I need a walk around lens for Canon 5D III

[Jed Shields]

I currently use a Canon 7D with 17-55 f2.8 L and 70-200 f2.8 L. I've recently picked up a second hand 5D MkIII and am looking for something to pair with the 70-200 lens. I also picked up a Canon nifty 50mm to keep me going.

I'm considering the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L, 24-105 f4 L and 17-40 f4 L lenses. Second hand on Ebay they're going for up to £400 ish. Can anyone recommend the best option?

 

[rpstewart]

My 24-70 2.8L is pretty much permanently attached to my 5DII. Lovely lens but it’s heavy!

I haven’t used the other two so can’t really comment. The 17-40 would be tempting but I’m a sucker for wide angles these days….

 

[a1ex2001]

My 24-70 2.8L is pretty much permanently attached to my 5DII. Lovely lens but it’s heavy!

I haven’t used the other two so can’t really comment. The 17-40 would be tempting but I’m a sucker for wide angles these days….

I have a 24-105mm as a walkabout for my 5D Mkii and it is a lovely lens with a really versatile range. Most of the time though it has a 35mm f2 IS stuck on it the size and quality of which is amazing and 35mm is a lovely focal length on full frame!

 

[dave28]

the f2.8 because f4 lenses does away with the iso performance advantage of full frames.

if you bother to buy full frame then you may as well take advantage

 

[Jed Shields]

I've always favoured the f2.8 in my 17-55 EFS lens, but I didn't think the drop to f4 in full frame would be an issue... I thought the ISO noise reduction would negate it to a good degree...

 

[iamtheoneneo]

the f2.8 because f4 lenses does away with the iso performance advantage of full frames.

if you bother to buy full frame then you may as well take advantage

From a DoF perceptive sure...but there's more to lenses then warped backgrounds and I certainly wouldn't buy a lens based on that alone when most of the time you won't be cranking to such shallow DoF.

And given a mark 3 has four times the available valid iso range from 7d i have no idea why would you consider this a 'problem'

 

[dave28]

From a DoF perceptive sure...but there's more to lenses then warped backgrounds and I certainly wouldn't buy a lens based on that alone when most of the time you won't be cranking to such shallow DoF.

I use it for light gathering, the more light you can get the less you have to bump up the ISO and the more flexibility you have to use fast shutter speeds.
F4 is great if you live in California and its sunny all the time and have tons of light to work with.

 

[JohnStewart]

For a walk about lens, the 24-105 is hard to beat. I have that and a 24-70 f2.8. For a general use lens (i.e. walking about on holiday) it would be the 24-105 every time. On a full frame body it's amazing the amount of time the extra reach is useful. The IS is handy in low light as well.

 

[BananaDunka]

I use nothing but the 35mm 1.4 for everyday stuff. Would never use anything else now having had 2.8 zooms from various models over the years. There's something this fl does that no other lens has been able to or ever will that gives images a certain "pop" and character.

 

[WoZZeR]

I use the 24-105 F4L on my 5DII occasionally and it is a fine lens with a decent zoom, well built and gives nice images. The 77mm filter size is handy too, fits so many lenses.

 

[marcus_667]

24-105 when i had my 5d3 was like a swiss army knife of lenses was great for walk around etc

 

[Tysonator]

the 24-105 L f4 IMO is ok lens, reason being it is a very old design and I use to have one for my 7D & 7Dii ans results were not as good as was expecting. My sigma 17-70 OS HSM contemporary was sharper IMO.
The 24-105L f4 Mkii is a great lens however the cost is a lot more than your budget. My choice would be the 24/70L f2.8