Canon Holy Trinity advice needed

Canon Holy Trinity is 35L, 85L and 135L !

Zooms are not playing the same league man

16-35 is a lovely lens, with fantastic colour rendition. F/2.8 makes it a really creative indoor tool. I love ultrawide, and I've some expensive lenses, but even I'd baulk at the 14L II. I just don't see how you'd get sustained use from it.

I've always though that the following was considered the "Holy Trinity of Zooms":

16-35 2.8L
24-70 2.8L
70-200 2.8L IS

In any case, the three zooms would be amazing to have to cover all sorts of photographic needs...

- airbutchie

There is no Canon Holy Trinity...everybody will have their own trinity.

I find having the 24-70 and 16-35 very useful, as sometimes I want normal to a bit wide, other times I want really wide to not-so wide. The 16-35 is an awesome and very versatile lens, I have a 34L which now doesn't see much use after getting the zoom. I upgraded from the 17-40, never happy with the IQ of mine, plus f/4 was a big limiting factor.
I toyed with the idea of getting the 14L, but after some testing, decided that it is only good for extreme situations, not much good for anything else. I'm not an ultra-wide person enough to drop that kind of $$ on it. The 16-35 is way more versatile (how often will you really need just 14mm?) is an extremely good quality zoom, and produces great results. But don't just get it 'cause it's part of someone's idea of a 'holy trinity of zooms'. Get it if you need it.

The reason you might buy the 16-35 over the 14 is due to the obvious versatility it would have over a prime. Even though you have an overlap you might go somewhere that you would only bring the 16-35 and 70-200 while leaving the 24-70 home.

I really like my 16-35 and have no desire for the 14L. My guess is more "pro's" would buy the zoom due to versatility.

texshooter wrote in post #8344318
So I bought 2 of the 3 lenses in the Canon Holy Trinity: 1) 24mm-70mm, 2) 70-200mm,

but,

I'm having doubts about getting the 16-35mm.

I'm thinking about getting the 14mm ultrawide instead. I figure that my 24-70mm lens does half of what the 16-35mm lens can do (namely shoot 24-35mm range), so why pay for the overlap. Secondly, I figure that most wide angle shots don't go wider than 24mm, anyways, unless a REALLY wide look is desired, in which case the 14mm would best fit that bill.

What do you recommend. Should I complete the Holy Trinity set, or go with the specialty ultrawide 14mm lens instead. I'll have to sacrifice shooting 16-23mm. Is that a fair trade off? And no, I can't buy them all. Wish I could.

cherrymoon wrote in post #8346478
Canon Holy Trinity is 35L, 85L and 135L !

Zooms are not playing the same league man

Come on man...you just busted his bubble. Now he has to run out and purchase 3 primes so that he has the Holy Trinity, just like the pros.

Hogloff wrote in post #8348486
Come on man...you just busted his bubble. Now he has to run out and purchase 3 primes so that he has the Holy Trinity, just like the pros.

and I'm taking my 16-35 and going home now.

cherrymoon wrote in post #8346478
Canon Holy Trinity is 35L, 85L and 135L !

Zooms are not playing the same league man

I thought the zooms/primes where different!

35L 85L 135L where the holy trinity of primes!

I'd check out that 35L, I recently tried it over the 16-35 -- and I'm leaning towards the 35L now xD

35L 85L 135L

Some say the 24L II, 50L, 135L

semantics.

I think everyone is correct here... Heck, I consider the 24-105 (instead of the 24-70) to be another option in the Holy Trinity of Zooms(which, yes, I think is as correct as the Trinity of Primes)

ishmelly wrote in post #8344367
i'm in the same boat i have the 24-70 and the 70-200 but i was debating between the 16-35 and the 35 prime. i hear so many good things about the 35 prime lens. which do you guys prefer?

for what it's worth, i'm in the same boat and i'm 99% sure i'm getting the 35L. good luck!

im happy with my 2 of the trinity and the 85/1.8...i may get the 1.2 some day, but there are a bunch of lenses id rather have to compliment what i already have instead..

14/2.8, 24/1.4II, 200/2, 400/2.8 IS( rented this last week and omg, but not for photography ;] )