SiaoP wrote in post #10893096
Keep the 70-200. I don't think I can survive without a zoom. Primes are just too inconvenient, not talking about the walking part. When you change the lens to get the shot, the subject might not be there anymore.
For me it was something opposite ,( I you have a mind to goo to fullframe, it's another type of photo) ..after I bought a 5DMKII, I got tired not to be able to use a lens 24h a day and get nice bokeh as soon as a subject is more than 1 meter far .. heavy to carry, bulky and intrusive (70-200F4 then a 70-300DOIS)..
So in two years I migrate to 135L2.0 than 24L1.4II than 85L1.2II and I finished with a Zuiko 500F8 (for candids and lanscape) .. so, sold my zooms ... without any regrets..
I mainly just go out with 2 lenses 24+85 (in the night) or 24 + 500 daytime ..it's light and covers my needs.. one lens is in a pocket and 5DMKII+other lens with a R-strap I carry in the other pocket a NEX5+FD50F1.4.
Ultra sharp, largest dof range, smoothest Bokeh, best speed speed (days and nights), best isolation power .. which zoom would be so so convenient ?
I don't mind to miss a subject as I am not a journalist.
I mostly need to get time to get the good light orientation on the subject, be at the best height level, get the proper DOf to get a good isolation and have a sharp full subject, get the right iso/shutter speed ratio for moving subject just to freeze movement not to get blurred hand, feet, hair etc ..
90% of my best pictures were when I took time to take them, nearly never when I pointed and shoot ..