Another lens deceision but with a trist

Yes a trist not a twist But now that I have your attention... haha

So Im thinking of upgrading my long lens. So far I have been pretty set on the 70-200 2.8 non IS. Everything I shoot is moving and when using a longer lens I use a monopod so there is no need for me to get the IS.

However

What would you guys say to getting a 135L and 200 2.8L to cover the same reach?

I dont mind switching lenses when shooting anything other than a wedding and have room in my bag for em.

Yay? Nay? Pros? Cons?

It seems to me that by going prime over 70-200 f/2.8 you gain:

* Some IQ from using primes
* One stop at 135mm

and you lose:

* Every focal length other than 135mm or 200mm

Sigma 100-300/4 is a fine lens if you do not mind using a monopod.

Well it seems like you enjoy using primes (50 and 85) so I say go for it.
I'm not sure if the sharpness advantage will matter too much with the huge 5D photosites but I've heard nothing but good things about both the 135L and the 200/2.8L.

Im looking for 2.8 or faster though. Lots of low light shooting for me.

Yea I use my 85 alot Sam the 50 not so much yet. Ofcourse I havent had alot of time to shoot with the 5D yet

Still trying to decide

bizarre.

Excellent comment. I find the versatility of a zoom outweighs the loss of sharpness vs. a prime. There are times I just can't budge from my position and a zoom means getting the shot or not getting it.

sleepo wrote in post #6971963
It seems to me that by going prime over 70-200 f/2.8 you gain:

* Some IQ from using primes
* One stop at 135mm

and you lose:

* Every focal length other than 135mm or 200mm

bluefox9er wrote in post #6991281
bizarre.

How so?

JasonRussell wrote in post #6991316
How so?

because of this :

It seems to me that by going prime over 70-200 f/2.8 you gain:

* Some IQ from using primes
* One stop at 135mm

and you lose:

* Every focal length other than 135mm or 200mm

I would pick the primes, if you can deal with having to switch lenses often.

If you like primes, stick to those. The zoom is a damn good lens though.

bluefox9er wrote in post #6991326
because of this :

It seems to me that by going prime over 70-200 f/2.8 you gain:

* Some IQ from using primes
* One stop at 135mm

and you lose:

* Every focal length other than 135mm or 200mm

Ive already taken that into account even before it was posted the first time.

If I went the route of the primes I would have 50, 85, 135, 200. Do I really need a 100 or 150? Nothing a little croping couldnt take care of if/when needed.

Whatever advantage you may have, and that is not assured, in IQ with the primes, would be lost when cropping.