My transition from 5 lenses to 3. My zoom vs. prime decisions are over.

Yeah, OP, I think there's a progression involved here. I had 9 lenses and a 1.4x at one point, many of them expensive, now I have 6 - all under $1000 - and a 1.4x and wish I could have less. Conversely, I have two 580exII's and am sorely in need of another. The transition I'm talking about is where the image becomes the ultimate goal and the equipment - as long as it's up to task - becomes secondary. The exception to this I'm finding is lighting. One can never have enough light...

twoshadows wrote in post #15876448
Yeah, OP, I think there's a progression involved here. I had 9 lenses and a 1.4x at one point, many of them expensive, now I have 6 - all under $1000 - and a 1.4x and wish I could have less. Conversely, I have two 580exII's and am sorely in need of another. The transition I'm talking about is where the image becomes the ultimate goal and the equipment - as long as it's up to task - becomes secondary. The exception to this I'm finding is lighting. One can never have enough light...

soon you'll be walking on rice paper silently ... or entering another gearing up phase. too early to tell grasshopper !

Dj R wrote in post #15872880
At the time I was considering all of this, Pixel Junkie posted an interesting thread,
which pushed me over the fence. I got the 50L (my 2nd time on this train).

My goal with it was to make people spend more money, damn it! Not less. Fail! :p

I kind of had the same thing.

Once I wanted some faster primes to learn and experiment with. I kind of bought into the whole 'holy trinity' thing here at POTN and wound up with 35-85-135 primes. They were OK, but after about a year I knew the focal lengths were wrong for me.

Now I have 24-50-85, and that set would really be 24-50-100 if Canon offered a lens like the EF 85/1.2L II at 100mm. As it is, I tend to run the 24 and 50 on the 5D Mark III and then put the 85L on the 1D4. The effect is like having 24-50-100.

I've switched to all prime-Zeiss 18mm f/3.5, Canon 50mm f/1.8, Zeiss 135mm f/2 (in route), Canon 200mm f/2.8L II, and Canon 400mm f/5.6L. May eliminate 200mm at a later date. Results are far better. Zeiss 18mm is incredible. I can't believe what you can do with this. It replaces a Canon 17-40mm f/4L and 28mm f/1.8, neither of which come close when it comes to capturing interiors, buildings, wildlife, landscapes etc. I can take one very small aspect of a picture and enlarge to full size with full detail. Does great with close ups and a lot of shots that you could do with a 35mm. 400mm price is lighter and far better with wildlife than the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L. Much easier to hit the moving targets.

Drool ^

pixel_junkie wrote in post #15876589
My goal with it was to make people spend more money, damn it! Not less. Fail! :p

Well I spent after I sold, so technically you didn't fail. Purchased 24Lii and 50L!

Feel better?

ed rader wrote in post #15876471
soon you'll be walking on rice paper silently ... or entering another gearing up phase. too early to tell grasshopper !

Lol, Ed. I'd better get out the fine art rice paper and start practicing, 'cause I don't feel a gearing up phase coming on any time soon. I'm now enjoying photography more than I ever have, and a lot of it is being shot with a 28-105II. On a pair of 1D bodies, no less. Ain't life grand?

good thing there are tons of lenses out there.
different strokes for ......

Nice collection! Always nice to get rid of the stuff you don't use as often for a more condensed kit!

I was for a while with just the 24-70 II and 70-200 II but recently its changing... Added a 17-40 for the meantime and now selling the 70-200 II for a 135L and 300/400L again... So the kit is doubling in size. But it just keeps changing and never ends, so whatever

For what it's worth, I just made a similar 'thin the collection' move, but kept the zooms over the primes.

I had:
16-35 f2.8L ii
24-70 f2.8L (sold - too heavy, no IS, 24-105 covers range)
24-105 f4L
85 f1.8 (sold, rarely used)
80-200 f2.8L (magic black pipe)
135 f2L (If I could only have 2 lenses, it would be this and the 24-105)
200 f2.8L ii (sold, rarely used)

I like the 'freedom' of being able to zoom when needed, and having overlapping zoom ranges reduces the number of lens swaps needed. Since upgrading from a 60D to 5D mark iii 6 months ago, I think I have the 'perfect' camera and 4-lens set for my needs...although I may try a 70-300 L or 100-400 L just for kicks...

The 200 2.8 L ii is a lens I find ways to use because it is just so good.

The AF and colors I get from mine--bought for just over $500 with a hood very lightly used--are downright gratifying.

my philosophy is a tiny bit different. I like having a lot of "stuff", but for the stuff that I dont use a lot, I WILL skimp as much as possible, while getting decent PQ. My wide and telephoto rarely gets used, but do get used a few times a month. Too many times, I encountered scenarios where I would miss it, so I got really cheap alternatives that I wont feel bad keeping in the drawers for longer periods of time (tamron 17-35 + 70-300 totalled $500).

I also have a lens to dissuade me from going mirrorless, the pancake..... and I'm surprised how much I actually use this. This along with the 270ex, can go along with me all the time, and there's no burden at all.

I've been using 35L 24-70L II, and 135L and I have been pretty happy with that combo. I just received a Sigma 35 1.4 yesterday and It's a tough decision which 35 to keep. I always go back and forth about what lenses I want. I've been wanting an 85, but its hard for me to justify the cost of the 85L since I cover events and rely on fast focus.

OP, this is a great thread.

I just posted my 24-70 2.8 II in the for sale marketplace. I have been searching for my perfect, minimalist setup. I don't shoot for anyone but myself, mostly shots of my girls, so I feel I can experiment with my setup. I just ordered a sigma 35 1.4 last night. So I'll end up running with a 35 and my 85 most of the time. I'm not sure how often ill use my 70-200, although it is an amazing lens.

I want to have 2, 3 lenses tops. I feel like I see in 85mm. Does that make sense? I frame up a 85mm shot before I even bring the camera to my eye. If I can get enough time in with the 35mm where I don't have to frame with the camera, I feel I could get most everything I shoot with these 2 focal lengths.