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

[zrz2005101]

The one point of having primes is for the extra stops of light and their reliable performance. Yes the 70-200 II is more than outstanding but even with IS sometimes it cannot have the picture just because the object may be moving too. Turning up ISO means losing IQ so having the extra stop of light is very helpful.

[Joellll]

I'm going to break the rule by saying a 16-35 to cover both 14mm (it's really a bit too wide) and a 35mm prime.

Then for the other 2 lenses you can have a bit more reach without sacrificing the focal lengths in between. I'd recommend 100L for more variety, but 85L has amazing bokeh. This is for you to decide whether you want more background blur or more close up shots. Both are very good portrait lenses. As for tele, I'd recommend 70-200L, but that will overlap with 85 or 100, so if you want something light, 200 2.8 is a great choice. Or else 135L is also fine if you end up choosing the 85.

If I were to make the decision it would be:
16-35
50L
100L
because I don't really need the reach. I'd go for a 7D if I want to shoot far. Also, 16-35 gives you more versatility when you're indoors. You won't be going wide open if you're taking group shots anyway.

[Razor2012]

The one point of having primes is for the extra stops of light and their reliable performance. Yes the 70-200 II is more than outstanding but even with IS sometimes it cannot have the picture just because the object may be moving too. Turning up ISO means losing IQ so having the extra stop of light is very helpful.

True enough, but I've been doing alot of event shooting lately and find the 5DIII and 70-200II to be an almost unbeatable combination of speed and performance.  Wide open with auto ISO I had alot of good images at 12800.  I personally don't feel a person is losing that much in IQ.  I prefer (in this situation) being more flexible with my zoom.

[bdunbar79]

The one point of having primes is for the extra stops of light and their reliable performance. Yes the 70-200 II is more than outstanding but even with IS sometimes it cannot have the picture just because the object may be moving too. Turning up ISO means losing IQ so having the extra stop of light is very helpful.

Yes true indeed.  However, you must evaluate what you are shooting.  If I'm only doing sports for instance, and I shoot at f/1.8, I'm going to lose my job.  I can't go wider than f/2.8 due to DOF issues anyways.  If you are doing portraits and weddings especially, yes you can go wider.

[scrappydog]

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.

If you are shooting Canon, this is about as close to a "must have" lens as you will find.  Perhaps you could get a fast wide angle prime and the 70-200 f/2.8L II and evaluate on the shots you take with the zoom which focal lengths that you prefer.

[Cannon Man]

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.

I am also looking for the 24-70 II. I am sure it will be much better than the 50 1.2 at all the same apertures.
When i compare my 85 1.2 II to my 50 1.2 the 50mm is much softer.

I wish they make a new 50mm, i don't care if it would be 1.4 i just want good image quality.

[bdunbar79]

The one point of having primes is for the extra stops of light and their reliable performance. Yes the 70-200 II is more than outstanding but even with IS sometimes it cannot have the picture just because the object may be moving too. Turning up ISO means losing IQ so having the extra stop of light is very helpful.

Yes but everytime you turn the aperture wider, you thin your focal plane.  Much rather have to remove noise than have a completely OOF shot because I didn't get the focal plane correct.  This is especially true on shorter focal length lenses when you're doing close ups.