Vote: Travel kit for 5DII (photojournalism)

Hi Everyone,

I'm trying to decide on a three-lens travel kit to use with my 5D Mark II and would greatly appreciate your feedback. I will use the lenses for general, photojournalism-style photography (e.g., events, landscapes, night photography, portraits, street life) around the world. I have two kits in mind (all lenses are from Canon):

KIT 1
24 f/1.4 L II
50 f/1.2 L
70-200 f/4 L IS -or- 135 f/2 L

Benefits of kit 1: Two (24 and 50) or more (24, 50, 135) fast primes with excellent image quality that are relatively small in size (i.e., more discreet) and lightweight. The thin depth-of-field of the 50 would be nice to have. The total weight of the three lenses is 1.9 kg.

KIT 2
24-70 f/2.8 L
35 f/1.4 L
70-200 f/4 L IS -or- 135 f/2 L

Benefits of kit 2: A flexible zoom with great image quality and one (35) or more (35 and 135) fast primes. I would need to change lenses less frequently with this kit. The total weight of the three lenses is 2.3 kg.

I currently have the 35, 24-70, and 70-200, and have used the 24 and 50. I haven't used the 135, but I like how it is smaller and more discreet (i.e., black) than the 70-200 (but I love the image quality from the 70-200).

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on which kit (or a variant of these kits) to go with. I've also considered a 35-85-135 (or 70-200) set up, but I really need a minimum of 24mm at the wide end.

Thanks very much,

Jonathan

http://jonathanmyers.smugmug.com/

If it were fior me - I shot full-time for years with single focal lengths like those in Kit 2 for major national magazines - the decision would be simple. And, if you were starting from scratch, I'd advise you to take Kit 2; but you're not doing that at all.

Since you already have Kit 1, I would recommend it. It will be more than sufficient for your needs, which makes purchasing the lenses you don't have an act that would, while making Canon happy, be of little benefit to you. The 135 is a wonderful lens; I had it, but now I don't much miss it as I also have an 85mm f1.2. Knowing what it's capable of, I'd say that, at 135mm, your 70-200 (I also had that lens before getting the latest f/2.8 II) can easily replace the f/2.0 L for more than 90% of what you'd use it for. Similarly, the 24mm in the 24-70 will do for 90% of the work of the 24 f/1.4. If you make this kind of analysis, the numbers are hard to argue with; you will only be able to grab a few more low light shoits with Kit 2 at a cost that is much higher than the utility gained, and the 24-70 will give you a lot more focal length options as well. Finally, don't forget that you can most often "back up" a few steps with the 35mm f/1.4 and get something near the result you'd have with the 24mm f/1.4.

If you wanted to buy anything more than you already have, I'd suggest something even wider and relatively cheap, so that you don't spend too much for a limited-use capability, like a Samyang 14mm manual focus lens, or even a good used 85mm f/1.8 to give you a "speedier" alternative to your 70-200. However, this would force you to carry 4 or 5 lenses, rather than 3, perhaps becoming a "bridge too far" for walking around all day.

Regards,
David

--
Keep learning; share knowledge; think seriously about outcomes; seek wisdom.

Thanks David!

Best,

Jonathan

16-35mm
50mm
70-200mm

My choice :

Sigma 12-24 (for interiors architecture and landscape etc) Although not too speedy this lens allows to take fantastic picture inside most buildings without tripod. Very very small distortion straight lines one sides
24-70 2.8L
70-200 F4 IS
1.4 multiplier
Maybe Canon 50mm 1.4
Bernard

I'd take the three lenses you have. You cover 24-200 plus have a fast lens if you need it. I think 24mm is plenty wide, but if you want to go wider still consider the 17-40 f4 and leave the other zoom at home. If you want to buy anything else, buy a second body in case the first one fails. And buy more CF cards, in small sizes, e.g. 8GB.

The advice from the pro
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/ambassadors/paolo_pellegrin.do
Slightly different approach, but story telling is picking up
http://www.mediastorm.com/train/resources/gear.html

I'm confused! You said that he already owns Kit 1, but from what I read he already owns kit 2. And you're recommending kit 2 'cause it's prime heavy, which it isn't.

The photo journalists that I know use a 16-35 on one body and a 70-200 on the other when using 1D bodies with a 1.3x crop and USUALLY a 24-70 (sometimes a 16-35) and 70-200 with FF bodies. One FF user said that what he wanted was a 20-50 f/2.8, because there was too much distortion at 16mm and 24mm wasn't wide enough.

--
Bob

'Dominance struggles are a fundamental characteristic of biological systems' - George C. Williams

Thanks for the replies!

To clarify, I think David inadvertently switched the kits numbers around in his reply.

It seems like the general consensus so far is to stay with my current kit (i.e., Kit 2: 24-70, 35, 70-200), but to potentially consider adding a wide-angle (e.g., 16-35 or prime) or fast short tele (e.g., 85 1.8 or 1.2).

