Canon 28 1.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 vs. 24-70L

Just curious what you guys think.

In terms of IQ...

NON L-PRIMES
Canon EF 28 f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 50 f/1.4 USM
Canon EF 85 f/1.8 USM

vs. L-ZOOM
Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L

If all lens where used at f/2.8, will the L zoom beat the non-L primes?
This is assuming 28 vs 28, 50 vs, 50, and the 85 cropped down to 70.

EDIT: I'm asking this because I went FF and am selling my 20D and 50D (if not already sold by the time you read this).
So now that the 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM is out of the question, I was debating whether to pick up the 3 primes first (non L primes) so that I can stop down when I shoot low light, or do I get the 24-70 f/2.8L USM first for versatility, and in low light, just rely on my nifty fifty for now or higher ISO.

I've had several copies of the mentioned and currently have the 24-70. I prefer the 24-70 for it's versatility. The 28 and 50 need to be stopped down to equal the sharpness of the 24-70. However, the 85 is sharp wide open. The 24-70 and 85 combo is great.

I'd personally go non-L primes for the added benefit of more speed. Zooms definitely have their advantages, though.

I'd go for the primes, but I'd replace the 28 f/1.8 with the 35 f/2.

all depends... is this on a crop body or a FF body...

if its solely crop then go after the sigma 30 1.4, 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8

if its for ff, spend that money towards either the 35 1.4 or the 135mm f2. and just collect your prime trinity from there.

Cover your ground with zooms. Then get primes where you tend to shoot 35mm? 50mm?? etc.

I'd say in most cases a prime at f/2.8 will be sharper than a zoom wideopen at f/2.8. Versatility is what the zoom has on a prime. Where no flash photography is concerned a f/2.8 zoom may not be fast enough.

This is why I have zooms and primes. Different situations sometimes requires different lenses. If your a prime guy your just quicker on your feet to get the shot

AlanU wrote in post #8666210
Cover your ground with zooms. Then get primes where you tend to shoot 35mm? 50mm?? etc.

+1 My 24-70 is a workhorse on my 5d.

Now there are TONS of rumors regarding sharpness issues with this lens. If you have a body that allows for microadjustment, you should be able to dial it in. If that doesn't work or if you have a non adjustable body, pair them up and send it to Canon. I did with my former 5D (not Mark II) and the results were stellar - sharp as a razor wide open.

The primes get deployed for specific treatments and conditions but the zooms get the majority of my images at the moment.

can anyone explain to me what is microadjustment!!! thanks.

I'd go with one L prime over an L zoom, for speed.

spider1135 wrote in post #8666366
can anyone explain to me what is microadjustment!!! thanks.

Microadjustment is a feature of select bodies. It allows the end user to tweak the autofocus point of the lens, and the body remembers the adjustments. That way you can mount different lenses that are "calibrated" to the body resulting in more accurate autofocus and hopefully sharper images.

Starbucker wrote in post #8666451
Microadjustment is a feature of select bodies. It allows the end user to tweak the autofocus point of the lens, and the body remembers the adjustments. That way you can mount different lenses that are "calibrated" to the body resulting in more accurate autofocus and hopefully sharper images.

which canon camera bodies have the feature; does canon d40 camera body has microadjustment feature!!!

As you can see in my signature, I have all 3 of the primes you mentioned. I really like all of them. Surprisingly to me, the 28mm has turned into my most used lens (on crop). The 50 is next, and the 85mm rarely (but the 85 is a terrific lens).
I just did a wedding, my first. I found myself changing lenses a lot, and even thought the 1.8 & 1.4 apertures were very useful at a "no flash allowed" wedding, I think the 24-70 zoom at 2.8 would have served me quite well.
If I had the zoom on one camera, and the 85mm on another, that would have been even better.

AlanU wrote in post #8666210
Cover your ground with zooms. Then get primes where you tend to shoot 35mm? 50mm?? etc.

I'd say in most cases a prime at f/2.8 will be sharper than a zoom wideopen at f/2.8. Versatility is what the zoom has on a prime. Where no flash photography is concerned a f/2.8 zoom may not be fast enough.

This is why I have zooms and primes. Different situations sometimes requires different lenses. If your a prime guy your just quicker on your feet to get the shot

I already have a few zooms, just not L-Zooms. So I'm just trying to figure out do I get the 24-70 first or the three non-L primes for the same price for low light.

I'm trying to compare non L primes to L zoom. I already know that in general, an L prime will outdo an L zoom (except for versatility).

I would think that the primes at 2.8 would be sharper than the 24-70 wide open. I have the 28, and the 50 and when they are stopped to about 2.8 or further they are incredibly sharp. I love the look of the primes wide open too. For the price I don't think you can beat them.