24-70 or two primes?

i have a xt and the 24-70 2.8L and the 50 1.4

i would go for the 24-70 as the most used of my 4 lens and add the really not expensive 50 1.8. when you need really more light and a very slim dof.

youll like and thanks yourself for having an usm zoom .. i found it to help a lot to focus in a dark place

I'd buy the 24-70 L and the Sigma 30mm 1.4 later.

Oh boy! That's a tough one because I have the 24-70 and the 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 and I just got the 70-200. I started with the 85 and added the 50 a few months later. Both are amazingly sharp and so easy to use indoors. But the 24-70 is my most used lens. I keep it on my 20D and 2.8 is not bad. If you don't like changing lenses often and you want one of the best zooms out there, opt for the the 24-70. If you don't mind changing lenses a lot and using foot zoom, as Pekka calls it, then the primes are, IMO, a better choice. Sometimes I wish I could have 3 camera bodies all the time because I don't like to take time to change lenses at events, but I'm limited by what I can take into a concert, for instance. So the zooms are my better choice.

breakdown wrote in post #2058458
Thanks guys,

I think the best choice will be to start with one or two good zooms then compliment them with primes as time goes on. I think, as an amature photographer, I will benefit more from the ease of use that zooms will offer.

I think a range from 24mm (or 35) to 200mm will cover everything that I need. There are so many options that it's hard to decide!

1. 24-70 + 70-200

2. 24-70 + primes covering up to 200mm

3. primes covering up to 70mm + 70-200

I've heard such good things about the 70-200 lens; I really want to get one. It seems like such a useful focal range and I've seen some stunning pictures produced from them. Because of this lens, options 1 and 3 are looking the best to me.

Which option would you guys recommend and why?

Option 1 is a very good combo. Long before the 24-70, the 28-70/70-200 or 28-80/80-200 was always a great combo...

I'd choose the three prime lens combo if i take portrait most of the time. if majority of your shoot is for landscape, then 24-70 zoom.

I love the primes....just me.

I would get a 50 1.4 over 1.8 to start and skip the 35.

Honestly my fav lens right now is the 70-200 hands down.

I just sold my 24-70 because it was never used. The 50 is alwaysa on my camera and the 70-200 is second followed by 17-40.

My honest opinion buy the 50 start there and have fun than build up tour collection. The 50 will really let you know what lens you need next.

I prefer zooms for versatility but like primes for specific purposes - all the primes you mention are on my hit list!

But for value - for - money, you will use the 24-70 zoom far more. Although it's arguable that the Canon 24-70 is great value for the average shooter, it is superb optically and physically, and if that's what you want then it's worth the money.

I'd say get the zoom and the 50mm 1.8 ( because it's practically free compared to a 35 f/1.4!) and then start saving again for primes.

Option 3 sounds good to me, as I shoot with primes much more than zooms. I don't think you would regret the choice at all.

JimAskew wrote in post #2058563
Hi,

I like your option #3. Also, take a look at the Sigma 30MM f/1.4. Very fast and very sharp.

Here is a review:

http://www.photodo.com​/topic_20.html

on board w/ this 100%.