Input on building a prime lens kit

[gregorywood]

Greetings all,

Long time listener, first time caller...

I've been slowly evolving my equipment as well as my skills over the last few years. I find myself in a good place with camera bodies and zoom lenses having honed in on the smallest number of zoom lenses (4) that meet my needs, but I find myself wanting to have that same efficiency in prime lenses.

My current kit consists of a 6D and a 7D body. I shoot a lot of action (soccer, dancing, events, exercise studio, motorsports, etc) as well as landscape, walk around, travel, portraits and product/real estate. My current lens kit consists of the EF 17-40mm L, EF 24-105mm L, EF 70-200 L, EF 70-300mm L, EF 100mm L macro, EF 35mm IS, EF 50mm 1.4.

To be specific, I'm curious to hear opinions from others on the most versatile 3 lens prime kit. I'm thinking either a 24mm/50mm/85mm or 35mm/85mm/135mm arrangement, though other combinations might warrant consideration. I want enough diversity in focal length yet still have a reasonably flexible kit. I'm not so concerned about the primes on the crop body as I am the full frame. I predominately use the zooms on the 7D and the primes on the 6D, though I do use the 17-40mm L for real estate shots and the 24-105mm as a walk around and travel setup on the 6D and occasionally will through the 35mm IS on the 7D.

I want to sort of "force myself" into leaving the house with 2 or 3 primes and the 6D and making it work to see what happens.

Thanks in advance for the input!
Greg
Fort Worth, Texas

I haven't read the whole chain, but your shooting sounds a hellova lot like mine...right down to dance recitals. Sports action like that and some football games I do, You really need the zoom. My gear list I below. That aside, I shoot house interiors on my 7D with the 11-16 on a tripod so I can use low ISOs. You have the 17-40L on a 6D so you're golden. I'd hate to suggest giving up the zoom there. That's the only lens you really need for real estate. I'm looking at the new 16-35 f4 myself right now. I will also add that on the dance recitals, I rent a 1DX for the weekend for 350 and strap the 70-200 IS MkII to it and I'm done. 8000 frames over 4 recitals each with 50 dance routines. Primes are hard to pull off for those two types of shooting.

Street? 50mm or 35mm. 35mm will get you wider range obviously and if you need to move in to tighten up, do so. I find it's easier for me to move in (or crop if nothing else) than back up most times. Sig 35 ART is insane. But I also have the 50.

For portraiture, I've actually gotten great results for chest-up headshots with the Sig 50 ART. Barrel distortion is zip and everything is very proportional. That said, 85mm is more ideal and some even shoot head with 135. Canon has fantastic stuff here and SIgma is about to release both in the next year from what it smells like. That cheap little 85mm canon I have will blow your socks off for what it is.

So here we go. Street and general. 35mm. Studio Portrait Headshots (single subject) 85mm. Want a #3 length, then go 50mm.

Keep your 17-40L for real estate and your 70-200 for sports and rent a 1DX for those indoor wacky lighting dance recitals. You can look at my website to see how those came out.

Thanks very much for the thoughtful input and for the samples below. I think my plan will be to keep the 35mm f/2 IS and sell off the 50mm 1.4 to force myself to use and become more comfortable with the 35mm. In place of the 50mm, I may get an 85mm (which one remains to be seen). I like the logic someone else pointed out that most of the focal lengths are already covered by zoom lenses, so I should make the prime lenses I do have unique in some fashion. I figure with a fisheye, a macro, and a bokeh monster (in a yet to be determined focal length), that makes good sense.

 

[JonAustin]

The depth and variety of opinions offered up in this thread are the reasons why a forum like this is priceless.

I most relate to the viewpoints expressed by Mt Spokane and Rusty the Geek. I started into SLR photography about 12 years ago, thinking I had to cover the entire focal length range (up to at least 300mm) with L zooms, as well as a good variety of L or "just below L" primes.

I've purchased and sold a good number of lenses over these years, and of late, have been paring down my lens collection, getting rid of (freeing myself from) glass that just didn't get used.

My kit now comprises a 24-105, 70-200 II, 50CM and 100L. I sold my 1.4x II extender recently, and don't intend to replace it. Likewise, my 17-40, which saw a lot less action after I moved from APS-C to full frame. I'll only get the 16-35/4L IS if a definite need arises. I only use the 100L for portraits (sold my 85/1.8 after I got it), and lately I've been thinking I could substitute the 70-200 II for those portrait sessions and lose nothing.

That little GAS voice inside me keeps whispering that I should pick up a 24- or 35mm IS prime, while I wait for Canon's mythical 50mm IS and 100-400 II lenses to appear. When that happens, I just look at how infrequently I use my current primes, and then I convince myself that my money's better left in my wallet.

 

[DRR]

As a general rule, is it a good idea to skip alternate lenses in a line up when planning and building a prime kit?

For example

24 - skip 35 - 50 - skip 85 - 100

or

35 - skip 50 - 85 - skip 100 - 135

And then only if you find that you really need one of the skipped primes, go back and fill it in?

That's what I am doing now that I am re-building my prime kit. I *think* it is a good strategy.

FWIW, this is my strategy. 14/35/85/135. Although I may go back in an get a 100mm for its macro ability.

 

[bholliman]

As a general rule, is it a good idea to skip alternate lenses in a line up when planning and building a prime kit?

For example

24 - skip 35 - 50 - skip 85 - 100
or
35 - skip 50 - 85 - skip 100 - 135

And then only if you find that you really need one of the skipped primes, go back and fill it in?

That's what I am doing now that I am re-building my prime kit. I *think* it is a good strategy.

FWIW, this is my strategy. 14/35/85/135. Although I may go back in an get a 100mm for its macro ability.

+1 I currently own 14/35/85/135 with a 100L Macro thrown in for good measure. The combination works well and provides good coverage. My 35mm f/2 IS is generally my walk around lens and I combine it with the 85 or 135 depending on how much reach I think I'll need.