Prime Lens ? How many of you have them?

I shot a buds wedding yesterday and I only own 3 primes...

Heres the link...
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=482166

I have several primes: the 100 f/2.8 macro, the 50 f/1.4, the 85 f/1.2 and the 300 f/2.8 IS being the ones I use the most.

The 300 I use mostly for wildlife -- it's a monster that I might have in my car, but won't lug it around without a specific target. It has exquisite sharpness, and can even play well with a 2x teleconverter, much better than my 100-400, so when I need the most reach the 300 is what I go for (I'm planning for a 500 f/4 sometime this year)!

For more "out and about" photography, such as street photography, as well as landscape photography, I've really been happy with my range of zooms, which cover from ultra-wide to the long reach of the 100-400. All of the zooms I use except for the UW have IS, which is, to me, invaluable in many, many situations. In fact, if I'm out and about with my 5D or 1D, and only have one lens to choose from, I go for the 24-105 IS. For me, f/4 is pretty sufficient for daylight photography, especially with the IS.

On the other hand, I do think about what I'm looking for when I go out, and there are times, especially when I feel creative, that I'll mount my 50 or 85 and just use the one lens, for creative control of selective focus/bokeh especially.

Indoors, it's a whole other dynamic. While I can get by with the 24-105, with the IS, in decent indoor lighting, I'm more comfortable if I'm hand-holdong and not using a flash with one of my primes. Not, though, the 300!

Cody21 wrote in post #5259023
OK, I keep reading about the PRIME lenses and feel like I'm missing out on something important. These appear to be "better" than Zoom lenses, WHY?

Primes are generally lighter, faster, and sharper. As an example, here's the image I cropped to make my avatar. Bearing in mind the size of the crop, do you think the little 50mm MK I is capable of making sharp images?
-Bruce

I have quite a few.
-Bruce

if i can ONLY have one, that would be the new 800mm.

Haha that'd be a tough game to play. If I could only have ONE lens, it'd probably be the 35L or 85L. Picking between them would be the hardest thing ever.

On FF it would be the 35L becasue I could if I had to, shoot ALMOST everything I shoot with it.

I only have primes. I prefer the speed and the IQ over zoom lenses. Ill take a 24L over a 16-35 anyday.

Just a note of thanks to all of you who have commented on my question. This has all been great information in my decision to pick up my 1st Prime lens.

I'm fairly new to primes - having bought the ever-adored 50mm f1.8 on a friend's recommendation just a few months ago, to try something a little bit different (different to me anyway).

I fell in love with it immediately. I found myself having to think a lot more about my positioning, rather than planting my arse somewhere and cranking the zoom back and forth. Primes get me more involved, which I like - it gives me a better feel for the subject.

And yes, they are faster and sharper as well. Though I wouldn't say they're all that much cheaper if you buy the L versions...

Anywho, I own the 50mm, a 24mm f2.8 has been ordered and is currently en route (as much as I love the 50mm, I want something wider) and will probably buy far more primes than I will zooms in the future.

If I ever switch away from the Canon system, it's also very likely the first items I will scramble for are the equivalents to the primes I am familiar with.

I have three primes (50/1.4, 85/1.2 and 100/2.8). I don't use the 50 so much any more, but the 85 and 100 see quite a lot of use. Mainly because of the sharpness, DOF control and for the sheer joy of it. Zoom-photography can seem quite industrial by comparison.