dump 70-200 to go prime?

Use an XSI and going to use the loyalty program to get a 5D markII next year.

Have a 100 2.0 in bag which I like and will keep.

Addicted amatuer who shoots street, family functions, landscape.

Learning portrait with off camera lighting. Harder than I thought it would be.

Thinking about selling my 70-200 2.8IS...

and

Getting:

85 1.8
135 2.0
200 2.8

Will I miss the flexiability? Will my picture quality be that much better?

I dont think you would need the 85/100/135L combo, the focal lengths are pretty redundant and once you get a 135L, you won't use any of the others. I would sell the 100mm and not worry about the 85mm and go for something in the shorter reach category. Some sort of 50mm would be nice to have to round out your set.

Wow thats pretty much what I have been doing is dumping my zooms for primes. It all started with trading my 50 1.4 for a 85 1.8. I then sold off my 70-200L f/4 IS and got a 28 1.8/50 1.8 mk1 and traded my 24-105L for a 135L. I am still waiting on my 50 and 135 but so far I am happy with the 28/85 combo. I fell in love with primes and although I will miss the luxury of having a zoom but I am much happier with the results I get from the primes.

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.

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.

yes, in the end, I feel, that it makes you a better photographer because you learn to see shots with what you have at the time. You are more creative in your composition. Pick a lens or two and take a walk. It's really not that inconvenient. In portrait environments, primes steal the show as well.

Just noticed you also talked about doing landscapes, why not get something a little wide like a 35mm at least?

sell it and get 2.8Mk2, or downgrade to 4IS and try some other lenses?
that's what I'd do if I were you

70-200 is just too convenient to dump Imo, just hold onto it and get glass as you have the budget to do so.

bigpow wrote in post #10893213
sell it and get 2.8Mk2, or downgrade to 4IS and try some other lenses?
that's what I'd do if I were you

And that's what I did.mk2 that is.

With those primes, I would just stick with the 70-200 for now.

I'd get something like this after selling the zoom:
- Zeiss ZE 35mm f/2 Distagon
- Canon 85mm f/1.8
- Canon 135L

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 ..

guyzer09 wrote in post #10893094
traded my 24-105L for a 135L.

i'm interested in snagging a 135 for my T2i. what do you use your 135 for? i'm just worried that it will end up being too long for practical use...

use what u've got... primes won't magically aid u produce professional work... it's more about skills then lenses.

if you don't get quality results from 70-200 f.2.8 no prime will help u there...

sandro9mm wrote in post #10893511
use what u've got... primes won't magically aid u produce professional work... it's more about skills then lenses.

Yes to that.

I see work in this forum from a few photographers who have refined their gear down to just primes, and some have even forsaken some of the Canon glass for Zeiss.
I can pick their work...it's that good. But it ain't the glass that makes them that good, it's their eye. The glass just makes the excellent into the superb. And I can also pick the work of some who use zooms as well as primes, and it's also that good!

If you, OP and others, are in that league you won't be needing a thread on POTN to tell you what to buy, you will know because it's those sort of things that real photographers know.

If, like me, you are 'aspiring' to those higher planes, and why wouldn't you be, just keep making pictures and learning. The lenses you need will become obvious by the work you do. By all means buy primes instead of zooms if that seems like the best thing for you, but don't believe that you'll suddenly become a better photographer.