24-105 + 50mm 1.2 or 24-70II

Looking at making a 5DIII purchase the next chance there's a good deal.

Thinking about what my lens choices should be and wanted to get your thoughts.

I think I'm leaning towards option 1

As much as I would love the 24-70 II, I would take the 24-105 & 50L in a heartbeat. It really all comes down to what you shoot.

Tony_Stark wrote in post #15034258
As much as I would love the 24-70 II, I would take the 24-105 & 50L in a heartbeat. It really all comes down to what you shoot.

Yeah, that's the thing. My 'style' call it could benefit from both setups. So I guess I'm thinking about the best bang for my buck.

I never liked shooting primes - but shooting micro43 has changed my opinion on that.

Probably the most important question. Do you need the 2.8 aperture of the 24-70 or will the IS of the 24-105 be able to replace it and do you need the 1.4 aperture of the 50?

IF you are fine with f/4 AND will be shooting video more
THEN 24-105 + 50mm 1.2
ELSE 24-70

Personally I would go for the 24-105L, 50 1.4, 600EX-RT and ST-E3-RT.

I would replace the 50mm f1.2 by the Sigma 50mm f1.4. Quite more usable wide open.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0

Also you could take the Tamron 24-70 VC f2.8 over the Canon 24-105mm f4.

Because you should save some money for the 135L...

It comes down to, 24-105 range, IS, f/1.2 vs. 24-70 range, no-IS, "only" f/2.8, extra weight.

Earwax69 wrote in post #15034345
I would replace the 50mm f1.2 by the Sigma 50mm f1.4. Quite more usable wide open.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0

Also you could take the Tamron 24-70 VC f2.8 over the Canon 24-105mm f4.

Because you should save some money for the 135L...

I like this suggestion.

I standing for the same decision. All ready have the 24-105. I decided to sell the 24-105 and order the 24-70 II.
Think the 24-70 II would be a nice combination with my 16-35 II and 70-200 II

I'm not a real prime user. Maybe next year an extra 50L

Tony_Stark wrote in post #15034421
It comes down to, 24-105 range, IS, f/1.2 vs. 24-70 range, no-IS, "only" f/2.8, extra weight.

Hmm the 24-70 II+5D3 will weight less than a 5D3+24-105+50L, no?

That said, if the OP doesn't need 2.8, get the 24-105+50L. Its a very good combo.

Superdaantje wrote in post #15034434
I standing for the same decision. All ready have the 24-105. I decided to sell the 24-105 and order the 24-70 II.
Think the 24-70 II would be a nice combination with my 16-35 II and 70-200 II

I'm not a real prime user. Maybe next year an extra 50L

I decided the same. Getting the 24-70 II or the temron 24-70. I'm waiting to see when its available and than fully decide.

Not really sure here. I might opt for the 24-105L and 35L. The 35L is just so much sharper than my 50L. Have been using a Sigma 50 f/1.4 unti I can do something to recalibrate the 50L.

I am considering to replace the it with a 24-70L II if its as sharp as they say.

I have the 24-105L + 50L combo, and am quite satisfied. I like the extra range, lighter weight and IS of the 24-105L as a walk around lens. If I need something fast, the 50L fills that need better, as f/2.8 is only one stop faster than the 24-105L anyway.

With the high ISO capabilities of the 5D3, the 24-105L works in a lot of lower light situations anyway.

24-105L + 50L for sure. Although you could still achieve some great results from the Canon 50mm f/1.4 (and save some majory money in the process).

-Nick

I would go 24-70MK2+ 50 1.8 over 24-105+ 50L

I think the 24-70 is that good but that's just me