Transitioning to Primes

[AcutancePhotography]

After years of humping large SLRs, motor drives and big zoom lenses, I now travel with a 35mm, an 85mm
and don't feel I miss a thing.

When I rebuild my lens kit with good quality glass (instead of the cheap stuff I could afford in my youth), those are the primes I am also getting. Later I might add something in the 150mm macro range. One I build my prime kit I might consider a mid range zoom as a walk around. Or I might not.

Of course, it depends on the type of photography one does. For my type, a small set of primes will work better than a zoom.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

As someone who just did the exact opposite (sort of), I would really ask yourself if this is the best course. I sold my 35 1.4, 50 1.2, and 135 2 to get a 300 2.8 II. I kept my 24 1.4 II, and 85 1.2 II, but found myself using the other lenses less and less after upgrading to the 24-70 II and 70-200 II.

If I were you, I'd consider trading the 70-200 II (a huge lens) for the 85 1.2 II and 135 2 to get the portability you desire. That's how I'd start. The 85 1.2 II is amazing and the 70-200 can't touch the look you get from f1.2-2.

If you're still having prime lust, I'd keep the 24-70 II as it's not that huge, and then pick your most used prime focal length (i.e, 24, 35, or 50) and buy that lens. For me, my love is the 24mm perspective, so that's what I kept, but others prefer the 35 or 50.

If you don't shoot the vast majority of your shots at f/2.8 or need portability, I'd just start with one prime before selling your zooms to make sure. The convenience you give up is much bigger than you think unless you mostly shoot portraits, street photos or the like.

Your last option is to rent one more primes for a week or two and try to shoot everyday with them so see if it's worth it for you. Everyone is different and I never imagined I'd part with my primes, but not that I only have 2 of them, I don't miss the rest.

Renting is a great thing to do. It's a little loss in money but it does give you the chance of really working with the lens before the big purchase. When I was a newbie pro, I would hire a lens I needed for a gig to try out and see how I got on with it. When I had the money to buy, I know exactly what I wanted and didn't want and it made my gear quest a lot more informed. These days, I do most of my weddings with just three lenses. Landscapes, just three lenses...Wildlife, just three lenses....unfortunatly mostly different lenses!

 

[bleephotography]

I would keep the zooms and add one prime at a time to see how often I use it. In your situation i would add 135L to your zooms setup. This is a great portrait and street lens and relatively inexpensive. See how often you prefer it over your 70-200 zoom. See if the IQ difference justifies having a fixed FL lens.

Thanks. I'm actually in the process of doing exactly this. I added the Sigma 35, which is my preferred focal length, and I'm looking to add the 135 and repurchase the 24-70 II when the next batch of rebates come around. Having a lighter telephoto will come in handy when I don't want to lug my 70-200 around or when I'm doing more head and shoulder portraits.

 

[bleephotography]

As someone who just did the exact opposite (sort of), I would really ask yourself if this is the best course. I sold my 35 1.4, 50 1.2, and 135 2 to get a 300 2.8 II. I kept my 24 1.4 II, and 85 1.2 II, but found myself using the other lenses less and less after upgrading to the 24-70 II and 70-200 II.

If I were you, I'd consider trading the 70-200 II (a huge lens) for the 85 1.2 II and 135 2 to get the portability you desire. That's how I'd start. The 85 1.2 II is amazing and the 70-200 can't touch the look you get from f1.2-2.

If you're still having prime lust, I'd keep the 24-70 II as it's not that huge, and then pick your most used prime focal length (i.e, 24, 35, or 50) and buy that lens. For me, my love is the 24mm perspective, so that's what I kept, but others prefer the 35 or 50.

If you don't shoot the vast majority of your shots at f/2.8 or need portability, I'd just start with one prime before selling your zooms to make sure. The convenience you give up is much bigger than you think unless you mostly shoot portraits, street photos or the like.

Your last option is to rent one more primes for a week or two and try to shoot everyday with them so see if it's worth it for you. Everyone is different and I never imagined I'd part with my primes, but not that I only have 2 of them, I don't miss the rest.

Well, after a few days of pondering, I just couldn't bring myself to get rid of my 70-200 (especially now that I've added the 1.4x extender for sports). Having a couple fast primes at either ends of the spectrum in addition to the versatility and quality of the 24-70 II seems like the most logical choice for how I shoot. I'll be getting the 135 instead of the 85 II, but who knows...maybe I'll add the latter later. Thanks for the advice!

 

[mackguyver]

As someone who just did the exact opposite (sort of), I would really ask yourself if this is the best course. I sold my 35 1.4, 50 1.2, and 135 2 to get a 300 2.8 II. I kept my 24 1.4 II, and 85 1.2 II, but found myself using the other lenses less and less after upgrading to the 24-70 II and 70-200 II.

If I were you, I'd consider trading the 70-200 II (a huge lens) for the 85 1.2 II and 135 2 to get the portability you desire. That's how I'd start. The 85 1.2 II is amazing and the 70-200 can't touch the look you get from f1.2-2.

If you're still having prime lust, I'd keep the 24-70 II as it's not that huge, and then pick your most used prime focal length (i.e, 24, 35, or 50) and buy that lens. For me, my love is the 24mm perspective, so that's what I kept, but others prefer the 35 or 50.

If you don't shoot the vast majority of your shots at f/2.8 or need portability, I'd just start with one prime before selling your zooms to make sure. The convenience you give up is much bigger than you think unless you mostly shoot portraits, street photos or the like.

