Canon's Holy Trinity 2015

Sabaki

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 4, 2012
800
0
45
Cape Town, South Africa
So when I started photography three years odd back, this was the Holy Trinity:

Canon EF 16-35 f/2.8 L mkii, Canon EF 24-70 L f/2.8 and the Canon EF 70-200 L f2.8 IS mkii.

The EF 24-70 f/2.8 L mkii obviously replaces the earlier version but which wide angle completes the trinity? Is it the 11-24 or would we consider that a niche lens? Is it the 16-35 f/4.0 L IS or does the 16-35 f/2.8 L mkii still hold it's place?

I guess the 16-35, 24-70 & 70-200 f/4.0 L's complete their own Trinity?

Silly post but I'm just trying to humour myself :D
 

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,116
309
Yes there seems to be many holy trinities.
Years ago the Prime one seemed to be
50 F1.2, 85 F1.2 and 135 F2

What would mine be?

Probably
24 TSE II, 100L and 70-200 II probably are favourite lens and so my holy trinity.

Pushing them hard would be the 100-400 II, 50mm 1.2 and the workhorses (17-40L and 24-105L not because they are stunningly brilliant but because the are good and robust and both heavily used).
 

LukasS

Yeap
Dec 24, 2014
106
5
Mine dream team was the one Sabaki mentioned, but it changed over the years (couldn't afford it at the time). At first it was street photography and large outdoor events so 17-40 (eventually sold) and 70-200/2.8 was mainly in use (with 10D) some macro with 100/2.8 and some every day use with 50/1.4

Right now it's different story, I still like to record events but much closer so 24-70/2.8 arrived few years back and it's most used non-prime in my bag (on FF) and 100-400/II (on 7d2) for closeups in airshows and related events. I fell in love again with UWA (after not so good experience at the time with 17-40) with new addition 16-35/4IS to the family.

My focused moved also from outdoor to indoor and primes took hold of me :) -> 35/2.0 (will add to that 1/4mkII), 50/1.2 and 85/1.8

So my journey started with 17-40, 50/1.4, 100/2.8 macro and 70-200/2.8 but it changed and grew into two groups :) and with current offer by Canon it's hard to keep interest in one field (and one "trinity"), when there are so many opportunities and great collection of lenses.
 
Aug 22, 2010
1,628
327
49
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
There's always been some debate over which lenses make the 'oly three.
There's the zoom list: 16-35 / 24-70 / 70-200...all f2.8 lenses. The weakest lens in this list is the 16-35IIL.
Then there's the f4 zoomsters: 16-35 LIS, 24-105 LIS and the new 100-400 II LIS. The weakest lens in this list is the 24-105L.
Then there's the prime list, which sort of depends on your wide choice and then runs from there.
24IIL / 50L /100 Macro or 135L if you start with the 24mm f1.4 IIL as your wide choice and then your focal lengths double with each lens. The issue here is the 50L, which is the least impressive of all the L primes.
A more common option is 35L / 85L / 135L. But it lacks a very wide option, so many swap out the 35L for a 16-35IIL or have the option for both in their bag.
Remember that in an ideal situation, you would have a full frame camera on each of your three lenses for the 'oly three to count. Which is why I run with three cams for my wedding work.
 

Sabaki

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 4, 2012
800
0
45
Cape Town, South Africa
GMCPhotographics said:
There's always been some debate over which lenses make the 'oly three.
There's the zoom list: 16-35 / 24-70 / 70-200...all f2.8 lenses. The weakest lens in this list is the 16-35IIL.
Then there's the f4 zoomsters: 16-35 LIS, 24-105 LIS and the new 100-400 II LIS. The weakest lens in this list is the 24-105L.
Then there's the prime list, which sort of depends on your wide choice and then runs from there.
24IIL / 50L /100 Macro or 135L if you start with the 24mm f1.4 IIL as your wide choice and then your focal lengths double with each lens. The issue here is the 50L, which is the least impressive of all the L primes.
A more common option is 35L / 85L / 135L. But it lacks a very wide option, so many swap out the 35L for a 16-35IIL or have the option for both in their bag.
Remember that in an ideal situation, you would have a full frame camera on each of your three lenses for the 'oly three to count. Which is why I run with three cams for my wedding work.
Interesting! I always thought the zoom trinity was the holy grail. But it makes sense that primes have theirs too

