EF 24-70mm F2.8 L ver 2 or 3 Prime Lens

[biscuit]

If I may, I'd like to buck the trend here a bit. We do not really know what the OP wants out of the equipment. If one were to want discrete shooting in the street and interiors, then a 24-70 would be a rather poor selection. For convenience and overall sharpness, then the zoom will come out on top but if the OP wants to frame something that the 100mm does well, then the 24-70 will have to be shot wide and then cropped in post. If shooting film, this may be more hassle than it is worth.
There are just so many possible photographic situations with ideal equipment selections for each that it is truly impossible to suggest an ideal without knowing the use scenario.
That said, why not get the 50, 100, and the zoom? 50 is inexpensive and a low light monster, the 100 covers a focal length the zoom does not cover, and the zoom can be used when the focal range is right and IQ is paramount.

I agree with this - the choice is not so clear cut and I am surprised by the consensus.

The combination of primes suggested by the OP is about 5-600 USD less than the zoom with the major online US retailers (OP's local prices might differ of course). Closer in price would be : Sigma 35mm f/1.4 + Canon 85mm f/1.8 + Canon 135 mm f/2 L. This gives an even wider range of focal lengths and includes two lenses in the 35/135 combination that are widely considered to be exceptionally good.

I'm not necessarily advocating this particular combination of primes - maybe OP would prefer something wider - just pointing out that there are other options and the situation is not black and white. Yet another similarly priced option would be the 35/85 combination above, plus the 24-105 f/4 L.

My own suggestion to the OP would be not to buy anything at the moment, and look to borrow and/or rent some of these options to figure out what is really needed.

 

[deleteme]

As someone else noted, it depends on what the OP wants to do.
The 24-70 is, inarguably, a superb lens. However, they may want a faster lens for the DOF aspect although I feel the Canon 50's are poor value in terms of optical quality (for the 1.4) and cost (for the 1.2).
The 100 is a tack sharp optic that offers a FL the zoom does not.

But.... for me the zoom offers the unassailable advantage of being at the FL I need instantly. I shoot events and lifestyle. I do not want to be fussing with a lens change when I need to shoot NOW. It was bad enough in the film days but with digital sensors and their sensitivity to dust, I will do anything to not change lenses. All the putative advantages of primes go out the window when I don't have a shot.