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

well it's many months later.
I added the 200L (got it from canon for a song!)
so now I have 4 primes, oops!

I have shot entire gigs with JUST the 50mm 1.2
the 85 would have been too long.
the 85 is only for portrait session$

I'm really content with the lineup

Thanks for this thread. It's making me re-think my lineup and how I use what I own.

I am also thinking of converting my zooms to primes. Very interesting that someone has the same idea as me before I can even finalized my future move. Lol. Thank you for this thread.

I still got some stuff that needs to get rid of as you can see on my signature.. Kit lens are just hard to move.

I was wondering all the time why the hell people prefer the 85 over the 50mm and if im the only idiot who bought the 50mm. It may not be the sharpest but its a perfect focal length for me, thanks for justifying my purchase

Btw: i would never ever sell my 16-35 or the 135mm :P

You could get a 100L macro and a 200L 2.8 II for the price of your 85mm.

I was down to one zoom and 6-7 primes - then I bought the 28-105 II f/3.5-4.5. The zoom changed my game for the better, and has become my main lens. Go figure.

Dj R wrote in post #16061981
well it's many months later.
I added the 200L (got it from canon for a song!)
so now I have 4 primes, oops!

I have shot entire gigs with JUST the 50mm 1.2
the 85 would have been too long.
the 85 is only for portrait session$

I'm really content with the lineup

Which 200L? I wouldn't really call the 2.8 "L" Real one costs 6k!

Just kidding.

Humble Photographer wrote in post #16245598
Which 200L? I wouldn't really call the 2.8 "L" Real one costs 6k!

Just kidding.

Real as in REAL expensive!

The 2.8 is a steal on the used market for the IQ.

Thanks for starting this thread. It is nice to reflect on where one is with current lens investment. Reading about someone who pulled the trigger and went on a different route from what you would currently do.

Given what I shoot (i.e., I don't shoot enough to say that there's certain subjects I wouldn't shoot enough times with current lens selection to identify a lens I could live without), I am sticking with my zooms.

However, how of the lens I am thinking about buying in the future are primes. I'm thinking about buying a 135L for portraits and times when lugging the bigger 70-200/2.8L IS II doesn't make as much sense.

Of course, if Canon announces a 14-24/2.8L or a 100-400L mk II, I would be buying those zooms.

NotBlake wrote in post #16245251
You could get a 100L macro and a 200L 2.8 II for the price of your 85mm.

the 85L is my money maker and that is prbly true for most of the people who have dropped 2k on 1 lens. sure it's expensive, and you could live without it. but it's worth it. it's that special.

Humble Photographer wrote in post #16245598
Which 200L? I wouldn't really call the 2.8 "L" Real one costs 6k!
Just kidding.

haha seriously. i JUST have the 2.8L. and as others have mentioned, it's quite good, and especially for the money. it's the same lens as the 135L, to me, optically, AF is the same (instant and quiet), color/contrast too. great value.

marcosv wrote in post #16247567
TOf course, if Canon announces a 14-24/2.8L or a 100-400L mk II, I would be buying those zooms.

the problem is their new pricing.
what do you think the 14-24L will fetch? that is an interesting zoom.

Good for you, I thought about doing something similar 24/50/135/400 but I like my setup so I can't think of anyway to narrow it down to even 4 or 5.

When it comes to going out shooting I tend to only take 2 to 3 lenses at most so it ends up usually pretty similar. Just much of my gear stays home but I switch it around depending on what I am doing.

Good choice on the tripod/ballhead. I have the 2541 and Q10 and its sweet

I am fairly new to FF just buying the 6D in May. I had the 50/1.2L as my first lens, but I've already sold it when I realized I was shooting my Sigma 35 90% of the time and I use both lenses for the same kinds of outings and shots. I also have a 100/2.8L Macro, which is my portrait lens and my macro lens (dual purpose). I will round things out with the Zeiss 21 or the Voigtlander Color Skopar 20 in the near future. I have shot long enough to know that's all I need for my 6D.

I do have a fisheye lens and a 55-210 lens for my NEX 5N, but they rarely make an appearance. (and my 40 pancake is just for when I need to go small with my 6D, but I never plan to shoot with it for regular shooting).

I made a change. Upset! A zoom!

Wasn't using the 50L. Sold it here in the forum. Needed a zoom for a bunch of concert events that I'll be covering. Picked up the 24-70 2.8 L II. SOOC images look amazing. Sharpest lens that I own.

If you're not using it, move it! Be happy!

You'll be back to 5 or 6 by end of year. :-}. The gear is fun, I may rent a 24-70II for a trip.

Whenever I see a post like this; it makes me want to cut back. Then I start picking what to sell... Then I start picking what re-buy. As another poster mentioned; I ended up buying a 'cheap' lens (Tamron 70-300) I knew I woudl rarely use to prevent me from spending 4-5x as much on a Canon variant when I find it on sale (and still rarely use)