The Unholy Trinity of Non-L Primes?

[Sitting Elf]

My trio + 1
These are the only non L Primes I have. Don't use them much, but occasional for walk-around.

15mm Fisheye
40mm 2.8 Pancake
50mm 1.8 Nifty Fifty
85mm 1.8 (Needs a nickname ;D )

I also have one additional non-L... but it's a specialty lens
MP-E 65mm 1-5X Macro

All the rest are "L's"

 

[robbymack]

the 100mm f2 is better then the 85mm f1.8.

i don´t know why everyone recommends the 85mm.
the purple fringing of that lens, even when fixable in post, is annoying.

It's not that bad if you stay away from high contrast areas and dont shoot wide open. plus the 100 f2 suffers much the same plight as its essentially exactly the same lens just 15mm longer. In any case I think the reason it gets recommended is two fold. First price, relatively cheap. Second it's a good fl on both crop and ff. on crop 100mm could get a little long, and on ff you're probably more likely to buy the 135L than a 100.

 

[Synomis192]

It's not that bad if you stay away from high contrast areas and dont shoot wide open. plus the 100 f2 suffers much the same plight as its essentially exactly the same lens just 15mm longer. In any case I think the reason it gets recommended is two fold. First price, relatively cheap. Second it's a good fl on both crop and ff. on crop 100mm could get a little long, and on ff you're probably more likely to buy the 135L than a 100.

So what you're saying is that if I'm really considering getting a 100mm f/2, I'd be better off getting an 85mm f/1.8 and the 135mm f/2L? If that's the case, I think I'll try that combo one day when I'm older and more wiser about photography. (and when my budget allows some guilt less spending haha)

My trio + 1
These are the only non L Primes I have. Don't use them much, but occasional for walk-around.

15mm Fisheye
40mm 2.8 Pancake
50mm 1.8 Nifty Fifty
85mm 1.8 (Needs a nickname ;D )

I also have one additional non-L... but it's a specialty lens
MP-E 65mm 1-5X Macro

All the rest are "L's"

What is the MP-E 65mm? Is that strictly a macro lens that is super special? haha

and for the nickname of the 85mm. How about the Sassy Glass? Seeing that DXOmarks show that the 85mm f/1.8 is one of the best canon prime lenses to have that's not an L glass? I dunno. It's 2:00am here. I need sleep. x]

 

[verysimplejason]

MP-E 65mm is the ultimate non-custom macro lens that exists in this known world.

 

[ecka]

For FF:
EF 40/2.8 STM
EF 85/1.8 USM
Σ 150/2.8 HSM Macro

For crop:
EF 28/1.8 USM or Σ 30/1.4 HSM
Σ 50/1.4 HSM
EF 100/2.8USM Macro

 

[Synomis192]

For FF:
EF 40/2.8 STM
EF 85/1.8 USM
Σ 150/2.8 HSM Macro

For crop:
EF 28/1.8 USM or Σ 30/1.4 HSM
Σ 50/1.4 HSM
EF 100/2.8USM Macro

So, I'm guessing that you aren't recommending any prime wide angles on a FF camera because they suck haha. I'd be better off getting an ultra-wide variable zoom (ex. 17-40mm or 12-24mm) and a collection of primes?

 

[ecka]

For FF:
EF 40/2.8 STM
EF 85/1.8 USM
Σ 150/2.8 HSM Macro

For crop:
EF 28/1.8 USM or Σ 30/1.4 HSM
Σ 50/1.4 HSM
EF 100/2.8USM Macro

So, I'm guessing that you aren't recommending any prime wide angles on a FF camera because they suck haha. I'd be better off getting an ultra-wide variable zoom (ex. 17-40mm or 12-24mm) and a collection of primes?

That's not the case. I'd recommend Samyang 14/2.8UMC for FF, but we are talking about the trinity, which means 3 lenses, not 4
For crop - yes, get the zoom

 

[AvTvM]

my current non-L EF prime trinity is
EF 40/2.8 pancake ... super compact, great IQ, not so great AF
EF 50/1.4 ... and still waiting for a really great Mk. II
EF 100/2.0 ... simply an amazing lens

I wish there was a great and affordable 20/2.8 ... dont need IS and high price, just great image quality.

 

[AdamJ]

I believe I first used the 'unholy trinity' tag in relation to non-L primes so I'm claiming the right to define them.

Actually, they define themselves as the poor man's holy trinity (35L, 50L, 85L), namely the 28mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8. They share the same mid-range external design theme and build quality, thus the cohesion to justify the 'trinity' description.

