Recommendations for lenses to use with Canon 5D Mark II

I have been lurking around these forums for a while now and just registered. I would like to ask for your help in recommending lenses for the Canon 5D Mark II.

Here is a bit of my background: The 5D2 will be my first digital SLR camera. I have used only compacts for the last few years. In the late 80s I got a Minolta Dynax 7000i film SLR camera which I had until a couple of years ago. Due to moving back and forth between continents it got kind of banged up. Even though I do have some experience with SLRs I never bothered too much about lenses. All I used was a simple zoom with which I was pretty happy. I want to get back into SLR photography, though.

Since I am going on a vacation in a few months I want to by a new camera. After reading Gordon's wonderful reviews I decided on the 5D2. However, I am still not sure about the lens. The best thing about the kit lens (24-105) is that it is a great deal together with the camera. However, for the type of photography I am interested in I am not sure if it is the best choice.

As mentioned, I first need this camera for my vacation. I will not only visit cities (such as Copenhagen) but also my parents' place in the Alps where I intend to do a lot of hiking. This means that some terrific landscapes will need to be captured as well.

I am also interested in city photography at night and in low light situations - one reason why the 5D2 seems to be a good choice. And this makes the selection of a good lens difficult for me.

Besides the kit lens I also thought of those alternatives:

- Canon 24-70 L lens
- Sigma 24-70 EX HSM (maybe in combination with the upcoming Sigma 70-200 EX HSM OS)
- just a set of primes? However, these are quite expensive so probably only two at the most for now.

I appreciate your feedback and thanks a lot for this great forum.

- Roland

In my opinion, if you only will have one lens initially, the deal offered in the kit of the 24-105 is a really good one. The 24-70 is a great lens, but lacks IS. If you need to stop action in lower light, the 24-70 would have the advantage by one stop, but otherwise the 24-105 would be better given a longer range and IS.

Why do you say "the 24-105 not the best choice for the type of photography I am interested in"? What type of photography are you interested in would be an obvious first question.

Second, what is your budget? Are you looking for 1 all-purpose lens or are you open to multiple lenses?

I love my 24-105 as an all-purpose walk-around lens. I also have the 16-35 mark II for landscape and wide-angle uses.

Depends what you shoot. I love the 35L and 85L on my 5d2

Sigma 50mm f/1.4

The 24-70 and 70-200 2.8's are a good if weighty combo. If I am wandering around the streets of Hong Kong or Dubai, I like the extra reach of the 24-105. It is a pretty good lens sharpness and versitility wise. For some applications the IS can compensate, some not. As of late I have been dragging about the 200 2.8L as it is quite sharp, light and compact, as those things go.

For me the size of the kit is a consideration, for others it might not be.

Cheers: T

The 24-105 is my favorite lens and is on my 5D MkII about 75% of the time! I owned a 24-70 and sold it. I prefer the longer reach and the lighter weight of the 24-105! With the high ISO quality of the 5D MkII, I do not miss the extra stop in the slightest!

And, frankly, the 24-105 is just as sharp as my 24-70 was!

Mark

Until you get your feet wet, large range and convenience are more important than ultimate IQ, imo.

I would get the 17-40 (used), 24-105 and, if pressed, 70-200(used, pick your flavor). This will cover 17-200mm and, with time, you'll be able to sort out what you really need different, if anything. You will also, most likely not lose any money to speak of on those lenses if you were to sell them, later.

Since you are going in a few months and your lack of familiararity with a camera that requires some effort to actually get a good picture, I would not wait till the very end to get the camera/lenses.

Thank you for all your valuable feedback. The kit lens is a great deal ($600 bucks off) that it is hard to ignore. I was just wondering whether the f/4 might be good enough for low-light photography I would like to get into more in the future.

I am open to multiple lenses as well. It seems that an ultra-wide zoom such as the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM or the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM together with the kit lens would make a good combo.

I will get the Mark II as soon as possible so that I can familiarize myself with the camera and the lenses. For now I am just debating which lenses to get.

romendo wrote in post #9707067
Thank you for all your valuable feedback. The kit lens is a great deal ($600 bucks off) that it is hard to ignore. I was just wondering whether the f/4 might be good enough for low-light photography I would like to get into more in the future.

I am open to multiple lenses as well. It seems that an ultra-wide zoom such as the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM or the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM together with the kit lens would make a good combo.

I will get the Mark II as soon as possible so that I can familiarize myself with the camera and the lenses. For now I am just debating which lenses to get.

I think you have some bias against the 24-105 kit lens because it came in the box. You are wrong in this respect. I bought mine after buying the 5D2. I took it to Venice and it dealt with everything admirably. 70% of my shots were taken in darkness and I didn't take a flashgun. I did night-time architecture. It is very sharp and the IS is excellent. However, I understand that you might want to be wider, so in that respect you would find that the Sigma 12-24 works well. I also use a Canon 15mm fisheye, which those users who actually own one will confirm that it is a very useful and light lens to carry. It does take skill and practice. Remember that all lenses below 20mm will give distortion on the 5D and you will have to process accordingly. By the way, I sold the 17-40mm. No IS and I didn't like the distortion at the wide end.

So... Get the 24-105 L IS. You won't regret it, but if you do, its very easy to sell.

Good luck.

booja wrote in post #9706796
Depends what you shoot. I love the 35L and 85L on my 5d2

i haven't tried the 85L (one day!) but the 35L and 135L work for me very nicely. 35L is usually stuck on the camera for everything now days and the 135L is a perfect reach for me (i've never needed anything longer than that, plus the ability to crop a lot is nice on the 5d ii). congrats on your camera!

This thread has become one of those 24-105L vs 24-70L. It's truly depends on what you're using it for. You mentioned you are going vacation soon, then in this case the 24-105L cannot be beat. It's the ultimate travel lens for 5D2, it'll do everything you mentioned. Also, you'll be glad to hike with 24-105L instead of 24-70L for the weight reason alone (more than 1/2 lbs difference).