3 "Red" Ring Circus...aka The Trinity

Thanks to some recent good luck, I was able to complete the prime set a little earlier than I had planned.
I'm ecstatic about it. Here's a picture of the boys and a sample photo taken with the new lens. It's my usual model; even though he was not a willing model today as you can tell.
Brat

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Drooling......

I don't really get this 'holy trinity' thing. As far as I can tell it's just a sub set of 'L Fever', 'Dante Virus' and other such in-group/out-group nonesense. Maybe I'm missing something.

Well said. There are equipment collectors and photographers and most fall into one of these categories.

It all depends what you make out of it, but those lens, can be put to great use. schmoelzel is a great example of a user who is talented, and using these lens, just enchances his photos to greater levels.

And if someone wants to waste their money, let them. Hopefully if they decide to sell it used, someone with better skill can get it for cheaper and put it to good use.

And it'll always be like this and not just in photography. Some people will spend money just to have it, even though they don't use it to its fullest. That's life.

Ayotnoms puts out some pretty good work, from what I've seen over the time. I think its unfair to say that stuff in his thread and bring down his excitement by turning this into a "some people buy their lens just because of that L title."

I know schmoelzel takes a good shot and has a very good workflow and a very good model. What I actually said was that I don't understand what makes those 3 lenses the 'holy trinity' given they don't even cover the lengths most might prefer to use within the broad range covered by the 'trinity'. It's just an arbitory collection of three prime lenses.
Steve has a 50mm 1.4 which to me seems to add well to the three in practical terms, but not a wider prime or two that would really make it a very nice set of five or six.

My point wasn't directed to him at all, tho' in retrospect it clearly seems to. Apologies for that and for spoiling his joy. It relates to the meaninglessness of the description beyond, when you really do drill down, 'mines bigger and better'. As I said, if I'm missing something maybe someone will point it out. I was just curious. No big deal.

My skin is a horrific shade of envy green.

Have a blast with them, Steve.... and now I expect to see a lot more pictures posted out of you

Generally speaking, those three are excellent lenses (particularly for portraits, candids, etc), in fact 135 mm prime is superb, so happy luxury photography to you ! I'm sure you'll put them to good use.

They also cost a bundle of money ! With Canon lenses, it is not always "you get what you pay for".

A lmost as excellent and much cheaper, much lighter, much smaller "trinity set" would be 35 f2.0, 85 f1.8 and 135 f2.0. (Yeah, the 135 is "unique")

I think it is important that novice amateur photographers who are still acquiring their bread-and -butter gear, do understand that this lens triplet is not a "must have" unconditionally in order to enable one to do "quality" work. Far from it !

With all due respect, condyk, yes you are. You're missing "L" lenses.

With all due respect I've had three and I'm not missing them so far.

Ouch.

Nah, you're not missing anything. It couldn't have easily been termed The Three Stooges as The Holy Trinity. It's just a phrase. Nothing more. Nothing less. I'm thinking however, that Dante probably doesn't care for the idea that his name is associated with a virus. He may chime in on this later, who knows. Also, I don't believe there's a in-group/out-group mentality among the members in this forum.

The long and short of it is this: images I get from my "L" collection look very good to these old eyes; better, in fact, compared to those taken in my non-L days. The bigger question in my mind has been, should I go zoom or prime because the "L" decision was a done deal. In any event-- as a previous poster suggested-- if things don't work out with any of the lenses, I can sell them so that the buy/sell difference can be rationalized away as a rental fee for me and shrewd bargain for the buyer. A win/win proposition, no?

Cheers!

Its not the kit that is important, its the Eye and brain that uses it. You can turn out amazing pictures with the simplest of kit. Having better kit just makes it easier to do and eaiser to repeat. There are downsides, it costs more and it can make you lazy, the challenge is to not let it.

I have always said that I want to be limited by my ability not my equipment. I started of with a Zenith and one lens so I know how hard it is to be limited by what your equipment can do. Now I have to live up to the potential of my gear, time to go take some photos.

Congrats on your new lens ayotnums, I hope you have lots of fun with it and it makes you work harder as a photographer.

All the Best

BearSummer

They're great lenses, and they do look good together. Now go out and enjoy them!
And don't let the scrooges get you down - you don't have to justify your purchases to anybody but yourself (and perhaps your spouse if so equipped).

Congratulations on getting your new lens (which one was the new one?). Enjoy it!

However, I also agree with Condyk's point about terms like 'holy trinity' only encouraging people to think they need to buy into some very expensive lenses to get great shots - when this is not the case. Look at this thread for some examples of what can be achieved with the humble 50 f1.8 - only one tenth the price of some of these 'L's'.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=119514

I think getting the lighting right, good expressions etc are far more important in most pictures than the lens used. If you don't get these right the L lens alone won't make your shot work.

I understand what you are getting at, and I agree some people just buy for the sake of buying. Just your post and the one after sounded like you guys were ragging on ayotnoms.