Which 3 Primes to go for. Your advice will be appreciated

[bdunbar79]

Hmm, this is a fun question.  If I could only keep 3 of my primes, my answer would be different because I have so many.  I'll never part with my 24L.  I will part with my 35L and 50L if I buy the new 24-70L II.  I won't part with my 85L, nor my 135L.  Going beyond that requires more specialized shooting, so I'd say I'd keep a 24L, 85L, and 135L.  Expensive lineup for sure, but let's just pretend you could get them at Walmart.

Out of all of my primes, I'd keep the 24L, 85L, and 200L.  IMO, the 300 and up lenses you just can't count, because anybody needing those will already be so specialized.  If a 200-400L zoom lens comes out though, boy that would be interesting.

Can I just buy 3 of the 24L's and count that? 

[Obaidey]

No matter what you decide you must get the 85 1.2 II, awesome lens.

So, with a 24-105 zoom, and after a while of use, I can check which focal length I was choosing most, then buy the relevant prime
I really wished that the 85mm, comes up as one of my frequent uses
Unfortunately, whenever I check, it seems to be around the 50mm, which I keep choosing again and again, unconsciously

      

[bdunbar79]

No matter what you decide you must get the 85 1.2 II, awesome lens.

So, with a 24-105 zoom, and after a while of use, I can check which focal length I was choosing most, then buy the relevant prime
I really wished that the 85mm, comes up as one of my frequent uses
Unfortunately, whenever I check, it seems to be around the 50mm, which I keep choosing again and again, unconsciously

      

Minus the f/1.2 to f/2.8 range, I'm thinking at all other apertures that the 24-70L II zoom lens will outperform all of the 50mm primes.  I definitely think it will outperform the 35L.  I am selling my 50 primes and 35 prime to get the 24-70L II after I see some field testing.  I no longer require wider than 2.8.

[Obaidey]

I won't part with my 135L.

I noted that the more recent the lens launch, the more likely it is better, and popular
New technology is better, obviously
Like 70-200 /2.8L IS II = 2010
100 /2.8L Macro IS =2009
and 85 /1.2L II = 2006
However, I am a bit puzzled by the EF135mm f/2L USM = 1996 !
So popular this one
It must be really good
However, it surely is due to be replaced
Or perhaps it is so good, they wouldn't replace
But, come on! 16 years?

[bdunbar79]

I won't part with my 135L.

I noted that the more recent the lens launch, the more likely it is better, and popular
New technology is better, obviously
Like 70-200 /2.8L IS II = 2010
100 /2.8L Macro IS =2009
and 85 /1.2L II = 2006
However, I am a bit puzzled by the EF135mm f/2L USM = 1996 !
So popular this one
It must be really good
However, it surely is due to be replaced
Or perhaps it is so good, they wouldn't replace
But, come on! 16 years?

Absolutely agree.  The ONLY reason I use it for basketball, is that you are far enough away that if you open it up to f/2, you don't really have any DOF problems on a particular player, ie the entire player stays in focus, while the background blurs.  This would certainly not be true of the 50L opened to f/2.  I'd buy a 135 f/2L II for sure, especially if it had IS!  To answer your question though, yes, it is a spectacular lens.  For covenience though, the 70-200L II IS does pretty well at 135mm. 

[Obaidey]

I am selling my 50 primes and 35 prime to get the 24-70L II after I see some field testing

I will part with my 35L and 50L if I buy the new 24-70L II.  I won't part with my 85L

Wise words. 24-70L II is still very expensive. And, not very well known quality. Interesting to see it debated. The old 24-70L was (as I heard from a lens rental company) the most hit and miss they had. Hopefully they cracked it with the II

[RLPhoto]

Forget the 24-105 IS Kit lens

If you want zoom lenses get the 16-35 II, 24-70 II and the 70-200 II.

If you want primes get the 24 mm 1.4L II, 50  mm 1.2L and the 135 mm 2.

+1

[wickidwombat]

i carry the following 3 primes every where with my 5d3 and the combo is awesome and also not crazy expensive
voigtlander 20mm f3.5 color skopar SLII its small light and awesome for landscapes
canon 40mm f2.8 pancake super sharp small light convenient excellent image quality
sigma 85 f1.4 super sharp fast awesome for portraits and super low light.
these 3 lenses cover most stuff produce fantastic results are relatively compact and light fitting in a small bag and provide outstanding versitility and coverage.

[zrz2005101]

since your primary purpose is portrait, for primes I would go with 35L 85LII and the 200L IS, just my opinion though.
However, I'm going for 35L 85LII and 135L on that note.

[Axilrod]

I think you made the right choice, congratulations on your purchase, the 5DIII is a stellar camera.  Buying multiple lenses at the same time (especially primes) can be more detrimental than beneficial.  The primes take time to learn, and when you get a new lens it's best to keep it attached to your camera for a few months to get used to it.  I don't think you could go wrong with a 35mm or 50mm if you want to check out a prime in the future, they're great focal lengths.  Also if you want a bit longer of a reach the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is arguably the best zoom in the world, close to as sharp as the 135 f/2 and definitely sharper than the 200mm f/2.8. 

[Cgdillan]

35L | 85L | 135L

[bdunbar79]

Which 3 primes?  My 3 choices are 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L, 135L, 200L 

[scrappydog]

Which 3 primes?  My 3 choices are 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L, 135L, 200L 

I think the 24L is a must-have for a fast wide prime.  I love mine.

[zrz2005101]

Which 3 primes?  My 3 choices are 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L, 135L, 200L 

+1
lol, that's what I'm looking to have in the future but first 24LII 85LII 135L are must haves,, I just wish the 85LII improved optically too and not just the AF part compared to the Ver.I

[bdunbar79]

Realistically if you would ever have the 70-200L IS II lens, you could honestly substitute those as long as you didn't need wider than 2.8.