prime lens combo choices on ff

Wanting to for sure get canon 135 f2 as I love long lens portraits

Trying to decide on what to pair it with:
Option 1 ($1700)
Sigma 50mm art (dying to try) used if I can find
Canon 135 f2 used

Option 2 ($2175)
Sigma 35mm art (I've owned before and over the top sharp. A little wide for portraits, but great I think when paired w 85&135) 1 local Fs for 675$
Sigma 85 f1.4 used ( or is it worth getting a canon 85 1.8 and saving $400?)
Canon 135 f2 used

I plan on getting a 17-40 eventually for landscape. I currently have no lenses.

which combo and why?
Is the sigma 85 sharp and reliable wide open? I have to admit I'm a shallow dof junky

Thanks

John

Well, the canonical "Holy Trinity" is the 35 L, 85 L and 135 L. The Sigma 35 would fit in there nicely instead of the Canon 35.

Yeah that's what I hear. Thanks! I have tried canon 35 but not worth the extra 3-400$. My last sigma 35 art was so sharp and accurate wide open w very little micro adjust on my 6d.

I'd love to buy the 85L but then I can't get the 135 for 3-4 months. I think used $1500. I can get sigma 85 and canon 135 for that

Heya,

With a 135, I wouldn't get an 85, because you may find 85 F1.4 and 135 F2 compete doing the same thing mostly and you will ultimately likely prefer one or the other. I skipped the 135 and went to 200 because I mostly use my 85 F1.4 more than anything for portrait, because I can use it in closer tighter space as well as wide open space and get that super shallow DOF look. Can't use that 135 inside for example much. But for my outdoor wide open space when I want tons of separation, I use my 200 F2.8 prime instead as it's much different than the 85, rather than too close to it (the way 135 is).

If you ultimately use 135, I would get something closer to 50mm for the wider telephoto (relative to the 135). 35mm is wide, and I like 35mm. But if you prefer the longer focal length, you probably would be better with a 50mm & 135mm as compliments, rather than 35mm and 135mm. For me, I use 35mm / 85mm / 200mm. I like having a big difference in focal lengths so that I'm not just moving a little bit in one direction, instead, I go for a big difference so that it's useful to make the change, and not just negligible.

135L
50A
I'd do that for what you're saying you like.

Do you need AF? Samyang/Rokinon are dropping a 135mm F2 lens that is manual that is going to be very, very interesting! If budget is of concern, you could get a 35 F1.4, 85 F1.4 and 135 F2 from them for the above costs.

Very best,

Thanks. Not opposed to calling option 3 a 35/85/200 combo. I've had the 200 2.8 l II before and it was an outstanding portrait and street photography lens. I used my sigma 70-200 OS mostly at 200 end

Picking up a 35 Art tomorrow locally. Next step is the 85. Im half tempted to get the 85L ii. I dont want to spend more than 2200, preferably keep it even lower than 2k. getting the L gets me 2 lenses for 2175.

Picked up a 35mm art and 85mm Sigma. Going to play around with them and keep my eyes on a used 135L and/or 200 2.8L

definitely go with the 135L to complement your 35 and 85, the 200 is awesome however the 135L is extra special and has a certain "je ne sais quoi" look to it. beautiful bokeah that really makes the subject pop. check out the lens sample threads for both of them before making a decision.

bob

Thanks! Im leaning that way + I have owned the 200, so why not try the 135 right?

Cheers,

John

I suggest 24L-50L-135L...as I'm going to fill in my gap of 50L by the end of this month...I hv been using the combo of 24L & 135L for a while and sometimes found the difference in focal length too huge...and 50L is definitely the solution for me...

I will say 16-35 F/4IS much better than 17-40
Sigma 50 Art IF you find one without focusing issues
Canon 135 L