Name all the prime lens one should own?

For me it's definitely the 35L, 50 1.4, 85L, 135L, and 24L

I'd love to own the 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L, and 135L, but my 30/85 combo will do for now....

Since you asked to "name all the prime lens one should own", I would say that my opinion is pretty obvious.
(two still missing, the 14L MK II and the 500L)

Look Here
||
||
||
\/

I don't see the 28mm f/1.8 USM listed. Seems to beat out the 30mm on my 1.6 crop body IMO.

Link to lens archive page

I love my nifty fifty and am thinking I'll add this one to the list next... then the 85 f/1.8 USM after that.

Jen D.

jra wrote in post #6615653
A 17-55mm lens wouldn't be a prime. As far as a great prime to own, I think the Canon 50 1.4 is a great piece of glass. Not too expensive, great for low light and very nice IQ.

I've heard it at other discussions too, but what is IQ?

Image Quality.

Well on a crop body

I now have 30 1.4, 50 1.4, 100 2.8 macro and coming soon, 200 2.8.

I also have the "prime" tamron you purchased and I must admit, it has its place in my travel lenses' list.

cheers

Derek you don't even have a prime.
Buy the nifty 50 and see if you like prime lens first. It's less than $100

I'm a newbie to the site but not photography. I actually came on here to research inkjet papers and ran across this thread. For a while I thought the whole thing was a joke, but apparently not. lol

Curious, out of all the primes I've seen mentioned here, why has no one mentioned the 400 2.8? That would have to be my all time favorite "want" and do not "have".

To the op, if you want to shoot "bugs" you need to be thinking macro or a telephoto with an extension ring or teleconverter. I'd lean toward the macro if I were you however.

I forget the exact focal lengths for the canon macros but I know they have the 100mm 2.8 that someone here mentioned which is a great lens. I actually shoot a Tamron 90mm 2.8 which is also a very good quality macro lens. Both of them would also double as better than average portrait lenses, etc.

That's my .02.

John

Collin85 wrote in post #6640144
I kept looking at my watch to make sure the date wasn't the 1st of April..

Sorry Derek, just a few jokes. I do have to say though - this is worse than LR's screw-up, but slightly better than PuppyDogMom's. But I guess that doesn't say much.

No problem I'm still learning all the lingo and I've just learned glass means lens

lukeap69 wrote in post #6677493
Well on a crop body

I now have 30 1.4, 50 1.4, 100 2.8 macro and coming soon, 200 2.8.

I also have the "prime" tamron you purchased and I must admit, it has its place in my travel lenses' list.

cheers

What does crop body mean? Yeah I know I got 2k posts and I should know it but I'm still learning lingo as I've told Collin85.

drummerhc wrote in post #6677521
Derek you don't even have a prime.
Buy the nifty 50 and see if you like prime lens first. It's less than $100

wow it's only $100?

"Crop body" - sensor is smaller than a 35mm film frame. All Rebels and XXD (30D/40D/50D) are crop bodies. That is why when you mount a 50mm lens on your Rebel, the field-of-view is similar to what you would see when mounting a 80mm lens on a film camera. To get the field-of-view you would get with a 50mm on film, you'll need a ~31mm lens on your Rebel.

The 5D and 1Ds bodies are full-frame, so the sensor is the same size as 35mm film. The 1D bodies are in the middle, with the sensor being 1.3x smaller (in area) than film. Rebels and XXDs are 1.6x smaller.

egordon99 wrote in post #6684481
"Crop body" - sensor is smaller than a 35mm film frame. All Rebels and XXD (30D/40D/50D) are crop bodies. That is why when you mount a 50mm lens on your Rebel, the field-of-view is similar to what you would see when mounting a 80mm lens on a film camera. To get the field-of-view you would get with a 50mm on film, you'll need a ~31mm lens on your Rebel.

The 5D and 1Ds bodies are full-frame, so the sensor is the same size as 35mm film. The 1D bodies are in the middle, with the sensor being 1.3x smaller (in area) than film. Rebels and XXDs are 1.6x smaller.

Thank you Evan, I kind of knew what it meant but I wasn't quite sure. By the way can you still buy 1D's? and if so around $1,000?

I don't know about the original EOS-1D, perhaps keep an eye on the Selling forum here. The current EOS-1D MKIII looks to be an awesome compromise between crop and full-frame and I know of quite a few people who prefer that body. I believe it's 10megapixels, shoots @10 frames per second, and runs about $4K. It's a sports shooters dream

egordon99 wrote in post #6684515
I don't know about the original EOS-1D, perhaps keep an eye on the Selling forum here. The current EOS-1D MKIII looks to be an awesome compromise between crop and full-frame and I know of quite a few people who prefer that body. I believe it's 10megapixels, shoots @10 frames per second, and runs about $4K. It's a sports shooters dream

Nice, but if If I'm going to drop that kind of coin it would be for the 5d

When I had a camera with a 22mm sensor, I was very happy with the 28/1.8 and 85/1.8.