Member of the Month

je_t.aime_canard
January, 2025

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

You have 3 lenses from now to the end of your life.

profile picture
kootenayklaus
Posts: 3914 - Karma: 2,179
Which three will you pick? Focusing more on DSLR/SLR's, but other's are suitable.

My Selection (Canon):
EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM (Wide)

EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (Standard, I have this lens and love it.)

EF 400mm f/4L DO IS USM (Tele. I wish I had the money for this.)

If said lens breaks or wears down, you get a replacement. No changing. And on a body of your choice.

Have at it M+A.
May 15 2011 12:29AM
0 0
profile picture
Chrris
Posts: 568 - Karma: 211
Nikon
14-24 2.8
70-200 2.8
24-70 2.8
I'm pretty sure thoes are the right ones?

Canon,
8-15 f/4
85 1.2
70-200 2.8
May 17 2011 11:19AM
0 0
profile picture
jason...
Posts: 9006 - Karma: 780
tokina 10-17 (i fucking love my fisheye, i could never give that shit up)

canon 24-70 f/2.8

canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II
May 17 2011 12:08PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
3 lenses is an entire set up? Should of been 1 lens you will have from now til the end of your life.
May 17 2011 1:02PM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,403
16-35 2.8L
24-70 2.8L
70-200 2.8L
May 17 2011 1:42PM
0 0
profile picture
kootenayklaus
Posts: 3914 - Karma: 2,179
No, that's the point. What do you want to sacrifice and what do you want to keep?
May 17 2011 3:13PM
0 0
profile picture
RileySnyderPhoto
Posts: 688 - Karma: 1,451
Sigma 10/15mm f/2.8 Fisheye (10 or 15 depending on which camera)
Canon 24-105 f/4L IS
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II

Pretty much my camera bag right now except I carry a Canon 100 f/2.8L IS Macro too. Love all these lenses
May 17 2011 3:15PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
But 3 lenses is pretty much a full kit. A wide, and standard and a long lens. You aren't really sacrificing anything..
May 17 2011 9:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Kangbang
Posts: 14211 - Karma: 423
EF 8-15mm f/4L
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
May 17 2011 10:44PM
0 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
Yup. I could easily live off three lenses, let alone two.
May 17 2011 11:05PM
0 0
profile picture
kootenayklaus
Posts: 3914 - Karma: 2,179
I would do some pretty damn evil things to acquire that...
May 17 2011 11:34PM
0 0
profile picture
zahava
Posts: 7791 - Karma: 12,039
As much of a canon fanboy as I am, I wish they made wide zooms as good as the Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF Lens. Its just too sick, blows the tokina 11-16 F2.8 and Canon 16-35 F2.8 out of the water.
May 18 2011 12:14PM
0 0
profile picture
S.C
Posts: 3068 - Karma: 2,285
BUMP!

Price no object:

5d Mkiii (yea, yea I know it is like a year away still)
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Budget:

Canon 60d
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/4
Pentax SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.2
Jul 17 2011 5:20PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61780 - Karma: 124,904
Zeiss LWZ.2 14.5-45 T2.6
Click for larger image

Zeiss CP.2 50mm T2.1

Canon 70-200 2.8 mkII (only have this because of ski filming haha)

Jul 17 2011 5:33PM
0 0
profile picture
*simba*
Posts: 9125 - Karma: 511
Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS II
Zeiss Compact Prime CP .2 50mm/T2.1 with EF mount
Canon 8-15 F4L
Jul 17 2011 6:04PM
0 0
profile picture
SeanTom
Posts: 7936 - Karma: 1,747
Nikon
14-24 2.8
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8

i mean, that's pretty much the field in three lenses.

but going over board with lenses/camera
Hasselblad
CFV-50
503 CW
CFi 3.5/30
CFE 2.8/80
CFE 4/180

Jul 17 2011 8:43PM
0 0
profile picture
finchski
Posts: 470 - Karma: 621
this but maybe id change the 16-35 L to the EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM (Wide)
Jul 17 2011 9:54PM
0 0
profile picture
yourthemannowdog
Posts: 4541 - Karma: 314
A lot of you are picking nikon, cannon, and decent third party lenses? Why would you not want carl zeiss or leica lenses?

I would pick:

Leica 24mm f/1.4 ASPH
Leica f/0.95 ASPH
Carl Zeiss Planar T 85mm f/1.4
Jul 17 2011 10:03PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61780 - Karma: 124,904
Only thing about zeiss is that they don't have very much of a long lens selection for something like a dslr, all of the long lens options are built for film and tend to not cover a digital sensor. I'd only have a canon (or nikon) 70-200 for ski filming. For most cinematography, you only need up to 100ish, but not skiing.
Jul 17 2011 10:23PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,388
Because for leica lenses you need a leica camera, and leica lenses aren't that sick anyways, some of them blow. I can pull better images out of Nikkor glass.

The Carl Zeiss lenses made for DSLRs are not made by Zeiss, the specs and brand are licensed out to Cosina, a cheaper Japanese lens manufacturer to produce the lenses - again, often the Canon and Nikon glass is better.

I know the lenses I chose perform amazingly, there's no sense in paying for a brand name that doesn't produce as good an image!

Jul 17 2011 10:29PM
0 0
profile picture
yourthemannowdog
Posts: 4541 - Karma: 314
Oh yeah, those 70-200 are great for filming skiing.

I really like working with prime lenses and zeiss and leica prime lenses will last a lifetime. If you get a chance to use one, do so. I live in NY and whenever im in lower Manhattan i go into B&H just to play with the lenses.
Jul 17 2011 10:30PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61780 - Karma: 124,904
Ive had a chance (at a camera store) to play around with a 5d and a 28mm cp2 and 85mm cp2. Its fucking amazing.
Jul 17 2011 10:31PM
0 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
I disagree. Some of the Nat Geo photographers are dumping all their Canon lenses for Zeiss because they aren't sharp enough for the high resolution of the 5dmkii. And if you plan on doing video, contemporary Canon and Nikon housings are far from optimal.
Jul 17 2011 10:52PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61780 - Karma: 124,904
twoods, youve obviously never used a cp.2, they are fucking really nice and are a different level video lens than any canon or nikkor.
Jul 17 2011 11:04PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,388
^ From the OP, this thread is more about "DSLR/SLR", of course the CP.2 primes are nice lenses, it would be tight to buy CP.2 lenses if you could get the range of them.

I wasn't talking about those though. I was talking about a bunch of the "Carl Zeiss" primes that aren't made by Zeiss, they are made by Cosina. The ones marketed to DSLR users. You're just paying for the brand name with those lenses, they really don't do better. The Canon 50s are a better lens than the cheaper Zeiss 50s
Jul 18 2011 12:48AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)