16-35mm/24-70mm/70-200mm @ 2.8 owners

I have all three. They give me flexibility when I can't use a preferred prime and foot zoom. They are my Holy Trinity 2.

I love my set, and they cover everything I PERSONALLY like to shoot. Umm, and god L on my 5dm2 is amazing =) However, I am thinking about picking up the 50mm f1.4 for myself just to get a couple extra stops of light =)

As for not having IS on my 24-70L I work just fine without it. No complaints here -- =)

I have the 17-40 instead of the 16-35. I love the combo but also miss my 24-105 for it's overall versatility. The trio is great. I had the 28 1.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, and 100-400L. Of all of those I just want the 85 back (or an 85L). The 24-70 is pretty nice indoors but the 85 was awesome. So if I had a choice:
16-35II, 24-70, 70-200, and an 85L (or 1.8 wannabe L).

ConDigital wrote in post #8560200
Does anyone own all three lens 16-35mm/24-70mm/70-200mm @ 2.8?

Are you happy with these three lens? Are these 3 zooms capable of covering a huge variety of shots/situations?

Need some feedback before I pull the trigger on these three.

Yes, all here.
16-35mk I though.
It's bliss. Paradise. Go for it.

if you dont have enough money for that, go after the crop trinity...

11-16
17-55
70-200 f2.8 L IS

i love this set. and now that i have a 5d, i dont know how i am going to finance a transition to a 16-35 and a 24-70.

i was thinking of just having 3 zooms and a prime. so it would be the 17-40, 24-70, 70-200, and a 85L

merp wrote in post #8566292
I love my set, and they cover everything I PERSONALLY like to shoot. Umm, and god L on my 5dm2 is amazing =) However, I am thinking about picking up the 50mm f1.4 for myself just to get a couple extra stops of light

The 5D-II and the 50 1.4 have produced some of my best shots. If my experience is any indicator, you will not be sorry if you get the 50 f1.4.

Timphoto wrote in post #8566677
The 5D-II and the 50 1.4 have produced some of my best shots. If my experience is any indicator, you will not be sorry if you get the 50 f1.4.

the 50 1.4 is a completely different lens on a FF camera. thanx for reminding me. i'll have to use mine more .

ed rader

I use my 24-105 more than my 28-70 2.8L, especialy when traveling. To me all three zooms are "must have lenses". I have three zooms and the 1.4x with me all the time.

Buy now before prices go up any more!

i am missing the 16-35 from that set... but i think thats next

My dream lens line up

I own all 3 and use them on 5D Mk2 and 50D. Used them at 8,000-11,000ft recently without problem. Awesome high-country shots. The Mk2 really gives the full wide angle advantage, the 50D makes the 16mm look like a normal wide angle. Shots with a polarizer were absolutely mind blowing. As noted in an earlier thread today, I was very disconcerted when I got fogging on 2 of these lenses at fairly normal temperatures in Hawai'i (about 85-deg, moderate humidity of about 70%). Never seen this before in any of my many lenses. The lenses were acclimated to temp and the fogging only occurred in the sun. Seems to have gone away, but I will probably send back to Canon for "servicing" since they are under warranty. Hope this helps. Peace.

While that combo is a little overkill for me, I woudn't mind having them. It all depends on what you shoot. I have survived for a long time only having 50mm as my widest lens. I am in the market for a 24-70L though

I have that range too, although I also went for the 17-40 instead of the 16-35.

Very useful range, even on a crop camera. The 17-40 is the one I use the less because of my shooting style. I love its image quality, I find the pictures to have a lot of pop.
However, I find the range of the 24-70 more useful.
The 70-200 2.8 IS has my absolute preference. I use it as soon as I can. This lens turns mundane subjects into jawdropper pictures

I don't feel anything for my 24-70, except that it's a useful range. But you would have to take my 70-200 over my dead body

I have all three. All three deliver good images, but the 16-35L mk1 is not the best
at f/2.8 and the 24-70L is somewhat better at f/2.8 with the tele zoom even better.

All are very good when stopped down one or two stops. All are very usable wide open,
but the wider ones are not stellar wide open.

The 24-70 and 70-200 are great when you need to work quickly.
I prefer primes if I have time to slow down.

But these are good zooms, no doubt.

Well I bought all three today. So I'm looking forward to tomorrow