5D Setup

My dads getting a 5D for HIS birthday (May 7th). He doesn't shoot birds, or animals, or sports (thus the fps didnt matter). I'm wondering what a good setup would be for him. (yes, i bought him a 5D).

Which of these two seems better to you guys? It's mainly for portraits (more like candids of family and friends), travel, lowlight, etc. I figured I had it all set but then I though hmmm he could go one of two ways.

First way:
17-40, 24-70, 70-200

Second way:
17-40, 35L, 135L

See one way or another its 3 lenses. One way he's got a huge focal length covered, but probably won't use most of it (ie the 24-70 will sit on the camera probably almost its entire lifetime.) The second way gives him more lowlight flexibilty, but might have to switch out lenses a bit too often. Which one would you go with?

Oh and feel free to come up with your own combinations of the lenses: 17-40, 24-70, 70-200, 35, 135


I'm not buying him the lenses (can't afford it.) but my mom and his two brothers want to splurge on those for him. I greatly appriciate any opinions.

First... I want to be adopted into your family.

Second - IMO, get him the zooms, it sounds like he doesn't want to be dealing with changing lenses, and he's then got the flexibility afforded by zooms mixed with the high-iso performance of the 5d - he may not necessarily need the speed of the primes.

I would go with setup number one although I probably would just stick with the 24-70 , and the 70-200. If you get the L versions you'll have some nice glass and you would be surprised how much that 70-200 would get used. Instead of an ultra wide angle you may want to consider a macro for him to play around with.

The 24-70 will offer a pretty wide view on the 5D. I use mine all the time and rarely wish I had anything wider.

hope that helps

Yeah it does. I think the 24-70 is pretty much definite. It's basically what to fit in and around that focal length thats hard.

Setup #1 offers the most convenience/flexibilit​y. If you're going to go all the way, have you considered the 16-35 (mark I or II)? The 1mm makes a noticible difference on the 5d.

Well the lenses the rest of the family is taking care of. I don't want to report back a ton of L lenses for them to buy. the 24-70 we'll probably get him the L. The 35 I think he could use for lowlight stuff. the f/2 of course, no way the family would spring again another 1100 for the L. A 35 prime is a really nice standard focal length good for just about anything.

24-105 f/4 L and either 70-300 IS ( 2 choices there DO or not) or 100-400 L IS (better IQ but less portability.)
Match your budget and your needs. Does he need a see in the dark lens with 1/2 inch DOF?
Without knowing the type of photography it is impossible to suggest the right tools.

Mayfly wrote in post #3126623
I would go with setup number one although I probably would just stick with the 24-70 , and the 70-200. If you get the L versions you'll have some nice glass and you would be surprised how much that 70-200 would get used. Instead of an ultra wide angle you may want to consider a macro for him to play around with.

The 24-70 will offer a pretty wide view on the 5D. I use mine all the time and rarely wish I had anything wider.

hope that helps

i'd get him the 24-105L and the 70-200L f4 IS and call it a day.

i take it he's new to photography? most people new to photography would rather have a lens like an 18-200 than a sack full of heavy ass lenses and non-zooming primes.

my suggestion is to get him what he wants. not what you want...since that changes fairly frequently anyway ... or what others think he may want (which is usually what they want anyway).

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #3126697
i take it he's new to photography? most people new to photography would rather have a lens like an 18-200 than a sack full of heavy ass lenses and non-zooming primes.

I agree

I'm not knocking your selections for a true enthusiast but if your father is new to photography he might appreciate a lighter, less bulky setup plus it has the green square -

eg. XTi / 17-50 / 70-200/4 IS with 30 EX

If he is a little more experienced then 5D / 24-105 IS / 35L / 70-200/4 IS / Canon 1.4x would fit the bill nicely...

Greetings,
With the resolutions of 5D, I'll recommend 24-105 F4L IS and 70-200 F4L IS. Probably add in 50 f1.4 for low light. This is a very portable combination, and can travel the world without any problems. Enjoy...

you are very close to my rig - see my Gear sig. I find it fits a middle aged newbie just fine (ME). All I think I am missing right now is the 100-400 for bird shots.

16-35 I 24-70 I 70-200 2.8

What's his photography experience? Will he appreciate the better IQ that comes with the lenses listed, or be burdened with the weight?

I'd say get him a 24~105 f4 IS L and a 100~400 IS L.
Lighter setup than the 24~70 & 70~200mm but with much better range. Add the 17~40mm only if he needs a UWA lens. 24mm is more than wide enough when starting out. I'd also argue 105mm is more than long enough when starting, so maybe get just the 24~105mm and then give him "I O Us" for more lenses once he knows what he wants.

The 24~105 & 100~400 package is smaller, lighter and less expensive, while providing a better range and IS on both lenses. Unless he NEEDS f2.8 lenses for some reason, I'd avoid their expense and weight.

Ben

He's not new to photography. He's always into the latest greatest. He has a 20D right now (not the latest, but one of the greatest!) with the kit lens and always hates how his shots come out looking like point and shoot material. So we're upping him in IQ both camera and lens. I think you guys are right that the 24-105 would be a great standard for him, especially with the IS.

I'd say the 24-105 would be a better choice if, as you say, you suspect the 24-70 will be the lens he uses most. For low light I'd recommend the 24 or 35L. I just got the 35 and it is an absolutely amazing lens.