There's quite a few people buying the 5d mark II for stock work so I'm interested in what lenses are you going to be using on it? It's a 21mp beast so only the top glass will be good enough (I know that pixel density isn't as high as on 50d for example, but still). I've seen a lot of samples with the 24-105 L f4 kit lens and they don't convince me. CA and distortions are awfull on some pics, but that can be fixed (still a PITA to do it on every shot) however poor sharpness can't. There are probably only a few zooms out there that will be able to make full use of the body: 70-200 f4 IS (probably the sharpest zoom in the canon lineup), 28-70 2.8 (discontinued, tests and many users confirm it's better than 24-70 2. and on the wide angle the nikon 14-24 with an adapter. That leaves us with primes. Probably most of the L ones will be up to the task (if you get a good copy that is).

So what are you gonna use with the new 5d II? Any suggestions from 1ds mark III users?

deleted

I really expected such a thread. Good question, for the maximum performance 5d mk II users need to forget the cheap lenses.

Here is my lineup of lenses I will use on my 5d mk II:
50mm f1,4 and 100mm f2,8mm macro. These two lenses I consider far enough to shoot sill life stock. I saw many tests and I compared these lenses with others and the result is that the 100mm macro is among the best Canon glasses, without any significant distortions. The 50mm it's not so good even at 2,8 but from 4up it's perfect, especially considering the usable high iso with the new 5d mk II.

For people/action there is the 17-40 f4. I don't see the reason to pay double for the 16-35 while the image quality is almost the same. Also, at wide angle the bokeh changes from 2,8 to 4 are very small so f4 is far good. It's definitely not Nikkor 14-24 but some more post-processing in raw and PS helps.
Also the most important is the 24-70 f2,8. Yes, if somebody can purchase a good 28-70 f2,8 lens, it's better but it's discontinued. For people and indoor shoots I see that the 24-70 it's a must.

For nature/landscape shoots the 17-40 f4 and the 70-200 f4L IS is perfect. I don't prefer the 70-200 f2,8 version since it's image quality is lower than the f4 IS.

So, 50mm f1,4, 100mm f2,8 macro, 17-40 f4, 24-70 f2,8, 70-200 f4 IS.

Of course other glasses like Sigma 8mm fisheye, Canon 14/15mm, Canon 85mm, Canon 135mm, Canon 180mm macro are welcome but without these you can live. For those who have enough budget, there is no question about what can be used, just buy the most expensive lenses...

I'm based on my own tests but anybody can have a look and COMPARE test results at
www.photozone.de
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/ here please look at the ISO 12233 Crops and compare! This is the most important thing.
Many other review sites do judge the lenses subjectively and provide totally unusable, good looking low-res samples. Don't look at these, they provide no information about sharpness, contrast, color reproduction and distortions!

here is my  current lens list ,which does almost all I need(except for macro but may be some kenko macro adapters would do the job)
nifty fifty+17-40 F4 L+70-200 F4 IS L 
I am dying to buy a 85mm f1.2 L but I have to wait for at it least a year as it is very expensive and I will have a big hole in my wallet after buying the new 5d m2   I'd also like to buy a 24-70 L f2.8 too.

24-70mm & 70-200mm f/2.8 IS

bought on Leaf's recommendation!

ahhh good choice .. i still think the 70-200 is my favorite lens of all.

i am using the same 24-70, 70-200 2.8 and the 16-35

my newest lens was the 180 f/3.5 (on sharpley's advice - which i have been very happy with and glad I went with the 180mm instead of the 100mm.  The extra working length has come in handy a number of times, and hand holding IS possible with good sunlight and pushing the ISO a little.

my 'to buy list'  which will take a few years to get through...
85mm f/1.2
100-400mm f/4.5-5.6
a tilt shift lens
15mm 2.8 fisheye
65mm 2.8 macro

i still use the 16-35 for the odd landscape or sky shot.  I bought it initially for interior architecture (real estate market photography).  So I won't be selling it but it is probably the least used lens.

The 15mm is on the wish list but i think mostly for fun... what do you use yours for?

85mm f/1.2

Was playing around with the 85 1.2 on 40d the other day. DOF is so shallow, you don't know wheather to look at the sharp parts of the picture or the wonderfull bokeh. Was hard to get the focus just right wide open (probably my fault, I'm not used to 1.2 ). Can't imagine that one on 5d wide open, if you focused on eyelashes the eye would probably be OOF

Was playing around with the 85 1.2 on 40d the other day. DOF is so shallow, you don't know wheather to look at the sharp parts of the picture or the wonderfull bokeh. Was hard to get the focus just right wide open (probably my fault, I'm not used to 1.2 ). Can't imagine that one on 5d wide open, if you focused on eyelashes the eye would probably be OOF

I've shot with this lens, too. Although using it wide open is attractive, it isn't always the best thing to do - even at a focus distance of 15ft you'll only have 8 in of in-focus room to play with. A better tactic is to stop it down to twice (to f/2.5), where you'll double the in-focus room and have something approaching maximum sharpness.

So far it looks that I'll be using my regular stock lenses - 70-200f4is, sigma 50f2.8 macro and sigma 105f2.8macro

The 24-105 zoom is nice for all around stuff, but corners suffer too much (at least on my copy) - on the other hand it is nice and sharp in the middle and I can crop the heck out of the photo with 21mp and still end up with XL size image

Zeiss ZE 50mm 1.4  - i'm waiting for that

Can't wait, actually.  Yes its manual, but it should top any of Canon's 50mm glass, which may sound ridiculous, but its probably true.  Just waiting on reviews

One of my favourite lenses is the 135L. I rented it a few times. This lens is amazing and sharp at 2.0. To go save I mostly shoot 2.2, 2.5 with it. I believe it is one of the lenses with the best image quality you can get from canon. I would prefer that over any 70-200 although it means the inconvenience of no zoom. It is also a bargain for the quality you get.
The 24-70 2.8 from canon is a nice lens. Although it is quite a bit heavy, as a walkarround lens.

I have the Canon 5D with 24-70mm f2.8 L lens and 100mm f2.8 macro lens. The 24-70mm is very sharp and a great lens as walk around, it is heavy but I cope okay with it as most of my work is on a tripod. It will get heavy if you're walking around a lot with it and particularly if you're carrying other accessories along with your camera and lens e.g. tripod, camera bag etc. It doesn't have image stabilisation, something to keep in mind if you want that, I don't need it so no loss to me. I do some table top photos with it mostly at the 70mm end and it can suffer from mild CA at 70mm but nothing too noticeable which cannot be corrected. I submit to Alamy so if this was a problem I'm sure I would have had rejections by now and to date I've had none. On the full frame 5D I would say (although I don't have experience of using this lens) that the 50mm might be too wide for most closeup table top and head and shoulders portrait photos. I nearly always use the 24-70mm at 70mm for this kind of work. It is a great lens for landscapes and I also do some home interior photos with it at the wide angle. The 100mm macro lens is perfect on the 5D for tabletop and closeup work/macro work. Also the 100mm lens is a great portrait lens, especially on the full frame 5D. The other lens that will compliment this camera well is the 70-200mm lens which is on my wish list for when I can next afford a camera equipment purchase.

Thanks a lot FreezingPics and Sophia, it seems that going for the 24-70 is a wise choice.
Now I'm tempted to give a call to a friend in NY coming home in Europe for holidays