which combination???

i bought a used canon 5d and i want to buy a pair of lenses but i dont know which ones!i want to spent about 1600 euros for both and the following combinations costs that much:


1. 135 f2 L and 24-70 f2.8 L


2. 16-35 f2.8 L and135 f2 L


3. 16-35 f2.8 L and 24-105 f4 L


4. 70-200 f2.8 L and 17-40 f4 L


5.70-200 f2.8 L and24-105 f4 L


6.24-70 f2.8 L <span>and 70-200 f4 L


7. 17-40 f4 L and 24-70 f2.8 L (1500 euros)


8. 135 f2 L and 17-40 f4 L (1200 euros)





which of these will give me better quality, focal length, blur background, indoor photografy and landscapes!


thx you all very much in advance!!![:)]

If it were me, and I am going based of of "better quality, focal length, blur background, indoor photografy and landscapes"


I would go with #6. You get the versatility of two zooms and high quality glass. You get the wide aperature with the shorter of the two lenses (which you will most likely be using indoors instead of a 70-200). Plus you get 65 extra mm on the long end over the 135 f2.


Now, I know there are some folks that will be getting on here and will be in favor of the 135, and rightfully so, as it is a helluva lens. I just think that zoom versatility can trump the f2 in a non-planned situation. Although you lose &gt;1 stop of light with the zoom and it isnoticeably less sharp than the prime.


So in the end, I think you can't really go wrong with choice 1 or 6. Of course, all of your choices would likely keep you very happy. I just think I would be happiest with those two.


MY 2 CENTS!!!


Good luck and happy shooting!


Dave.

Welcome to the forum


I would go with option-1. On the FF these will be the best, IMO, for what it seems you are looking for. Then begin saving for a 70-200 with IS. I am sure you will get the "L" disease with this combo on a 5D.


Mark

It depends on your style and what you like to shoot. Since you mentioned indoor photography, I think the 24-70 is probably the most versatile lens for that.The 17-40 is the perfect landscape lens. So I guess I would go with #7.

<div>


It does depend what you shoot but I'd go with #8 and buy a 50 1.4 with the left over change. I find that I can easily use my 50 in place of my 24-70 and you get the low light advantage.
</div>

I agree with #6 as well, i dont know what your outputting, but in many casses the the lenses are very sharp even wide open, and cover a huge focal length on FF. this would cover almost everything. What do you plan out outputting(shooting)?

I'd go with #6 in a heart beat, 24mm is wide enough for landscapes and you could shoot panos for a wider field of vew and the 70-200mm. If you are willing to wait I would get theCanon70-200mm f/2.8, it will give more background blur and has faster focusing and a constant f/2.8 in your lens line up. If you don't want to wait and can give up some AF speed the Sigma or Tamron 70-200mm's are also worthwhile arternatives.


Save up for a ultra wide next and few of your favorite primes later on.


John.