Your last option is to rent one more primes for a week or two and try to shoot everyday with them so see if it's worth it for you. Everyone is different and I never imagined I'd part with my primes, but not that I only have 2 of them, I don't miss the rest.

Well, after a few days of pondering, I just couldn't bring myself to get rid of my 70-200 (especially now that I've added the 1.4x extender for sports). Having a couple fast primes at either ends of the spectrum in addition to the versatility and quality of the 24-70 II seems like the most logical choice for how I shoot. I'll be getting the 135 instead of the 85 II, but who knows...maybe I'll add the latter later. Thanks for the advice!

I'm happy to have helped and you'll love the 135 f/2 - it's an amazing lens and WAY more discreet and portable than the 70-200 2.8. You can always add more primes, as you say, but the 135 makes the most sense of any lens to replace the 70-200 when you need something smaller. It works well with the 1.4x as well, provided you stop down to f/5.6 or smaller.

 

[Grumbaki]

The 24-70 + 70-200 is a super combo. About you add couple more primes(24, 85) before selling it.

That. But Sigma 35 and 85L.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

This is funny, because i am having a prime addiction issue. LOL...i have a 50, an 85 ad a 100 macro...and i have just spent close to 2 weeks renting a 24mm 1.4. I love that lensand plan to buy it once a few deposits make it through this week. My 24-70 has become less and less used over the years, and i love the look of the 1.4....

 

[mackguyver]

This is funny, because i am having a prime addiction issue. LOL...i have a 50, an 85 ad a 100 macro...and i have just spent close to 2 weeks renting a 24mm 1.4. I love that lensand plan to buy it once a few deposits make it through this week. My 24-70 has become less and less used over the years, and i love the look of the 1.4....

I think it must be phases we all go through. I fell for primes, moved on to zooms, back to primes, and now I'm using a mixture. It must be part of L'addiction de Canon.

 

[BozillaNZ]

If you made up your mind to trade all your zooms to prime, make sure you have 2 bodies and use them side by side in any serious shooting sessions. Otherwise you will stuck in the forever changing lenses back and forth and miss many shots.

 

[mackguyver]

If you made up your mind to trade all your zooms to prime, make sure you have 2 bodies and use them side by side in any serious shooting sessions. Otherwise you will stuck in the forever changing lenses back and forth and miss many shots.

+1

 

[GMCPhotographics]

This is funny, because i am having a prime addiction issue. LOL...i have a 50, an 85 ad a 100 macro...and i have just spent close to 2 weeks renting a 24mm 1.4. I love that lensand plan to buy it once a few deposits make it through this week. My 24-70 has become less and less used over the years, and i love the look of the 1.4....

I think it must be phases we all go through. I fell for primes, moved on to zooms, back to primes, and now I'm using a mixture. It must be part of L'addiction de Canon.

Yep been there too...I guess i should make a tee shirt....

 

[Northstar]

Keeping the zooms and adding the 135mm is a good plan.

With those zooms and your 35 art and 135, you'll be in great shape.

You mentioned shooting some sports, I didn't find the 135 very good for fast action...To many OOF shots.

 

[surapon]

As someone who just did the exact opposite (sort of), I would really ask yourself if this is the best course. I sold my 35 1.4, 50 1.2, and 135 2 to get a 300 2.8 II. I kept my 24 1.4 II, and 85 1.2 II, but found myself using the other lenses less and less after upgrading to the 24-70 II and 70-200 II.

If I were you, I'd consider trading the 70-200 II (a huge lens) for the 85 1.2 II and 135 2 to get the portability you desire. That's how I'd start. The 85 1.2 II is amazing and the 70-200 can't touch the look you get from f1.2-2.

If you're still having prime lust, I'd keep the 24-70 II as it's not that huge, and then pick your most used prime focal length (i.e, 24, 35, or 50) and buy that lens. For me, my love is the 24mm perspective, so that's what I kept, but others prefer the 35 or 50.

If you don't shoot the vast majority of your shots at f/2.8 or need portability, I'd just start with one prime before selling your zooms to make sure. The convenience you give up is much bigger than you think unless you mostly shoot portraits, street photos or the like.

Your last option is to rent one more primes for a week or two and try to shoot everyday with them so see if it's worth it for you. Everyone is different and I never imagined I'd part with my primes, but not that I only have 2 of them, I don't miss the rest.

Well, after a few days of pondering, I just couldn't bring myself to get rid of my 70-200 (especially now that I've added the 1.4x extender for sports). Having a couple fast primes at either ends of the spectrum in addition to the versatility and quality of the 24-70 II seems like the most logical choice for how I shoot. I'll be getting the 135 instead of the 85 II, but who knows...maybe I'll add the latter later. Thanks for the advice!

I'm happy to have helped and you'll love the 135 f/2 - it's an amazing lens and WAY more discreet and portable than the 70-200 2.8. You can always add more primes, as you say, but the 135 makes the most sense of any lens to replace the 70-200 when you need something smaller. It works well with the 1.4x as well, provided you stop down to f/5.6 or smaller.

+ 1 for me.
Yes, Sir, Dear Mr. mackguyver.
Past 8 months, I use 135/ 2.0 more than Big 70-200/ 2.8 IS .-0-------Yes, Better more beautiful Picture, Better Shallow DOF, Better Bokeh, Just in my Idea.
Thanks.
Surapon