Buying my first L glass, cant descide

perryge wrote in post #5278212
$1000 for a 70-200 2.8? Again, psh. 200 2.8L/135L, 85 1.8, and again, you're set.

Great, and now you're carrying around 3 lenses instead of one...

Get the 24-70 and save up for the 70-200...that is the way

I think it's really interesting, what a wide range of suggestions this question has elicited. It goes to show that it all depends on your own kind of photography, and there's no 'right' answer. That's why the manufacturers make such a wide variety of lenses - something to suit everyone, or at least optimise the compromises. Primes, zooms, wide, tele, fast, slow, there's a reason for choosing every one. Unfortunately as the OP is discovering, it means that if you just ask, 'what would YOU do?' you'll get every possible answer and it won't really help.

To the OP: following my own logic, the conclusion is that you should find out what YOUR kind of photography is. You have the kit lens; do you often wish it was faster, or longer? Find out what you want from a lens before you ask what you should buy. Reading these threads you'll find people who are unhappy with excellent lenses because they aren't the right lenses for them. Hope this helps.

^ That's the most insightful response out of em all!

24-70 or 24-105

Madweasel wrote in post #5279540
I think it's really interesting, what a wide range of suggestions this question has elicited. It goes to show that it all depends on your own kind of photography, and there's no 'right' answer. That's why the manufacturers make such a wide variety of lenses - something to suit everyone, or at least optimise the compromises. Primes, zooms, wide, tele, fast, slow, there's a reason for choosing every one. Unfortunately as the OP is discovering, it means that if you just ask, 'what would YOU do?' you'll get every possible answer and it won't really help.

To the OP: following my own logic, the conclusion is that you should find out what YOUR kind of photography is. You have the kit lens; do you often wish it was faster, or longer? Find out what you want from a lens before you ask what you should buy. Reading these threads you'll find people who are unhappy with excellent lenses because they aren't the right lenses for them. Hope this helps.

Follow this to the T hahah

Bubble wrote in post #5278642
geez..you never get tire of this prime crap eh?

Just throwing some extra options out there.

perryge wrote in post #5281084
Just throwing some extra options out there.

nothing wrong with throwing out extra option IF the OP ask for general comparation between zoom and prime. Here, he ASKS for 2 specific lenses then just stick to the main subject. Just seem like you just copy and paste your "cheap prime lens" answer on every single thread.

Primes may be "god" in term of IQ, but you are still "human" - how fast can you swap lens?

Personally, I do not like switching lens. I like that less then letting my feet do the zooming

Looks like OP already has short/med range covered? I say 70-200.

Madweasel wrote in post #5279540
I think it's really interesting, what a wide range of suggestions this question has elicited. It goes to show that it all depends on your own kind of photography, and there's no 'right' answer. That's why the manufacturers make such a wide variety of lenses - something to suit everyone, or at least optimise the compromises. Primes, zooms, wide, tele, fast, slow, there's a reason for choosing every one. Unfortunately as the OP is discovering, it means that if you just ask, 'what would YOU do?' you'll get every possible answer and it won't really help.

To the OP: following my own logic, the conclusion is that you should find out what YOUR kind of photography is. You have the kit lens; do you often wish it was faster, or longer? Find out what you want from a lens before you ask what you should buy. Reading these threads you'll find people who are unhappy with excellent lenses because they aren't the right lenses for them. Hope this helps.

Well put.. And when I think about the kit lens the 2 main things I want more are IQ and distance. I think I need to rent both of them 1st and see what I enjoy and or put to more use.

70-200 2.8 for sports. 24-70 for walkaround.

Mystwalker wrote in post #5282014
Looks like OP already has short/med range covered? I say 70-200.

I agree, buy the 70-200mm first since you have the kit lens for now for short range. The big chunky white lens will give you more wow factor that you are trying to get with an L lens.

my vote goes to "the brick"!

I've been through this decision scenario. I was thinking more range with the 70-200 vs stepping up from the kit with faster and better IQ lens. In the end, I opted for a better standard zoom lens as it'll be used a lot more than the long lens. There are a lot (ratio wise) who bought the 70-200 first but it ended up staying in the bag most of the time.

FWIW
I first got a 24-70 range, then moved to a 17-xx range.
24mm is not wide enough for me
55mm is not long enough for me
Most of the time though, I can walk towards but not away from the subject.