PLA: Prime Lovers Anonymous

I want to get into some primes. I currently own the 24-70/70-200 combo and will keep that.
But my start into primes is where I want advice. I do own the 50mm 1.4, should I step up to the 1.2?
Eventually I want to own the 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L and 135L.

Except the 17-40L, all my lenses are primes

My prefered are 135L and 85 f/1.4 (Zeiss contax adapted), both giving sharp and creamy pictures at f/2

Titi

ChrisMc73 wrote in post #12154338
I want to get into some primes. I currently own the 24-70/70-200 combo and will keep that.
But my start into primes is where I want advice. I do own the 50mm 1.4, should I step up to the 1.2?
Eventually I want to own the 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L and 135L.

Since you have the 50/1.4 right now, I would say go for the 35L first. But that's just my opinion. The 50L is great but if you don't need the 1.2 then you should hold off on it.

ChrisMc73 wrote in post #12154338
I want to get into some primes. I currently own the 24-70/70-200 combo and will keep that.
But my start into primes is where I want advice. I do own the 50mm 1.4, should I step up to the 1.2?
Eventually I want to own the 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L and 135L.

just remember to be realistic about it. although each of those lenses renders substantially different perspectives, they are still an extremely tight spread in terms of focal length. know what you're going to be shooting before you buy the lenses, or else you may find yourself with three great lenses and two that you struggle to justify owning.

i've actually been very interested in the 50L as well, but every time i'm tempted to submit an order for one, i think about where it would fall in terms of my normal use. for events, my current set does everything that i need. the 50L would be a dedicated portrait session lens, or fill in for my already-stellar 35L as a walkaround. the thing is, i realized that having it would be great, but limiting myself to just my current four focal lengths has made my life so much easier. when i compose a shot in my mind, there is usually one.. at most two lenses in my bag that can capture it in a manner that i'd be happy with. the addition of the 50L would instantly add another option, and i feel as though it would be detrimental to my photography in general, as i'd switch lenses out more often, and i'd be more indecisive about what sort of look i'm after.

your considerations may not involve the 50L like me, but feel free to apply the concept to whichever lenses you're planning on purchasing next. just make sure you actually use what you have, and don't give yourself so many choices that you ultimately fail to really master the focal lengths that are most natural to you. having so many amazing options at your disposal isn't necessarily a good thing all the time. just food for thought.

Yep, good points alt4852. I see you have all but the 50L as you've stated thinking about adding.
I've rented the 35L, 50L, 85L and 135L's in the past and really liked the 35L and 50L. I have a 24L on the way, which I'll evaluate and then make some decisions.

alt4852 wrote in post #12168663
i've actually been very interested in the 50L as well, but every time i'm tempted to submit an order for one, i think about where it would fall in terms of my normal use. for events, my current set does everything that i need. the 50L would be a dedicated portrait session lens, or fill in for my already-stellar 35L as a walkaround. the thing is, i realized that having it would be great, but limiting myself to just my current four focal lengths has made my life so much easier. when i compose a shot in my mind, there is usually one.. at most two lenses in my bag that can capture it in a manner that i'd be happy with. the addition of the 50L would instantly add another option, and i feel as though it would be detrimental to my photography in general, as i'd switch lenses out more often, and i'd be more indecisive about what sort of look i'm after.

your considerations may not involve the 50L like me, but feel free to apply the concept to whichever lenses you're planning on purchasing next. just make sure you actually use what you have, and don't give yourself so many choices that you ultimately fail to really master the focal lengths that are most natural to you. having so many amazing options at your disposal isn't necessarily a good thing all the time. just food for thought.

This is my exact sentiment.. too many primes to switch out, not enough focusing on getting the most use out of 1 lens. I think that the 35/85 split was causing me to lose time shooting because the 35 was used as my wide AND walk-around prime, and the 85 as my short tele. Now that I have the 24 and 50 (I am WAY more comfortable with the 50 vs. 35), the 24 is strictly wide angle, and the 50 is a perfect walk-around length. I think I've had more fun and success shooting the 50 in the past 2 weeks than I have had the past 9 months w/ the 35/85.

