Gear Acquisition Syndrome - Which Lens Next?

I've got the urge to splurge on a nice prime for my full frame kit, but i'm not quite sure which one.

My current full frame kit includes the following:
Canon 5D III
Canon 24-105L f4
Canon 16-35L II f2.8
Canon 70-200 IS II f2.8

I'm debating between the 35L and the 85L II.

Any recommendations?

The trouble is with the 70-200 mk2 it sort of makes the 85 a tad redundant doesn't it? What about the 50L? I find the 50 a great length on the FF.

L.J.G. wrote in post #14597784
The trouble is with the 70-200 mk2 it sort of makes the 85 a tad redundant doesn't it? What about the 50L? I find the 50 a great length on the FF.

thanks for the reply!

yeah I was thinking the same. however, the creamy bokeh of f1.2 = wow

the 50L is nice, but I hear it's very hard to shoot wide open. I might actually end up splurging on one, if more people recommend it.

EDIT: i'm still waiting reviews on the new 24-70 II. i'm worried that if i splurge on the 50L, it would have the same effect as the 70-200 II / 85L II

manual focus only Zeiss 35mm 1.4 ZE

i'd prefer to stay away from manual focus lens', purely because i find my manual focus MPE-65 quite annoying at times.

mrdunu wrote in post #14597809
i'd prefer to stay away from manual focus lens', purely because i find my manual focus MPE-65 quite annoying at times.

Oh, but the Zeiss is very well dampened and has very nice photographical quality, you will love it, heck try one, and see! also get the Zeiss CPL!

Really depends on what you want to shoot. If you are thinking about macro/portrait then the 100L is a fine choice. If you are thinking about landscape then the 17L or 24L TS-E mk1 or mk2 are excellent choices. TS-E is really fun to use. There is so much to learn/think about when using one. I'd recommend that everyone should at least play with one at least once in their photo experience.

kawi_200 wrote in post #14597817
Really depends on what you want to shoot. If you are thinking about macro/portrait then the 100L is a fine choice. If you are thinking about landscape then the 17L or 24L TS-E mk1 or mk2 are excellent choices. TS-E is really fun to use. There is so much to learn/think about when using one. I'd recommend that everyone should at least play with one at least once in their photo experience.

i'd like to get a nice portrait lens, but at the same time, i'm worried that i merely have G.A.S. and am not giving my 70-200 enough praise

Gojira1976 wrote in post #14597816
Oh, but the Zeiss is very well dampened and has very nice photographical quality, you will love it, heck try one, and see! also get the Zeiss CPL!

i'll look into sample photos and let you know.

thanks!

edit: the bokeh is amazing, but the fact that its manual focus is throwing me off ;(

based on https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1191353 , it appears as though the 5D3 / zeiss combo doesn't work quite well...

mrdunu wrote in post #14597826
i'll look into sample photos and let you know.

thanks!

That does help, but of course jpg net photos tell half the story! heck when i owned the zeiss 35mm 1.4 ze and the awesome 5d mk ii, i had freaking awesome handhelds, well, awesome in my opinion!

Gojira1976 wrote in post #14597837
That does help, but of course jpg net photos tell half the story! heck when i owned the zeiss 35mm 1.4 ze and the awesome 5d mk ii, i had freaking awesome handhelds, well, awesome in my opinion!

'when' implies past tense. why did you sell it if you don't mind me asking?

L.J.G. wrote in post #14597784
The trouble is with the 70-200 mk2 it sort of makes the 85 a tad redundant doesn't it? What about the 50L? I find the 50 a great length on the FF.

Wow, the 70-200 mk2 and the 85mm 1.2 are absolutely NOTHING alike. They are both godly lenses, but the 85mm does 85mm so much better than the 70-200 that to even assume they do it the same way is sacrilege lol.

I've got the 85mm 1.2 and the 70-200mk2 and for portraits on a full frame, nothing says love like the 85mm 1.2

Its a craaaaazy expensive lens, and its totally not worth the money on an economical standpoint, but it absolutely kills it every time you use it.

Just to note though that its very slow focusing and quite heavy. You'll also get a lot purple fringing at sub f/2.0 in non focused white areas. Not a deal breaker though, just what it takes to enjoy that stunning look.

35L!!

mrdunu wrote in post #14597884
'when' implies past tense. why did you sell it if you don't mind me asking?

Well, i wanted to try the fabled Nikon D700's autofocus, and so far, I love it, and I spent the change on some lighting and stuff I sure do miss that freaking combo however!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

How long have you spent with your current lens setup?

As for focal length overlap making something redundant, I have a hard time comparing f/2.8 with f/1.2. Same goes with a 35L or 50L and the 24-70. Zooms are great, no doubt, the the primes give so much more light gathering, DOF control, and potentially greater sharpness.

I am a prime person though. And I LOVE the 35L/85/135L combo I have now. I would love to upgrade my 85 to the L eventually, but the standard USM prime is an outstanding value.