Can you guys help me pick my first L Lens?

[gibsonla]

So I've spent the last few days in utter turmoil. I've finally saved up for some glass and each time I think I settle on what I want, I change my mind last second. I could really use some help and opinions =)

Background: I shoot mostly fashion/glamour/portraits/etc. Right now my main go to lens is the 85 1.8. It's amazing, great IQ, super sharp, etc. etc. But I really want to get a little bit more out of my glass. As far as focal lengths, I wish I was entirely certain on what I want. I know whatever I get needs to fall somewhere between 50 and 150mm as that's where I currently do the majority of my shooting

Now I've narrowed it down to 3 contenders

1) 70-200 f/4 IS
2) 135 L
3) 24-105 f/4 IS

I've had a chance to use all three in person and I've been pretty impressed with all of them. The IQ on the 70-200 and the 135 were amazing. The 24-105 wasn't quite up to their level (still pretty good) but it covers an extremely useful focal length range (which would come in handy if I decide to pursue my fleeting interest into landscape photography)

Now my concerns about the three lenses. Is the 70-200 really that big of an IQ boost from the 85? Will I really use that over the 85 in the field? With the 135 I'm concerned that it's an odd focal length and I'll never use it aside from the occasional shoulders up shot in the studio. With the 24-105, while it covers a really useful focal length, it really isn't up there in the IQ department compared to the other 2 lenses, even compared to the 85mm.

Anyways, I've read countless reviews, stalked the lens sample threads, but I would love to hear all of your guys opinions on which one you think I should get in why.

Thanks for helping me make this impossible decision =)
__________________

[JimFly]

Hi Mike
Not an easy choice to make, I think you should decide between
70-200 f/4 IS and 24-105 f/4 IS
Good Luck 2u

Jim

[tfiorda]

I essentially agree with JimFLy, I'd go with the 70-200 f/4 IS. I use a 70-200 f/2.8L IS and a 24-70 f/2.8L a lot for my shoots and I just love them. You won't be zooming with your feet if you get the 70-200 lens. I currently own only a 100mm macro a prime lens, haven't seem to need to spend the extra $$ to get what I want. That's not to say I haven't lusted after an 85 f/1.8 from time to time!

Tony...

[DarthVader]

Go with a faster lens... 135L.

[Mark_Cohran]

My primary glamour lenses are in order:

135 f/2L
85 f/1.2L
and surprisingly to me, the 100 f/2.8L IS - go figure - I've actually used it quite a lot in studio lately.

[Cosha]

i Have the 70-200mm F/4 L Is USM - perfect all rounder, Great for close ups, at 70mm you only have to stand slightly further away, and its a great for everyday use!

Unless you totaly pixel peep, the IQ of all of your choices is roughtly the same!

Unless your dedicated at 85mm then sure go for that, but if your like me and it takes years ot save for new Glass get something with a nice range like 70-200mm!

[trancerem]

135 L is a damn good lens, but it's not for a entirely session.
70-200 would be the thing for you.
24-105 is nice too, but for huge legs shots only, models need 50mm + to be confortable with.

[Rocketdun]

A great many portrait photographers I know use the 85 mm 1.2 lens, and the 135 f 2 lens. I do not think you error in choosing either.

[Dereksalem]

I essentially agree with JimFLy, I'd go with the 70-200 f/4 IS. I use a 70-200 f/2.8L IS and a 24-70 f/2.8L a lot for my shoots and I just love them. You won't be zooming with your feet if you get the 70-200 lens. I currently own only a 100mm macro a prime lens, haven't seem to need to spend the extra $$ to get what I want. That's not to say I haven't lusted after an 85 f/1.8 from time to time!

Tony...

I'd definitely go with the 70-200 f/4L IS. I have the lens and it's one of the best I've ever used. Sharpness is almost unbeatable and it's useful for almost anything.

[ccc_javier]

I'd definitely go with the 70-200 f/4L IS. I have the lens and it's one of the best I've ever used. Sharpness is almost unbeatable and it's useful for almost anything.

what about the right L lens for G&N for a 50D ?
70mm to begin with in a 1.6 crop is a bit too big right?

[PashaPhoto]

70-200, though mine is a 2.8, pretty much never comes off the camera...

i've played around with the 4.0 before, and it's a fine lens...

light, strong, sharp as a tack, and very reasonably priced...

if i had to rebuild my L collection, the 70-200 would be the first one i'd get...

[thekid17]

ive read somewhere most playboy photogrpahers use 70-200mm. makes models look skinnier

[kagetora13]

Hi

I wanted to add my two cents. Personally the 24-105 is a great walk around lens but when it comes to natural contrast and sharpness it just does not cut it. Maybe Canon sacrificed too much to give you the zoom range.

I've noticed in my cases that I usually keep the 70-200 (I own the 2.8 non IS and my brother has the f4 IS) when shooting portraits as well as when I need compression in my photos. If I need anything with a lower focal length then I tend to either use my 50mm prime or my Canon EF 17-40.

Overall if I could only own one L lens the 70-200 would be the choice because at that focus range it becomes more difficult to make a good lens. And before I forget my impression is primes tend to have the best sharpness so the 85 vs the 70-200 you will not see much if any of a difference.