Lens and new body based on rebates.

[johnastovall]

I'm in the process of upgrading my lenses and am looking at dropping the 17-40L, the 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and the 70-200/f4.0L and adding a second 5D body and dumping the 20D.

Based on the current rebate structure, there are only 2 lenses I'm considering which would double my 5D rebate. The 85/1.2L or the 70-200/2.8L.

I lean to the prime but the zoom might see more use since I could use it in lower light.

I know they are for very different uses. You can see my shooting style and such here.

Examples of my shooting style.

Current gear on profile.

[Daniel Bates]

It's really difficult not to recommend a 70-200 f/2.8L, but you seem comfortable with primes, so the 85 f/1.2L would be a good choice also.

Question: why are you getting rid of the 85 f/1.8? It might make sense to hang on to that and get the 70-200 f/2.8L...

[Jake]

I voted for the 70-200 because that one seems like it would have more uses.
I don't think you would go wrong with either and I think you will end up getting both of them one of these days anyway.....

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by Daniel Bates

It's really difficult not to recommend a 70-200 f/2.8L, but you seem comfortable with primes, so the 85 f/1.2L would be a good choice also.

Question: why are you getting rid of the 85 f/1.8? It might make sense to hang on to that and get the 70-200 f/2.8L...

I want the extra speed and Bokeh which the 1.2 is known for. I like to shot in many cases before or just at sun rise. I find the 85/1.8 Ok but not interesting. I'm wanting to add a 24/1.4L and the 85/1.2L over the long run. so I have a full range of L primes from 24 to 200.

The 70-200/2.8L would give me a full range of 2.8 zooms from 16 to 200 in three lenses.

Decision, Decision....

[Daniel Bates]

I would probably lean towards the 70-200 then. It's a fine lens, and you'll be getting one sooner or later anyways...

[dlbdata]

70-200 is the way to go for versatility.

[PeteQ]

John, it seems that my 70-200 spends a lot of time on my D2x, it's my workhorse. It is just such a versatile lens. To me it seems your decision really falls on one thing....Will you be doing a lot of super low light work? I mean the 85 seems a fantastic piece of gear, but I love the ability to compose on the fly instead of foot zooming. I know my Nikon 70-200 has great bokeh and from what I hear the Canon folks are happy also. The nice bokeh combined with the compression of the tele when you zoom in can really do wonders. The Nikon 70-200 performs well for everything from portraits to sports and I would believe the Canon does too, at least from what I notice on the sidelines.

Good luck!

[Wil_Bloodworth]

While it pained me to vote against the 85mm, I just had to pick the 70-200mm and agree with everything Pete said. You've already got the 85mm f/1.8 so you could work with it until you can upgrade to the f/1.2. Personally, I just think that's the best route.

- Wil

[AndrewCCM]

I also voted for 70-200.. I use mine all the time.. Even though I own primes (not the 85 F1.2), more often than not, my zooms are used unless I want a specific look or application.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by PeteQ

John, it seems that my 70-200 spends a lot of time on my D2x, it's my workhorse. It is just such a versatile lens. To me it seems your decision really falls on one thing....Will you be doing a lot of super low light work? I mean the 85 seems a fantastic piece of gear, but I love the ability to compose on the fly instead of foot zooming. I know my Nikon 70-200 has great bokeh and from what I hear the Canon folks are happy also. The nice bokeh combined with the compression of the tele when you zoom in can really do wonders. The Nikon 70-200 performs well for everything from portraits to sports and I would believe the Canon does too, at least from what I notice on the sidelines.

Good luck!

I do more than a little low light but I have a 50/1.0L for the really low light.

[iCe]

When I bought my 85 f1.2L I shot a lot of frames with it. But the 70-200 f1.2L IS has been on the camera second only to the 600 f4. Even the 300 f1.2 has less time than the 70-200. I've owned a 70-200 f2.8 of some kind for 15 years? Something like that. Daniel shoots some pretty nice images with my.. oops... HIS "old" non-IS version and it's been around for a while. It's always been the workhorse lens. It's relatively light, has awesome bokeh, and the IS version is kind of nice when you don't feel like dragging a tripod around (even though I handheld the "old" one frequently).

Personally I would get them both

These are all 70-200 f2.8 shots from last week-

Shenendoah 1

Shrooms

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by iCe

When I bought my 85 f1.2L I shot a lot of frames with it. But the 70-200 f1.2L IS has been on the camera second only to the 600 f4. Even the 300 f1.2 has less time than the 70-200. I've owned a 70-200 f2.8 of some kind for 15 years? Something like that. Daniel shoots some pretty nice images with my.. oops... HIS "old" non-IS version and it's been around for a while. It's always been the workhorse lens. It's relatively light, has awesome bokeh, and the IS version is kind of nice when you don't feel like dragging a tripod around (even though I handheld the "old" one frequently).

Personally I would get them both

These are all 70-200 f2.8 shots from last week-

Shenendoah 1

Shrooms

I do plan to get them both. When this is over I plan to have for Canon two 5D bodies and the following Canon lenses:

400mm f/5.6L, 200mm f/2.8L, 180mm f/3.5L Macro,135mm f/2.0L, 85mm f/1.2L MkII, 50mm f/1.0L, 35mm f/1.4L, 24mm f/1.4L, 16-35 f/2.8L, 24-70 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, EF 1.4X II.

Three 2.8 zooms and 8 primes (Canon's fastest) and that will do it as far as Canon until they have a 21/2.8L as good as the Distagon (or I get a serious case of Zeiss fever which ever comes first).

Then all future lens money goes to Leica for a while.

[iCe]

Just in case you come across one of the "older" 85 f1.2's and are tempted to settle... I was able to get my hands on the II version at Fran's workshop... BIG difference in the way the II focuses vs the "older" lens. The II is much faster.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by iCe

Just in case you come across one of the "older" 85 f1.2's and are tempted to settle... I was able to get my hands on the II version at Fran's workshop... BIG difference in the way the II focuses vs the "older" lens. The II is much faster.

I had heard that and now that Amazon has them for 1800 and change, it makes sense to go with new since there were used ones for that at KEH last month.

[venchka]

OOPS! My bad. I re-read the poll entry. No worries. It's still a load. Support required. YMMV.

You are thinking about the 70-200 2.8 L IS right? Have you ever handled one? It's a handful. Early and late in the day you'll want a monopod minimum and tripod mostly. Other than that, go for it! It covers a lot of ground until you get the 85/1.2 L.