Seriously wish I had three full frame bodies! But I'll be adding a 6D soon :p

My zoom wishlist is actually a quadrilogy: 11-24, 24,70 mkii, 70-200 mkii & the 200-400 but the 200-400 is way out of my budget (R120 000 in South Africa)

I actually prefer 'oly Trinity, less blasphemous! :D
 

AvTvM

EOS 5D MK IV
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
the term is primarily used by Nikonians for their three pro-grade f/2.8 zooms: 14-24, 24-70, 70-200

My personal favorite current FF Canon zoom triplet is: 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8 II, 70-200/2.8 II ... based on my needs, optical performance and price/value. :)

For APS-C it consists of EF-M 11-22 / 18-55 / 55-200 - carefully selected from the entire universe of available Canon EF-M zooms. ;D
 

2n10

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 25, 2012
640
0
56
Sparks, NV
The Trinity would be very dependent not only on one's preference for zooms or primes but also what you currently prefer to shoot. The Macro fraternity have the MP-65, 100 Macro L and the 180 Marco. Wildlife photographers might go with the 100-400 LIS II, 600 f/4 LIS II and both TCs considering them as a unit or team to make the trinity. Landscapers probably would have a different group yet again. I think it would be interesting to here from the various specialist groups.
 

martti

EOS 7D MK II
May 11, 2014
692
11
21.1144° S, 55.5325° E
I would probably kneel down before the 16-35mm f/4 IS, the 85 mm f/1.2 and the 100-400 II.
The Spirit of Canon manifests itself in the 85mm f/1.2.
Then again, I never had the chance to shoot with the 70-200 f/2.8 II.
 

Famateur

EOS 7D MK II
Oct 9, 2012
798
120
This question might produce as many diverging answers as the original attempt to define the Trinity. :p

For me, it's the F4 Zoom Trinity:

  • 16-35 F4L IS
  • 24-70 F4L IS
  • 70-200 F4L IS

I also note that they are three separate and distinct lenses, but one in Aperture. :)
 

rs

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 29, 2012
1,024
0
UK
I am very happy with my 16-35 L IS, 24-70 II and 70-200 II trinity. Regarding primes, I'd be happy with a pairing of a 35 L II to go with my 85 L II. If only funds would stretch that far.
 
Aug 22, 2010
1,628
327
49
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
AvTvM said:
the term is primarily used by Nikonians for their three pro-grade f/2.8 zooms: 14-24, 24-70, 70-200

My personal favorite current FF Canon zoom triplet is: 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8 II, 70-200/2.8 II ... based on my needs, optical performance and price/value. :)

For APS-C it consists of EF-M 11-22 / 18-55 / 55-200 - carefully selected from the entire universe of available Canon EF-M zooms. ;D
Sorry bud, they might have stolen the term...but it's not theirs. Pro's (particularly press) have been calling them the 'oly trinity from pre-digital. The Canon Eos-1 pretty much owned the press back then. The term pre-dates digital and Canon's AF system was the best there was. It took Nikon a while and I'm pretty sure they copied Canon's lens line up. Canon used to have their original trinity of 17-35 f2.8 L, 28-70 f2.8 L and 80-200 f2.8 L. The 70-200 was sold as the first zoom which was a sharp as a prime and the 28-70L was the first of it's kind...every one else copied it.
 

Famateur

EOS 7D MK II
Oct 9, 2012
798
120
dilbert said:
Famateur said:
This question might produce as many diverging answers as the original attempt to define the Trinity. :p

For me, it's the F4 Zoom Trinity:

  • 16-35 F4L IS
  • 24-70 F4L IS
  • 70-200 F4L IS

I also note that they are three separate and distinct lenses, but one in Aperture. :)
The 70-200/f4L could just as easily be replaced with the 70-300/f4-5.6L.
Maybe in your belief system's Trinity. :p :-X
 

davidcl0nel

Canon 5D3, 17 TSE, 35 IS, 100 L, 70-200 2.8 IS II
Jan 11, 2014
135
6
Berlin
www.flickr.com
17 TS-E, 35 IS and 70-200 2.8 IS II - I don't miss anything i cant do with these 3.
Both primes are extremely sharp, so I can crop a 24mm picture easly from the 17, or a 50 from the 35...
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,398
638
I believe that the original trinity used to be 35 1.4L, 85 1.2L (II), 135 2L.

