prime FLs, how close is too close (help me pick a prime lineup that makes sense)?

I'm a prime guy who uses zooms when needed. Both have their advantages, but I LOVE shooting primes when they make practical sense.

Right now I have:
15mm FE
24L
sigmalux (50mm)
135L

My issue is I've been rethinking the 85mm FL. I LOVE my 24L. The 15mm FE is just that, and therefor has a place in my bag but really isn't relevant... But my issue is on the longer end. The 135 is an amazing lens. I've used it as my travel tele as it's a nice small light fast lens when you want some reach but don't want a zoom... But generally it's a bit longer than I like to use. So I've been reconsidering the 85mm focal length again. I've also been toying with the idea of a 35mm lens... But I just wonder how much different 24 is from 35 is from 50, and how much 50 is from 85 is from 135?

24 - 50 - 135 make sense to me because I'm roughly doubling my FL with each step.
35 - 85 also makes sense to me because they're doing a similar doubling and its 2 lenses, but I doubt I could ever sell my 24L...

but the 135L just doesn't get the usage it deserves.....

the other thought I had was the 100mm f/2. It still falls in line with the doubling idea. It's still got some reach. It's smaller lighter and less expensive than the 135L... But then the 85mm is slightly faster (I'm ruling out the 85L for now in price alone).... Has anyone here ever gone from a 135L to a 100mm?

anyone want to add their $.02 in?

24L, 35mm f/2, sigmalux, 100mm f2?
35L and 85LII?
24L, 35mm f/2, 85 1.8?

Yes the 35L and 85L II will get a lot of votes in a thread like this, but bear in mind I'd love the 35mm f/2 for my wifes XSi anyway.... Plus, the 85L is a ton of money and heavy, so I think I'd go to another 85mm 1.8 first to try that FL again and then eventually upgrade that if I went that route.

I find that I use my 24 + 50 most of the time, and if I'm going to carry 3 lenses, the 3rd is going to be the 85. Like you, I really love the 135L, it's fast and sharp and just a nice lens to use. However, for me, it's a lens I use more specifically for portraits, and less for general use.

So for me, if I could only have 3 lenses, it would the 24, 50, 85. Next up would be the 135, and finally the 14.

I had the 35L along with the 24 + 50, and I just didn't use the 35 much because I would leave it home if I was bringing the 24 + 50 (like I usually do); 35 just wasn't enough of a difference between 24 + 50. That's not to say I would never get another, I just don't feel much of a need for it now.

timnosenzo wrote in post #8389814
So for me, if I could only have 3 lenses, it would the 24, 50, 85. Next up would be the 135.

thoughts on the 100 f/2 instead of both the 135 and 85?

yeah, 24 and 35 don't make much sense... The 35 f/2 is also for a wide light prime for the cropper (wife's XSi), but I wonder if I could ever sell my 24L for a 35?

right now I'm leaning towards selling the 135 for a 100 f/2 and 35 f/2. I'd pocket some cash on the deal and get to play with/try 2 f/2 primes I've been curious about. I'd just hate to miss the 135L but I honestly haven't been using it enough to really justify it lately.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #8389864
thoughts on the 100 f/2 instead of both the 135 and 85?

I've never tried one, but I think that, for me, I would be concerned that it's too long. But it might be a nice compromise between the 85 and 135.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #8389864
right now I'm leaning towards selling the 135 for a 100 f/2 and 35 f/2. I'd pocket some cash on the deal and get to play with/try 2 f/2 primes I've been curious about. I'd just hate to miss the 135L but I honestly haven't been using it enough to really justify it lately.

Probably a good plan. I had a 35 f/2 years ago, and it was a pretty cool lens--especially if you think the build of your 15 fish is kind of cool, it's basically the same. I would definitely try out a 35 f/2 before selling your 24L for a 35L, considering how much you like the 24.

But you already own many zooms that cover a wide range including the range you are asking about. You should already know if 85 or 100 is best for what you do, right?

timnosenzo wrote in post #8389933
Probably a good plan. I had a 35 f/2 years ago, and it was a pretty cool lens--especially if you think the build of your 15 fish is kind of cool, it's basically the same. I would definitely try out a 35 f/2 before selling your 24L for a 35L, considering how much you like the 24.

yeah, I was thinking it'd be built like the fish meets the 18-55... I'm not expecting much, and I want light for that body (XSi) anyway. Getting to play with it on the 5Dii is just a bonus, and yes it'd be a long term test before I ever even considered selling the 24L...

gasrocks wrote in post #8389964
But you already own many zooms that cover a wide range including the range you are asking about. You should already know if 85 or 100 is best for what you do, right?

in theory, sure, but once you put a prime on and CAN'T zoom it's a whole different world from having the option. Plus, my primes are generally for low light photography inside. I hate zooms for this because even 2.8 feels slow to me (so I've since gone to f4 zooms making that worse, but forcing the prime decision)... So yeah, I CAN test it easily enough with the 24-105 -vs- the 135, it's just that a fast prime is much different than the slow zoom will be.

I have primes of similar focal lengths to you- 24,35,50,85,135.

Like you I LOVE the 24mm fl.

In your situation I def go 85L or 851.8 rather than 35L.

I use 35 the least because 50 and 24 is a nice spread and 35 is close-ish enough to 24 not to get used that much.

The difference between 24 and 35 is significant, and the 35 FL has its own look but I just dont like carrying too many lenses around, and 24 and 50 is a great compromise.

