I have the money for it, but not sure on 40 D I can have all the benefits from that lens... And it is also too big.

I believe that with a 5DII and 100 L IS USM I can have sharper results.

Have no money for both

The 100 L IS USM (macro, right?) actually works well in portraits since it's sharp, but I dunno I hear it's unflattering with skins. I've never had a problem and use it all the time.
But the 70-200 L IS MK II is probably the only lens I would sacrifice a memory card full of irreplaceable pictures for. I got an exceptionally sharp copy

This post was edited by onepagememory on Nov 4 2010 10:38am

Eheh yes, I believe you, I heard good things about it, but is a 40D a good enough body?

Coz I have the money for the lens or for the body, not even closed for both... + it is a mammoth to carry

Isn't better to buy a good camera first, that is a good combo with my 100 macro L is usm and to look with calm for a good wide/general purpose lens?

My ideal kit could be a 20-24, a 50, (or a 35 instead of both) and an 85-135... I am used to this equipment and suits my needs for most of the times. I prefer the 100 over bigger or fastest lenses coz macro lenses are sharp and you can go closed as much as you like. And 2.8 with a good IS is almost always enough.

In the end I believe that the 5D wins. The lower I could find it in Italy is 1900 euros.. A lot!

Oh lord.... By the time you finally decide what you want to get all the current cameras would be obsolete and you will have to do the whole comparison and research all over again then you will never be able to get anything at all
Geez just get a Nikon D700 if you don't mind it's 12MP sensor or Canon 5Dmk2 if you don't plan to use it for shooting sports



but the problem is not everyone needs a telephoto zoom.
He seems to be into landscape so a 70-200 zoom may not be that useful no matter how great and sharp it is.

IN YOUR FACE!!! YOU KNOW WHO!!

I went for the lens before body route first and got a few pro lenses and then I felt that I had enough good lenses for a better camera
Believe me you don't want to slap on a cheap lens on the 5Dmk2 or you would be totally disappointed with the results and probably blame
the camera.
Well if you go with Canon you will have a lot of very high quality lenses in the 24-135mm range. You can probably get a Zeiss 21mm f2.8,
Canon or Zeiss 35mm f1.4, Canon 50 f1.2L and Canon 135 f2L then you will be a very happy camper
hmm I don't know the exchange rate for Euros nowadays but I paid 2600 CAD for my 5D because Canon is giving a 100 dollar rebate on it right now

its unflattering to skin because its so sharp.. this goes with all macro lenses and thats why people dont usually use macro lenses for portraits. amateurs dont have to care about this unflattering skin that much tho, thats why people tend to tell amateurs that macro lenses are good for portraits besides actual macro work, since they are both generally use same focal lengths and you can blur the images in photoshop and get nearly the same results than with softer lens.

This post was edited by Antichrist- on Nov 4 2010 01:56pm

They also complain about skin tones. The sharpness issue is likely.

My 100 macro works good also for general purpose photography, macros are good for portraits too. The problem in the past was extension and low AF speed, now this is not a problem any more.

Sincerely, I would feel owned in I had to buy a soft portrait lens to make happy some old lady...