Choosing lenses, need help (money not too much of an object!)

Edited: To keep some individuals here from being offended/jealous.

Easy:

16-35f2.8L II
24-70f2.8L
70-200f2.8L II
300f2.8L or 400f2.8L + Gitzo GM5540 monopod

Your boss will be expecting some top notch photos for the cost of this equipment so you'd better know what you're doing!

pihau wrote in post #10336513
Easy:

16-35f2.8L II
24-70f2.8L
70-200f2.8L II
300f2.8L or 400f2.8L + Gitzo GM5540 monopod

Your boss will be expecting some top notch photos for the cost of this equipment so you'd better know what you're doing!

Sorry i should have also mentioned a few things:

Firstly i am a photographer! (i won awards at the British Institute of Professional Photography last year)

Secondly this is what i already own:

-Canon 40d
-17-40 F4 L Lens
-70-200 L lens (F4 non IS)
-50mm 1.8
-580 EX II

I also should mention that i have my own ideas on what lenses i qill require, mainly what ive posted! but i need to hear from other people/professionals here on their thoughts as well as what you guys think of my selection above.

ze lenses.

For weddings you should have a 24-70 IMO. A 70-200 f/2.8 (IS optional with the 5DmkII) woud be good for low light conditions (as good as the f/4L is, it's pretty useless in a church).

Ive done plenty of weddings, my style now requires a lot of DoF or rather DoF that looks rather striking, hence why ive picked a 50mm and a 35mm primes with good apetures (1.4-2.0)

setsuken wrote in post #10337258
Ive done plenty of weddings, my style now requires a lot of DoF or rather DoF that looks rather striking, hence why ive picked a 50mm and a 35mm primes with good apetures (1.4-2.0)

What do you mean by a lot of depth of field?

if ur getting the 35L, skip the 50sigma and go for the 85 L

scroller52 wrote in post #10337279
if ur getting the 35L, skip the 50sigma and go for the 85 L

Erm well the price difference from the sigma to the 85 L is over a grand! its a bit much....

gonzogolf wrote in post #10337273
What do you mean by a lot of depth of field?

I like there to be a good deal of background blur, it gives a lovely quality to images, weddings especially. The 5dmk2 will help with that anyway but something with a large apeture in a lens will help even more. The 50 has a greater DoF than the 35 (the 35 however will be useful for video) im also looking at a decent tripod as well, preferably a monfrotto

setsuken wrote in post #10336470
I need the lenses to cove the following:

-Weddings
-Golf photography (sport lens, but must also be a MASSIVE zoom)
-General stuff
-Interior Room Photography for the website

Weddings - 24-70 2.8, 35 1.4 & 85 1.2
Golf - 24-70 & 70-200 2.8
General -17-40, 24-70, 70-200
Interior - 17-40

Keep your 17-40 and trade you 70-200 f/4 for a 2.8 IS II

DL.Photography wrote in post #10337349
Do you get to keep the equipment or will it be company property?

Do you have a budget, If not I would go all out with:

1D Mark IV
5D Mark II
16-35L II
24L II
35L II
85L II
135L II
70-200L f/2.8L II
Flashes

ok right might have to start again.

1. There is a reasonable budget (meaning i cant be buying a CRAP load of stuff)
2. I get to keep them, yes.

that list is far too excessive, there is no need for a 1d mark 4 (considering its not even a FF camera!)

5d Mark 2 yes agreed.
35 agreed
24L ive read is a poor lens,they even reccomend the 17-40 over it (soft in the corners, even with a prime!)
70-200 isnt enough range IMO needs to be more, but a prime isnt going to be useful either!
135 is making things more expensive now i feel

setsuken wrote in post #10337258
Ive done plenty of weddings, my style now requires a lot of DoF or rather DoF that looks rather striking, hence why ive picked a 50mm and a 35mm primes with good apetures (1.4-2.0)

setsuken wrote in post #10337303
Erm well the price difference from the sigma to the 85 L is over a grand! its a bit much....

I like there to be a good deal of background blur, it gives a lovely quality to images, weddings especially. The 5dmk2 will help with that anyway but something with a large apeture in a lens will help even more. The 50 has a greater DoF than the 35 (the 35 however will be useful for video) im also looking at a decent tripod as well, preferably a monfrotto

I think you meant a shallow depth of field. Larger apertures will give you shallower DOF.

If you are going to do weddings AND sports, you might be better off with a Canon 1d Mark IV (or III even). Good ISO, extra reach, etc. Just my 2 cents.

setsuken wrote in post #10337258
my style now requires a lot of DoF

gonzogolf wrote in post #10337273
What do you mean by a lot of depth of field?

setsuken wrote in post #10337303
I like there to be a good deal of background blur, it gives a lovely quality to images, weddings especially. The 5dmk2 will help with that anyway but something with a large apeture in a lens will help even more. The 50 has a greater DoF than the 35 (the 35 however will be useful for video)

A "lot of depth of field" means that elements of the scene over a wider range of distances from the camera will be in focus.

What you are describing is minimal depth of field.

Because the 5dII can come as a kit with the 24-105 AND because I really love this lens as a perfect single lens solution, I wouldn't think of missing out on the opportunity to get it as part of the kit. The new 70-200 2.8 IS looks amazing, but I can't justify spending that kind of cash. For golf, I think the 100-400 would prove an interesting lens as you are usually shooting in bright sun, at least that's what I've seen in my golf shots. And the extra reach will be more important than you think, particularly going from at 40d crop to the 5dII.