Please let this be agreed because it will give me small sense of achievement on this forum, which I badly need. :-[ ;D

 

[dr croubie]

EF 100/2.0 ... simply an amazing lens

Damn straight

 

[grey4]

I'm currently using an unholy trinity with my 7d.

20mm f/2.8
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8

The USM AF on the 7d is excellent. It's not a huge hit on the wallet either.

 

[Synomis192]

I'm currently using an unholy trinity with my 7d.

20mm f/2.8
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8

The USM AF on the 7d is excellent. It's not a huge hit on the wallet either.

ooooh, how well does the 20mm perform on your 7D? I'm pretty interested in that lens haha

 

[drmikeinpdx]

the 100mm f2 is better then the 85mm f1.8.

i don´t know why everyone recommends the 85mm.
the purple fringing of that lens, even when fixable in post, is annoying.

I have both of these lenses and found something interesting when I was doing focus calibration with my new 5D Mark III.

Both have substantial and virtually identical color fringing just in front of the point of focus. This is at the center, not in the corners.

I plan to do more testing when I have time. I did not use these lenses much with my 5D classic, since the autofocus system wasn't accurate enough to use them wide open. The Mark III is a huge improvement in focus accuracy and I am really looking forward to playing around with these two primes.

 

[Loswr]

Both have substantial and virtually identical color fringing just in front of the point of focus. This is at the center, not in the corners.

That's longitudinal CA. Lateral CA occurs at the edges, longitudinal CA anywhere in the frame. Pretty much all fast primes have it, to some degree.

 

[crasher8]

How's the CA on the 100 2.8 macro? Negligible? I have one on the way and it will be my main macro lens but double as a portrait too.

 

[peederj]

The 50/1.4 and 100/2.8 Macro are my picks for non-L primes in the Canon lineup. I ended up liking the 40 shorty a lot and have it as my body cap and shoot more with it than I should. On the wide end, potentially the new 24 or 28 IS versions are good, but I haven't tried them. I have the Zeiss 25/2 in that range, which makes sense as I do a lot of video. With stills I am usually using zooms (Canon 16-35 II, 10-22) on the wide end, fast apertures aren't so very crucial there but proper framing is (want to maximize resolution).

 

[RLPhoto]

I've always heard photographers that praise a photographer for collecting either a 35/50/85 or 24/50/135 lens collection. Those are really really great lens and I've only got to spend 30 minutes with a 50 f/1.2 and I ultimately fell in love with it.

Is there a non-L prime trinity out there that offers the best images?

Like this is what I'm thinking, if I were to get the non-L versions of the 35/50/135 lens is that a good enough prime collection?

As the owner of the 24/50/135L prime trinity, I can say its the most practical setup I've ever used.

But if you don't have the cash, I would do this setup

5Dc

28mm 1.8
50mm 1.4
100mm F/2

I can do 90% of all my work with those 3 lenses.

 

[Synomis192]

As the owner of the 24/50/135L prime trinity, I can say its the most practical setup I've ever used.

But if you don't have the cash, I would do this setup

5Dc

28mm 1.8
50mm 1.4
100mm F/2

I can do 90% of all my work with those 3 lenses.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll just start saving now to reach a combo that is worthy of being unholy haha. Is the jump from 50mm to 100mm going to make me miss some shots?

 

[joshmurrah]

So question for the experts here...

I see the 100mm f/2 get recommended over the 85 1.8 a lot.

Why (with a limited budget keeping you out of the L lenses) would you have this lens over the non-L 100 macro?

Does it come down to the larger-than f/2.8, and faster (I'm guessing here) focus, versus having the macro capability?

Seems like if you needed macro, you'd do maybe the 85 plus the 100 macro.

 

[AvTvM]

I see the 100mm f/2 get recommended over the 85 1.8 a lot.
Why (with a limited budget keeping you out of the L lenses) would you have this lens over the non-L 100 macro?
Does it come down to the larger-than f/2.8, and faster (I'm guessing here) focus, versus having the macro capability?
Seems like if you needed macro, you'd do maybe the 85 plus the 100 macro.

if you need a macro.. you need a macro - yes. The 100/2.0 is a different beast .. i love it for street, concerts and some events, and occasionally for indoor sports. It is 1 full stop faster than the 100 Macro Non IS, has more background blur - especially on APS-C - and the AF is way faster. I would not want to exchange it for the non-IS 100 Macro.

And for me 85mm and 100mm are too close to bother having both focal lengths in primes.

However, I have been toying with the idea to sell both my EF-S 60 Macro and the 100/2.0 ... to get the 100/2.8 Macro L IS ... only 1 lens, FF capable, IS ... but then, I need f/2.0 miore than IS, becaus my subjects are often not static but in motion and in rather low light.