Your must-have Canon EF lenses

[gavinlg]

Big fan of the 24-70 f2.8L second version, and the 35mm f1.4L first version. Both rendered sublimely. Regret selling the 35mm.

Best,
-Tim

I have to agree that the 35mm f1.4L (1st version) is truly superb. The 50mm f1.2L is too, but is more a of a character lens and less all-purpose. It got mixed reviews for many years because it's not ridiculously sharp at f1.2 (only moderately sharp) but the rendering wide open is sublime.

 

[Russell W. Barnes]

'A 50/1.8, 85/1.8 and the pancake 40/2.8.'

I like my EF f1.8 85mm USM for train spotting. I couldn't quite put my finger on why I liked some of the pics I'd seen taken by others on APS-C cameras with a 50mm lens, then it dawned on me that an 85mm on my full-frame is the same as a 50mm on an APS, so I got one and I like it.

I keep a 40mm f2.8 STM 'pancake' lens on my 5D otherwise; I like it too, better than the 50mm f1.4 USM I once had. My only other Canon lens is an 'L'-series 200mm f1.8, but it only gets used on odd occasions.

 

[Fraser]

When Canon dumped their FD mount to EF mount, I refused to buy any EF lenses. Ever.

Even though it is annoying and its such a shame that unlike Nikon you can't use all those great FD lenses on an EF mount Canon realised that without changing the mount they would not be able to make an autofocus system and there would never of been the 1.2 lenses.

As for favourite EF lenses I always liked the 24mm 1.4, 50mm 1.2 if you can get a good copy and as already said the 135mm f2 is amazing.
For a time my lenses for work were the 24,50,135 and 300mm until I got lazy and went back to 16-35, 70-200 and 300mm.

 

[Colin Corneau]

85mm 1.2 II is fantastic for portraits. It just makes everything look good -- when I have the freedom, I'll shoot wide open...even though I find I have to shoot twice as much to make up for the shots where the eyelashes are sharp but the eyes aren't! But wow, when you nail it, it looks terrific.

The other one I find I shoot a lot is the 50/1.2 -- simple lens that also just makes things look terrific. Very versatile too -- oddly, when I shoot film I much prefer a 35mm lens for a 'go everywhere' kit. But on a 5D, it's a 50.

Friend of mine bought the fabled 50mm/1.0 -- I didn't even know that lens existed until he got it. And you know what, he kills it with razor sharp shots too. I'll echo Fraser above, on the 24mm 1.4....it has a really nice look to it, its own character.

 

[Colin Corneau]

When Canon dumped their FD mount to EF mount, I refused to buy any EF lenses. Ever.

Good for you, thanks for chiming in.

 

[Colin Corneau]

35 f/1.4L : all around great lens for one-lens trips, not my favorite FL

85 f/1.2L : super lens for portraits, a bit heavy with 72mm filters ; )

100 f/2.8 Macro : this is the one lens I would keep if I could only have one, fast accurate focus, good for walking around and macro (hand held or live view on a tripod).

70-200 f/4L : good compromise tele, light weight, use it with the 1.4x

What's missing is a 50 and a wide... at the price point, nothing rings the bell IMHO

I have the 70-200 f/4 and I don't miss the extra stop at all...an amazingly sharp lens, it really is terrific. Being more compact and lighter doesn't hurt, either.

 

[taemo]

I have the 70-200 f/4 and I don't miss the extra stop at all...an amazingly sharp lens, it really is terrific. Being more compact and lighter doesn't hurt, either.

I sold my 135L to get a 70-200 f/4 as yes, you sacrifice some bokeh (f2 vs f4) but you get a more versatile zoom lens

if you are shooting lots of events, the 70-200 is a no brainer but personally I find the 135L more fun to shoot.

 

[Colin Corneau]

I sold my 135L to get a 70-200 f/4 as yes, you sacrifice some bokeh (f2 vs f4) but you get a more versatile zoom lens

if you are shooting lots of events, the 70-200 is a no brainer but personally I find the 135L more fun to shoot.

Definitely - it's a great events lens and for travelling, also. Light, small and as I said, so sharp. A winner of a lens.

 

[B-9]

Plus you get a white barrel! 😉

Ever tried the 80-200L black barrel? (Never came in white, atleast that I know)

 

[Fuchs]

- EF 16-35/4L
- EF 35/1.4L v.1
- EF 40/2.8 STM
- EF 100/2 USM
and the 24/1.4L v.2 is also a must have.

 

[Ccoppola82]

I keep seeing the 40mm 2.8. Perhaps I should throw mine on next time I feel like lugging a DSLR around!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Best lenses I have are L series. Even old EF L series are great.
Film or digital. They are better than Leica, but the size...
Even 50 1.2 L EF despite its dirt cheap build with plastic and glue is the lens I still miss.
50 1.8 should be just fine on film. I have MKI with all original, minus box as well.
So-so on digital lens, IMO.

 

[GarageBoy]

How's the 24 1.4? Always wanted one and they're relatively cheap

The 17 ts-e was well coveted

 

[Fraser]

Plus you get a white barrel! 😉

Ever tried the 80-200L black barrel? (Never came in white, atleast that I know)

About twenty plus years ago when I was a staff photographer I had one as a hire lens while my lens was being repaired after I ran over my camera bag in my car! they were nicknamed the drain pipe.
I seem to remember it being quite good bit heavy compared to the 70-200 and not as sharp or as fast focus I would think, for a time they were quite cheap but they seem quite collectable now and are almost the same price as an original 70-200. Always fancied by one and pairing it with the 20-35mm 2.8.

 

[B-9]

Fraser,

I always thought the 28-80L was interesting. Seems like the same story these days. They were pretty cheap but I suppose now they are collectible as well as the 20-35L.

I would not mind one of those 28-300L lol talk about only needing one lens.

 

[Scottboarding]

If you want a 35mm and can't afford the f1.4 version, the original f2 (non IS) is a great lens. I didn't feel the need for the 1.4 or IS back when I shot Canon so I went with the original and I was super happy with it. Plenty sharp wide open and fast (though loud) autofocus. The 40mm f2.8 is an awesome little lens as well.

 

[B-9]

Anyone have the 70-210/4.0?

Looks like a banger for around 50-75$

I also hear the 28-80 MKI (Metal mount) is a nice one.

 

[raid]

Good for you, thanks for chiming in.

I still have many excellent FD lenses. 80-200/4L, 85/1.2L, 50/1.2L ... maybe they are similar optically to the matching EF lenses?

 

[B-9]

Raid,

I would assume they have to be pretty similar!

What do you shoot them on? T90?!

 

[Mackinaw]

I still have many excellent FD lenses. 80-200/4L, 85/1.2L, 50/1.2L ... maybe they are similar optically to the matching EF lenses?

I believe some of the early EF lenses were optically the same as their FD counterparts. Not sure which ones though.

Jim B.