Best,

Jonathan

You are in perfect shape with the lenses that you have:
24-70L
35L
70-200L

The only change you might consider is adding something wider such as the 16-35L...you could even trade the 35L for it to keep the number of lenses in your bag to a reasonable level. Either way you are in good shape.

a-rod_dc said:

Either way you are in good shape.

Click to expand...

I hope you are in good physical shape too ! That's a pretty heavy gear selection.

I hauled a Billingham with similar gear too many times around Asia and Australia.

Much as I love the gear, I am coming round to the idea that great high ISO performance can allow for slower but smaller and lighter glass !

Maybe I'm getting too old to be a packhorse!

Why not just 2 lenses - the 24-70L and 135L.
Fast enough and lighter

If you want to stick to primes at the wider end I I ended up with a 28mm f3.5 Olympus OM lens and it's been incredible, I find the slower aperture to be a non issue once you get wide

I'd love to travel with a 35L one day

But for now just a 28-70L and 135L are serving me well (& 2x tele to get a 270mm)

--

Not neccesarily answering your question per say...

but my photojournalist kit (for papers) is a 16-35 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8 IS II and a 300 f/2.8.

Or sometimes throw in a 24-70 and a 50mm for sure.

And a 580ex
--
http://www.fatherlyfilms.com

Thanks Everyone!

Best,

Jonathan

Bob (and jon01),

In my hasty first reply to the OP's original query, I reversed the identification of Kit 1 and Kit 2, and, of course, my comments should have been taken to apply to Kit 1 when I mention Kit 2, and vice versa. Sorry for the confusion; I realized it the next morning when I re-read my post, but, until now, thought my mistake wouldn't matter all that much after everytone else had already added their own advice to the OP after mine, and that perhaps, from the context of my remarks, the OP would understand that I had mistakenly reversed the labels.

Regards,
David

--
Keep learning; share knowledge; think seriously about outcomes; seek wisdom.

dont get the old 35L or the 24-70L.

they are really too long in the tooth, due for updated version.

I am sure the 35f1.4L update is on the horizon with better sealing and better SWC coating like the 24LMK2.

And the 24-70 needs the 4 stop IS of the new 70-200f2.8LISMK2.

So, avoid these 2.

jon01 said:

Hi Everyone,

I'm trying to decide on a three-lens travel kit to use with my 5D Mark II and would greatly appreciate your feedback. I will use the lenses for general, photojournalism-style photography (e.g., events, landscapes, night photography, portraits, street life) around the world. I have two kits in mind (all lenses are from Canon):

Click to expand...

I 'd say go for the kit 1 but replace the 50L with the 85LMK2.

And probably better go with the 135f2L or even better the 70-200f2.8LISMK2.

jon01 said:

KIT 1
24 f/1.4 L II
50 f/1.2 L
70-200 f/4 L IS -or- 135 f/2 L

Benefits of kit 1: Two (24 and 50) or more (24, 50, 135) fast primes with excellent image quality that are relatively small in size (i.e., more discreet) and lightweight. The thin depth-of-field of the 50 would be nice to have. The total weight of the three lenses is 1.9 kg.

KIT 2
24-70 f/2.8 L
35 f/1.4 L
70-200 f/4 L IS -or- 135 f/2 L

Benefits of kit 2: A flexible zoom with great image quality and one (35) or more (35 and 135) fast primes. I would need to change lenses less frequently with this kit. The total weight of the three lenses is 2.3 kg.

I currently have the 35, 24-70, and 70-200, and have used the 24 and 50. I haven't used the 135, but I like how it is smaller and more discreet (i.e., black) than the 70-200 (but I love the image quality from the 70-200).

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on which kit (or a variant of these kits) to go with. I've also considered a 35-85-135 (or 70-200) set up, but I really need a minimum of 24mm at the wide end.

Thanks very much,

Jonathan

http://jonathanmyers.smugmug.com/

Click to expand...

--
derek.
my current cameras:Soony A900, EOS5D2.
I may sell the Nikon D7k for the K5.

oh and you should avoid the crappy 50L too , this lens is not as good as the other L primes or even the Sigma 50HSM is a bit better lens.

and as for PJ work you dont need 50mm prime any way.

the 24 mm , 85mm + 70-200 make a much better kit.

3systermuser said:

they are really too long in the tooth, due for updated version.

I am sure the 35f1.4L update is on the horizon with better sealing and better SWC coating like the 24LMK2.

And the 24-70 needs the 4 stop IS of the new 70-200f2.8LISMK2.

So, avoid these 2.

jon01 said:

Hi Everyone,

I'm trying to decide on a three-lens travel kit to use with my 5D Mark II and would greatly appreciate your feedback. I will use the lenses for general, photojournalism-style photography (e.g., events, landscapes, night photography, portraits, street life) around the world. I have two kits in mind (all lenses are from Canon):

Click to expand...

I 'd say go for the kit 1 but replace the 50L with the 85LMK2.

And probably better go with the 135f2L or even better the 70-200f2.8LISMK2.