I still have the 85L though, but it sits on the shelf. It just isn't right for a walk-around, and in doors it's be too tight. It may be on it's way out in short time As we know, it takes amazing shots, but it's use is getting more few and far between as the 50L takes up the most time on the camera.

Gotta ask, but what's so good about prime lenses apart from the distortion factor? To me I think it would be annoying not being able to zoom. Or if something was too close to me and I couldn't step back I wouldn't be able to get a good shot.

I'm probably missing something here but I'd love to know what the big deal is about them.

They perform better in low light, in most cases are sharper than zooms, weigh less, and give you a better subject to background separation.

It all depends on what/how you shoot your subjects.

DigiNon wrote in post #12171092
They perform better in low light, in most cases are sharper than zooms, weigh less, and give you a better subject to background separation.

It all depends on what/how you shoot your subjects.

Ah, so what sort of area would a prime best be used for? Portraits?

I don't take a lot of portraits, I usually just use my lens for "every day" purposes so not sure it would suit that.

Lady Tori wrote in post #12171110
Ah, so what sort of area would a prime best be used for? Portraits?

I don't take a lot of portraits, I usually just use my lens for "every day" purposes so not sure it would suit that.

They are pretty popular for portraits but it depends on the focal length of the lens. You can use them from landscapes to portraits, to sports and events. As long as you have the right lens for the occasion it shouldn't be a problem. Next time you go out for photos, leave the lens in a fixed zoom length, like 50mm or 35 or 85 (whatever your lens covers) and try shooting like that for a whole day. You will find that for most, if not all your shots could have been taken at one focal length with just moving around rather than zooming. Of course keep in mind that the perspective of the subject and background changes as you zoom in or out. A prime will keep the same perspective all the time as you zoom in and out with your feet.

DigiNon wrote in post #12171144
They are pretty popular for portraits but it depends on the focal length of the lens. You can use them from landscapes to portraits, to sports and events. As long as you have the right lens for the occasion it shouldn't be a problem. Next time you go out for photos, leave the lens in a fixed zoom length, like 50mm or 35 or 85 (whatever your lens covers) and try shooting like that for a whole day. You will find that for most, if not all your shots could have been taken at one focal length with just moving around rather than zooming. Of course keep in mind that the perspective of the subject and background changes as you zoom in or out. A prime will keep the same perspective all the time as you zoom in and out with your feet.

Well I might just try that when my 7D comes.

Thanks for explaining.

No problem this is all information I have learned from this forum. I'm sure there is much more I didn't mention but maybe someone can chime in as well.

What I like most is the speed. You can shoot low-light or fast-action situations easily. Lots of exhibition venues don't allow flash and the indoor lighting isn't always the best. With a f/1.8 or 1.2 or 2 prime, you can shoot without worry... just think about composition.

And, of course, they are incredibly sharp, so cropping and PP is a breeze.

DigiNon wrote in post #12171144
Of course keep in mind that the perspective of the subject and background changes as you zoom in or out. A prime will keep the same perspective all the time as you zoom in and out with your feet.

DigiNon wrote in post #12171228
No problem this is all information I have learned from this forum. I'm sure there is much more I didn't mention but maybe someone can chime in as well.

Mario, a little question if I may?
If there is something I learn from this forum, it's that the distance from the subject changes perspective. Zooming in or out with our feet will change the distance to the subject and therefore changes the perspective, am I right?
The following is the link for the article by Skip.
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=672913

CMIIW

jwicaksana wrote in post #12173438
Mario, a little question if I may?
If there is something I learn from this forum, it's that the distance from the subject changes perspective. Zooming in or out with our feet will change the distance to the subject and therefore changes the perspective, am I right?
The following is the link for the article by Skip.
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=672913

CMIIW

I think I may have used the wrong word. The 'compression' stays the same with primes whether you zoom in or out with your feet. Someone correct me if I'm wrong please.

I will check out the link, thanks for pointing that out