The Prime lens bug.

..seems to have taken its hold on me.
Over the last month or so, I seem to immediately dismount my 24-70 L in favour of my 50mm 1.8. Going through my pictures, it seems I only shoot at either 24mm,50mm or 70mm, and I'm considering ditching the 24-70 for a 30ish prime, and the 85 1.8

Anyone have any input on those lenses?
hahah can I expect this phase to pass?

My exact plan
My dream\planned gear list:
Canon 17-40L (Own)
Canon 28 1.8 (Next)
Canon 50 1.4 (Own)
Canon 85 1.8 (Own)
Canon 135 2L (Future)
Canon 200 f/2.8L (Future)

Bukka wrote in post #7224704
..seems to have taken its hold on me.
Over the last month or so, I seem to immediately dismount my 24-70 L in favour of my 50mm 1.8. Going through my pictures, it seems I only shoot at either 24mm,50mm or 70mm, and I'm considering ditching the 24-70 for a 30ish prime, and the 85 1.8

Anyone have any input on those lenses?
hahah can I expect this phase to pass?

Depends to be honest

Ditching zooms in favor of primes is not a stupid move, its a personal choice, if you usually stick in one of those 3 areas for a shoot or can afford to change lenses/have a backup camera, Then really, Go ahead

You can get the 24mm f/1.4L or the 35 f/1.4L and the 50mm f/1.4 and the 85 f/1.8

or if you're on a budget, the 24 f/2.8 and 35 f/2 are great choices as well!

I sold my 17-55 because I personall usually used it at 17 stopped down to f/8 on a tripod [Which my Sigma 10-20 does equally well] or racked out to 55mm at f/2.8

I basically realized I never used it or got anything i really wanted to keep with it [Because f/2.8 at 55 just never isolated things well for me it seemed..] and said I'll revise my system to something like this

Sigma 10-20
Canon 50mm f/1.4 [Or Sigma/Zeiss depending..]
Canon 100-400 [or Sigma 80-400 OS]
Canon 200 f/2.8L

Then another fast prime or two in there depending on how i feel in the future...

[QUOTE=Bukka;7224704].​.seems to have taken its hold on me.
Over the last month or so, I seem to immediately dismount my 24-70 L in favour of my 50mm 1.8. Going through my pictures, it seems I only shoot at either 24mm,50mm or 70mm, and I'm considering ditching the 24-70 for a 30ish prime, and the 85 1.8

Anyone have any input on those lenses?
hahah can I expect this phase to pass?[/quote]

most likely. if you ever catch yourself saying "zooms are for chumps" the phase will have about run its course .

ed rader

Well, I think a lot of is having to deal with weight. I'm at the point now where I'd much rather carry 3 lighter lenses, and mount 1 at a time, instead of having a 2 pound zoom.

I know the 85 1.8 is a great lens, but i'm just not sure what the options are in the shorter focal lengths. I eventually do plan to bump my 50 1.8 to a 50 1.4...I may be getting rid of my sigma 10-20 to do that.

Bukka wrote in post #7224766
Well, I think a lot of is having to deal with weight. I'm at the point now where I'd much rather carry 3 lighter lenses, and mount 1 at a time, instead of having a 2 pound zoom.

I know the 85 1.8 is a great lens, but i'm just not sure what the options are in the shorter focal lengths. I eventually do plan to bump my 50 1.8 to a 50 1.4...I may be getting rid of my sigma 10-20 to do that.

Eh I'd recommend against that, unless you dont shoot in that range frequently There are sadly no primes that cover down there very well that arent HUGELY expensive

KenjiS wrote in post #7224777
Eh I'd recommend against that, unless you dont shoot in that range frequently There are sadly no primes that cover down there very well that arent HUGELY expensive

Yeah, I don't use my 10-20 very much...it has become sort of dead weight in my bag.