3systermuser said:

KIT 1
24 f/1.4 L II
50 f/1.2 L
70-200 f/4 L IS -or- 135 f/2 L

Benefits of kit 1: Two (24 and 50) or more (24, 50, 135) fast primes with excellent image quality that are relatively small in size (i.e., more discreet) and lightweight. The thin depth-of-field of the 50 would be nice to have. The total weight of the three lenses is 1.9 kg.

KIT 2
24-70 f/2.8 L
35 f/1.4 L
70-200 f/4 L IS -or- 135 f/2 L

Benefits of kit 2: A flexible zoom with great image quality and one (35) or more (35 and 135) fast primes. I would need to change lenses less frequently with this kit. The total weight of the three lenses is 2.3 kg.

I currently have the 35, 24-70, and 70-200, and have used the 24 and 50. I haven't used the 135, but I like how it is smaller and more discreet (i.e., black) than the 70-200 (but I love the image quality from the 70-200).

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on which kit (or a variant of these kits) to go with. I've also considered a 35-85-135 (or 70-200) set up, but I really need a minimum of 24mm at the wide end.

Thanks very much,

Jonathan

http://jonathanmyers.smugmug.com/

Click to expand...

--
derek.
my current cameras:Soony A900, EOS5D2.
I may sell the Nikon D7k for the K5.

Click to expand...

--
derek.
my current cameras:Soony A900, EOS5D2.
I may sell the Nikon D7k for the K5.

3systermuser said:

oh and you should avoid the crappy 50L too , this lens is not as good as the other L primes or even the Sigma 50HSM is a bit better lens.

and as for PJ work you dont need 50mm prime any way.

the 24 mm , 85mm + 70-200 make a much better kit.

3systermuser said:

they are really too long in the tooth, due for updated version.

I am sure the 35f1.4L update is on the horizon with better sealing and better SWC coating like the 24LMK2.

And the 24-70 needs the 4 stop IS of the new 70-200f2.8LISMK2.

So, avoid these 2.

jon01 said:

Hi Everyone,

I'm trying to decide on a three-lens travel kit to use with my 5D Mark II and would greatly appreciate your feedback. I will use the lenses for general, photojournalism-style photography (e.g., events, landscapes, night photography, portraits, street life) around the world. I have two kits in mind (all lenses are from Canon):

Click to expand...

I 'd say go for the kit 1 but replace the 50L with the 85LMK2.

And probably better go with the 135f2L or even better the 70-200f2.8LISMK2.

3systermuser said:

KIT 1
24 f/1.4 L II
50 f/1.2 L
70-200 f/4 L IS -or- 135 f/2 L

Benefits of kit 1: Two (24 and 50) or more (24, 50, 135) fast primes with excellent image quality that are relatively small in size (i.e., more discreet) and lightweight. The thin depth-of-field of the 50 would be nice to have. The total weight of the three lenses is 1.9 kg.

KIT 2
24-70 f/2.8 L
35 f/1.4 L
70-200 f/4 L IS -or- 135 f/2 L

Benefits of kit 2: A flexible zoom with great image quality and one (35) or more (35 and 135) fast primes. I would need to change lenses less frequently with this kit. The total weight of the three lenses is 2.3 kg.

I currently have the 35, 24-70, and 70-200, and have used the 24 and 50. I haven't used the 135, but I like how it is smaller and more discreet (i.e., black) than the 70-200 (but I love the image quality from the 70-200).

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on which kit (or a variant of these kits) to go with. I've also considered a 35-85-135 (or 70-200) set up, but I really need a minimum of 24mm at the wide end.

Thanks very much,

Jonathan

http://jonathanmyers.smugmug.com/

Click to expand...

--
derek.
my current cameras:Soony A900, EOS5D2.
I may sell the Nikon D7k for the K5.

Click to expand...

--
derek.
my current cameras:Soony A900, EOS5D2.
I may sell the Nikon D7k for the K5.

Click to expand...

--
http://www.jamesaxford.com

Always interested in this. If I could start now with an unlimited budget I would go with 16-35 L II (or 16-28 Tokina if it ends up being great), 50 1.4 Sigma, and the 100 2.8 Macro L or the 70-200 2.8 IS L II. If Canon comes out with an amazing 24-70 2.8 L IS, I could see that and a 135L or 100 2.8 L IS Macro being an amazing combo, although I will always want something wider and longer...

Here is a rough summary of what everyone has recommended so far (organized from most votes to least votes):

70-200 - 9 votes (4 votes for f/4 IS, 3 for f/2.8, 2 votes unclear)
24-70 f/2.8 - 6 votes
Wide-angle - 6 votes (Canon 16-35 f/2.8 was the most recommended)
35 f/1.4 - 3 votes
50 - 2 votes
85 - 2 votes (85 1.8 and 1.2)
24 f/1.4 - 1 vote
100 f/2.8 IS - 1 vote
135 f/2 - 1 vote

So far, the consensus seems to be that it would be worthwhile to add a wide-angle lens (e.g., 16-35 f/2.8) to my current set up (24-70, 35, 70-200).

Thanks!

Jonathan