1.4 a specialty lens. I don't think that I'd care for it as a "walk around." That being said, I do have one on my "list of things to buy" because of being to go to 1.4.

For the 5D, I still think that I'd go 24-105 vs 24-70. I use my 24-70 a lot but you have to remember that for my body (30D) it effectively goes to 112. It really comes down to what you shoot. I do primarily landscape shots. If I were a portrait shooter I'd probably have a very different perspective.

Cheers

[MCary]

First let me say, anyone who buys a 5D, you suck! That's jealousy speaking. I have to get by with a 30D.

The 50mm 1.8 I heard is an outstanding lens and much less money than the 1.4 which is the tops, but do you need that fast of a lens.

Personally, I would get a 50mm lens, either the 1.4 or 1.8 depending on my budget. You have the 100 mm Macro. I have one of those and love it. So macros covered. I also have a 70-200 mm f/4L which is the best bargain in the L series lenses. My next purchase is the 400mm f/5.6L Prime, possibly a 1.4x extender and I'll probably have most distances covered for a while.

Mike

[Frisco]

I have a 5D along with a couple of the zoom and prime lenses that you have mentioned - what will you be shooting? Will it be primarily for portraits of your family, tank pics, sporting events of your kids, theater recitals of your kids, landscape/nature pics, night clubs, etc? It's hard to find a single lens that serves all purposes, and that's why you see so many people with a bag full of lenses and that the lenses that try to do everything having one major shortcoming or another. How firm is the budget and how long will you need to use the lens before your next lens? Have you considered a non-Canon lens or a used lens, or are you tied to a new Canon because of the rebate?

The 50 f/1.4 is a nice prime and pretty reasonably priced, but I wouldn't want it as my primary lens due to the lack of zoom. It is a good walk around lens because it is fairly small and the wide aperture helps in less than full light, but the lack of zoom would kill it for me if I didn't have other primes to use when I wanted a different field of view.

The 24-70 f/2.8 is also a nice lens, but it is massive, heavy, and fairly expensive. I wouldn't pick it as my walk around lens, because it is just so big.

With that said (and without any more info), I have to agree with Doug and recommend the 24-105 f/4 IS if this will be your only lens for the time being. The f/4 is less than ideal for low light conditions, but the reasonably small size, wide zoom range, fluorite optics, and image stabilizer function make it a great general purpose lens. One note, this is not actually a lens that I own although my buddy has one and I have played around with it a bit.

[flameangel88]

Thanks for all the replies.

I understand there's no such thing as a one camera or one lens for all but we try to made the best use of what we can. After getting the camera and the 100mm macro that's an arm and didn't want to give out the leg right away. I will only be able to pick up one lens and it will be awhile b4 I can think about another one. The camera and the macro lens will be on a tripod in front of the tank when I'm not taking the camera out.

In the Nikon world, the 18-200mm vr lens is pretty good in most of the time as a walk around lens as I don't like to swap lens. I'm looking for a combo that I can just take out at the spur of the moment and snap away and not dependent on a flash. (sorry about not putting this info out earlier) I will mostly be taking pictures with family gethering, parties, and more importantly a night out in the city. On the macro side I'm covered, as for the long end, I can depend on the Nikon setup for now till I can pickup a nice canon lens down the road.

At this point it seems to come down to the 24-70 f/2.8 or the 24-105 f/4 IS. I'll stop by a photo store and check both out.

Thanks again to everyone for your help!

[Frisco]

If that is the case, you might want to check out the prime lenses as well as those zooms because of the wider max apertures and smaller sizes/weights. f/4 max aperture will be a bit painful at night in low light and lacking in DOF for pictures of people, and ideally you probably want f/2.8 or lower. Does your local cam store rent out lenses to try?

[karm40]

The thing that was throwing everyone off is what the use will be. You said earlier that you wanted to use it in low light. So, that's when one would go to a prime lens. On the 30d with the mag factor, you might want to look at the 35 f2 if you still want a lens to use in low light. Depends how wide/tight you want to be.

You have to decide between the cash factor and the need. Sounds like you want to save a little money, so the zooms might be out. The primes will be cheaper and may suit your need for a lens to use in low light.