The Devil's Advocate......Primes are great for specific known, controlled circumstances, such as shooting portraits, specific type of nature or architecture...etc. Even then, most of those are done stopped down and pretty much any decent lens, in the right focal range will do.

If you think that a prime will make a good walk around, then you are probably just taking snapshots. Too much cropping involved, most likely. If you are prepared to walk around with 3 primes and waste time switching lenses, then you are probably shooting scenery.

Nothing wrong with any of the above..... just pointing that out.

Bukka wrote in post #7224766
Well, I think a lot of is having to deal with weight. I'm at the point now where I'd much rather carry 3 lighter lenses, and mount 1 at a time, instead of having a 2 pound zoom.

I know the 85 1.8 is a great lens, but i'm just not sure what the options are in the shorter focal lengths. I eventually do plan to bump my 50 1.8 to a 50 1.4...I may be getting rid of my sigma 10-20 to do that.

so what you are saying is you want no wide angle and you want to change lenses frequently.

hmmmmm....let me think about that one .

ed rader

bohdank wrote in post #7224845
The Devil's Advocate......Primes are great for specific known, controlled circumstances, such as shooting portraits, specific type of nature or architecture...etc. Even then, most of those are done stopped down and pretty much any decent lens, in the right focal range will do.

If you think that a prime will make a good walk around, then you are probably just taking snapshots. Too much cropping involved, most likely. If you are prepared to walk around with 3 primes and waste time switching lenses, then you are probably shooting scenery.

Nothing wrong with any of the above..... just pointing that out.

Usually I am shooting in a very controlled mannor. My style of portraiture, is pretty structured in how I shoot, and almost always shot at 70mm (except recently as I've been switching to the 50mm)

Same thing about when I shoot on the street. Generally shot 24-30mm, and I prefer to get in close, so having to crop is of little issue.

Then sounds like you should go for it.

Bukka wrote in post #7224874
Usually I am shooting in a very controlled mannor. My style of portraiture, is pretty structured in how I shoot, and almost always shot at 70mm (except recently as I've been switching to the 50mm)

Same thing about when I shoot on the street. Generally shot 24-30mm, and I prefer to get in close, so having to crop is of little issue.

i hear what you are saying .... but it sounds like an ideological move to me.

straight up dichotomous 180 degree move .

ed rader

haha,
Anyone mind giving some input on some of the wider (28-35) primes available?
I'm not in need of having "L" glass in my bag so third party options are more than welcome ahah.

I heard good and bad things about the sigma 30 1.4...
or the Canon 28 1.8

There are people on this forum who do not want to change lenses on their camera. And certainly not every few minutes. I think that is kinda silly myself but zooms have their place. If I was going to travel light I would grab 2 zooms and not a bunch of primes. If you came over for a portrait I wouldn't even consider using a zoom. But, it probably took me 20 years to learn where to stand to get the proper perspective for a picture. Now, I can use a prime easily. For others, having a zoom helps them get the job done.

Bukka wrote in post #7224704
..seems to have taken its hold on me.
Over the last month or so, I seem to immediately dismount my 24-70 L in favour of my 50mm 1.8. Going through my pictures, it seems I only shoot at either 24mm,50mm or 70mm, and I'm considering ditching the 24-70 for a 30ish prime, and the 85 1.8

Anyone have any input on those lenses?
hahah can I expect this phase to pass?

Bukka wrote in post #7224906
haha,
Anyone mind giving some input on some of the wider (28-35) primes available?
I'm not in need of having "L" glass in my bag so third party options are more than welcome ahah.

I heard good and bad things about the sigma 30 1.4...
or the Canon 28 1.8

I shoot primarily with the Sigma 30mm 1.4 and Canon 85mm 1.8. I do have a Sigma 10-20 for ultra wide duty. The Sigma 30 and Canon 85 1.8 are excellent lenses. Half of the complaints you read about the Siggy are user error and internet bandwagon. Have a look through the archives for those lenses. Both are capable of incredible images.