Are L primes "better" than L zooms?

Started Sep 19, 2010 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Forever Young
Regular MemberPosts: 239Gear list
Like?
Are L primes "better" than L zooms?
Sep 19, 2010

Hi,

Is there a general consensus that Canon L primes have better image quality (sharpness, color, contrast, etc.) than Canon L zooms on a 5DII body if I shoot mostly family (grandchildren) and landscapes and I print mostly A4 and occasionally A2? Shall I be "better off" with six primes, i.e. the 14mm f/2.8; 24mm II f/1.4; 35mm f/1.4; 50mm f/1.2; 85mm II f/1.2; 135mm f/2; 200mm II f/2.8 setup than with the three zooms, i.e. 16-35mm f/2.8; 24-70mm f/2.8; and 70-200mm II f/2.8 IS?

My feeling is that for most of the range up to 200mm fast primes are able to give me far much more light and thus more options to play with, and the prime lenses are even lighter (i.e. have less weight) than the zoom beyond 70mm... Yes, I will loose some convenience by having to change lenses more frequently instead of just zooming, but probably I gain more by having faster lenses...

The question still remains. What about the image quality? What do you think about the "prime rout"...?

-- hide signature --

Thanks, Imre

 Forever Young's gear list:Forever Young's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS-1D X Canon EOS 100D Canon EOS 70D Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM +25 more
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
yesNew
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow