How 'bout primes

[lux]

So I have 24-70ii and 70-200ii. Everyone talks about the need for some primes.
I have 40 2.8, 50.1.4(yeah I know seems sort of redundant but I swear it's not)
Now what. Of course I would love 35 1.4 and 50 1.2 and 85 1.2 and 135 2.0 but I'm not made of money.

I need another reason besides focal length to get a lens

For example the 40 2.8 is so small I can just throw it in my pocket in case I need wide and I'm shooting with my 70-200 or rented 300.

The 50 1.4 is a lens that can do about anything and is faster than my zooms for low light

Then I thought the Rokinon 14 for really wide.
And the 100 non-l macro for portraits and macro

This make my own unholy trinity of utility primes 14/50/100 with the pancake for fun

What do you think?

(Yeah I'm snowed in and bored)

 

[Random Orbits]

Nothing like being forced to be idle to ignite Gear Aquisition Syndrome (GAS)!

With the 24-70 II and 70-200 II as good as they are, the advantages that primes have over zooms have been reduced, but the advantages can still be significant. One thing you had mentioned is using the 50 f/1.4 for low light. I prefer fast primes to the zooms indoors, so the question is whether or not the 50 f/1.4 satisfies your requirements. If you need something wider a bit of time, then a fast 35 might be the correct complement. For portraiture, a fast 85 might work well. Some people swear by the 135L, by I find it less "essential" when you have access to the 70-200 II.

Really, what it comes down to is which photographic discipline do you want to improve in. Want to take better indoor event candids: look at a 35. Want to take better portraits: look at a 85 or 135. Want to get into macro or at least have a higher max mag than what your current lenses offer: look at a 100 macro. The key is to have a defined scenario for each of your lenses. The scenarios will dictate which lens you use when and will maximize the utility of your gear funds. In your case, it might make more sense to save for the 300mm lens that you rent...

 

[slclick]

You almost named my entire set!

I have the S 35 1.4 and it plays a completely different role than the pancake, kind of analogous to your 50 vs 40 spiel. I cannot suggest it enough. The 14 is... fun but it's no Canon except for better coma and AF. But hey for 279$ (Bower) why not?

Then the dual role of a good Macro lens, even the non L 100 is amazingly sharp.

They don't all have to have red rings.....

 

[Don Haines]

How about the MP-E 65 ?

Then, if you are still snowed in, you can take snowflake pictures

The 100mm macro lenses (L or not) are fine lenses... you can't go wrong with them, and it does seem to work well for portraits....

 

[lux]

Ok what do I shoot?

I shoot photos of my kids and friends. I shoot field sports using 70-200 and 100-400(borrowed) and I shoot occasional indoor sports though not as often recently since they have given up basketball. I shoot indoor school events and gatherings primarily with the 24-70 though sometimes with 70-200. (Sometimes with flash). I take pictures of kids outside playing or hiking with 70-200. I shoot at zoos and other animal parks with 70-200 and 100-400.

I use the 50 1.4 when I don't want to bother with flash.

So what could I improve on...I guess both the 14 and the macro don't help with what I do. They are more aspirational. I would like to be the guy who takes cool landscape, nighttime or macro shots but as of yet I have not been. This or course is why I don't own them. However at as little as 300 and 400 for these lenses it isn't too much to spend.

I do like the 85 fl. However the 85 1.8 is not as good as my zooms and I can't justify the L. I considered the sigma but I don't think I can justify that either.

If my kids started playing more indoor sports I would definitely consider a 135L. If they started doing more drama I would consider either the 135 or the sigma 85 though something with IS would be nice For video.

For what I shoot the best addition would be a 300 or 400 2.8 but I don't have that kind of money. I guess I could sell the 24-105, 17-40, 2ti and 50 1.4...then beg lens authority to sell me a used one for the cyber Monday price but I would still need 2500 or so and I don't think my wife would like that.

What does all this mean...looks like I'll ask for the rokinnon for my birthday...might be going to Alaska and a wide angle would be fun.