But in my limited experiace with 135 and 85 (I have only had them recently) 85 gets used more because 135 is quite long indoors and quite specialised as a walkaround lens imo.

Have you thought about a second hand 85L MKI ?

Ob Com wrote in post #8390287
Have you thought about a second hand 85L MKI ?

yes. I'm kinda thinking the smaller lighter faster AF on the 85 1.8 would be better for me? But I'm also leaning towards the 100 f/2 as it keeps a bit of the tele I feel I'd loose selling the 135L and it also keeps me from wanting to go with the L over the 1.8 as there's only one 100mm option (I have no need/desire for the macro).

I have both 85 f/1.8 and 85LmkII and I'll use the lighter f/1.8 when I want to take photos on the run. I did a baby session yesterday and I grabbed the 85L for the more creamy bokeh.

I doubled my primes by buying my 50D (will get the 60D later on) I really find owning the 50D to be so beneficial with excellent IQ. I love using the 70-200 with the 50D when I need more reach. The 85L is my equiv 135L on my 50D in the primes I own. At this point in time I do not need a longer prime for my application. However a 100 f/2.8 Macro is on my wishlist for macro.

^ I did the whole crop/FF deal with a 40D/5D last year. I'd rather have an extra lens (135 and 85) than an extra body. I swapped out my 40D for a XSi which my wife loves, this way I keep a spare but it actually gets used.

The 100 f/2 is an underappreciated lens IMO. I prefer it to the 85 1.8 on FF. Actually I've found my Sigma 105 is as about as good for portraits and I've been using it than the 100 f/2, except for when I need the f/2.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #8390605
^ I did the whole crop/FF deal with a 40D/5D last year. I'd rather have an extra lens (135 and 85) than an extra body. I swapped out my 40D for a XSi which my wife loves, this way I keep a spare but it actually gets used.

I agree with you having a lens instead. However I'd rather have 2 bodies to reduce lens swapping at events. I use my 50d equally as much. I use the BlackRapid RS-4 strap and hang my 50D on the side. Having the crop sure helps taking group shots easier or staggered couples shots.

I use my 85L alot in home on my 5d to get the crop/50mm equivalent and 50D with 30mm Sigma. Both combos have phenominal IQ.

If you do not use your 135L that often I think you'd use the 85mm focal length alot. If you buy the 100 f/2.8 Macro it will be another "sit in the bag" lens but when you need Macro you'll be happy you own it.

24L and 50L for sure (I love this combo, and I know you love your 24L so keep it!)
then either 85 or 100 (not both of them) and 135 or 200 if you want more reach, but that's not really necessary I guess.

You can also sell the 135L and sigmalux, to buy the 35/2 (for your wife) and the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 or 100/2.0

24 - (35) - 50 - 85/100 is sweet IMO

You seem to really like the 24 / 50 combo so I wouldn't lose that. Myself I think 24/ 35/ 50 are too close together, I wouldn't own both 24 and 35 for FF. Now, if the 35mm F/2 is just for your wifes XSi then that is a different story altogether. You've had 85 / 100 in the past and feel that you would use them more than your 135? I say go for it, sell the 135, grab either an 85 or 100 along with the 35mm f/2

AlanU wrote in post #8390812
I agree with you having a lens instead. However I'd rather have 2 bodies to reduce lens swapping at events. I use my 50d equally as much.

I see what you mean, but I don't shoot anything were a lens swap will kill me.

yeah, my other issue is I like to travel small/light/compact. This is why I'm considering selling the 135 as well. The 100 is MUCH smaller and I'm thinking the FL might be "close enough"... but the macro doesn't work for me, it's too big/heavy to bring with me "just in case". Instead I keep a tube (or two) in my bag at all times.

prinspaul wrote in post #8391052
then either 85 or 100 (not both of them) and 135 or 200 if you want more reach, but that's not really necessary I guess.

see, the 200 has never appealed to me because it's a 2.8 (and the 2 is ridiculously priced and HUGE!).

I JUST bought the sigmalux last week. I was almost going to sell my 50 for good because of the CA wide open, but decided to try the siggy before giving up on this FL all together (I won't spend the $1400 for the 50L). So far I'm loving the siggy though.

Dorman wrote in post #8391108
You seem to really like the 24 / 50 combo so I wouldn't lose that. Myself I think 24/ 35/ 50 are too close together,

yeah, I wonder if 35mm would be as good for me as 24 though? I've never had a 35mm prime... So I'm also wondering if the 35mm f/2 would be a good trial with that FL for the possibility of selling the 24L down the road? I've also been considering going to JUST the 35 and 85 if that were to work. Or just the 24/85 or 24/50 depending.

not really but it's not a fair statement for me. My son is 17 months old. When he was born I basically switched to primes for the majority of my shots of him and I've been loving it. But I sold my 85 the first time just after he was born. At the time I did it to fund the 24L which I LOVE. But now I'm wondering if 85/100 would suit me better than my 135 does now. Basically 135 can be too long a lot of the time so I'm wondering if switching back would be worth it....


here's what I'm thinking/hearing: sell the 135L. Buy the 35 f/2 to test that FL (and most likely keep for the XSi anyway). Also get a 100. Try that FL and see how I like something smaller/lighter but similar to the 135. I'm leaning towards the 100 because it removes the desire to go to an L (85 1.8 -> L upgrade) and mentally I'm giving up less of my "travel tele" by losing only 35mm fl and not 50mm....