But of course everyone has any trinity they like...

My Low light trinity is... a deity: 35 1.4L 85 1.2L II (They fit with a 5D3 in my small urban disguise 30 think tank shoulder bag)

My travel trinity consists of 17TS-E, 24-70 2.8II and 100-400 L IS II (the later two with 5D3's attached).
 

bholliman

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 6, 2012
1,473
0
USA
www.flickr.com
AvTvM said:
My personal favorite current FF Canon zoom triplet is: 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8 II, 70-200/2.8 II ... based on my needs, optical performance and price/value. :)
rs said:
I am very happy with my 16-35 L IS, 24-70 II and 70-200 II trinity.
+1 One could argue the 11-24L over the 16-35/4 IS, but to me the 16-35 IS is a near perfect landscape lens. Excellent optically, small and light, takes screw on filters and the price is very reasonable. The 24-70 II and 70-200 II are clear leaders in their focal ranges.

My prime trinity would probably be the 35 IS (maybe the 35LII when its available), 85LII and 135L.
 

BLFPhoto

Canon EOS user since '91...
tron said:
I believe that the original trinity used to be 35 1.4L, 85 1.2L (II), 135 2L.

But of course everyone has any trinity they like...

My Low light trinity is... a deity: 35 1.4L 85 1.2L II (They fit with a 5D3 in my small urban disguise 30 think tank shoulder bag)

My travel trinity consists of 17TS-E, 24-70 2.8II and 100-400 L IS II (the later two with 5D3's attached).

Ding, ding, ding....we have a winner. The original coinage of the term Holy Trinity with respect to Canon lenses is the 35/85/135 L prime lineup. Back then the zooms just weren't what they are today. The old 80-200L 2.8 (The Drainpipe) was awesome, but the 28-70 was just ok, and the wide zooms just didn't cut the mustard.

The 35/85/135 L is still the trinity in my book, and those lenses cover 90% of weddings and portraits for me. They simply give me images I can't get with a 2.8 zoom. The zooms shine for close in sports, though, when the 300 is too long. Kids are another place the zooms shine too. If someone wants to call their three favorites that aren't the 35/85/135 group a trinity...fine by me. It's all good.
 

arthurbikemad

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 19, 2015
463
39
UK
I have all the f2.8 zooms and love them, never sure why so many slate the 16-35mk2 as I find it's a sharp fast lens that I've taken some cracking shots with inc astro stuff, also have the new 11-24/4, it's an amazing UWA but frustrating to use in the wet/dust as the front is so vaunrable, for reasons of fear I tend to opt for my 16-35 at those times! However the 11-24 is super SHARP!!! So many great lenses from Canon, just started to shoot with the 100-400mk2 this week, another cracking lense even with X1.4, even good for a few 800mm moon shots at f11/x2.0. :)
 

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
782
151
dilbert said:
Famateur said:
dilbert said:
Famateur said:
This question might produce as many diverging answers as the original attempt to define the Trinity. :p

For me, it's the F4 Zoom Trinity:

  • 16-35 F4L IS
  • 24-70 F4L IS
  • 70-200 F4L IS

I also note that they are three separate and distinct lenses, but one in Aperture. :)
The 70-200/f4L could just as easily be replaced with the 70-300/f4-5.6L.
Maybe in your belief system's Trinity. :p :-X
Why on earth would I want the 70-200/f4L IS USM over the 70-300L?

The 70-200 is physically longer, making it harder to keep in camera bags, smaller focal length range meaning you need to use an extender to get > 200mm and the IQ is inferior.
Both lenses are great so it is mostly down to personal preference, but I'm with Famateur on this. The 70-200 f/4L IS is noticeably lighter (good for strenuous hiking / long hikes when you have tent, food, etc too), constant aperture, wider aperture from about the 100mm mark onwards, and I prefer the handling. I also disagree the IQ is inferior - not my experience (or perhaps you just meant the 70-200's IQ is inferior once you add an extender?). Anyway, YMMV!