Reading mode: Light Dark

Prime lens users... Can you assist? (posted in the correct forum)

Go to last post
R

riversen

Senior Member
Messages
1,267
Reaction score
1
Location
Waco, TX, US
I am debating yet again. I was about to sell my 50mm f/1.4, 100mm f/2, and 200mm f/2.8L lenses and keep my 24-105mm f/4L IS lens and possibly buy a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens. I was all set, but now I don't know. Could it be that I am willing to part with my primes because I use my 24-105mm so much and have never really used my primes and find that I don't have the right back to truly switch my lenses. Sometimes, too big of a bag can really limit what you do. So in my search for a smaller carry bag/shoulder bag/etc., I am reconsidering keeping my primes and possibly selling the 24-105mm lens. That would give me the widest lens with 50mm. What should I do then? Is there a good 20mm or 24mm prime lens?

Okay, so do I keep the primes or not. Do you recommend that I get the smaller bag and try out the prime switching thing? Do you think that I am crazy for even debating this?

Thanks for everyone's thoughts and experiences!

--
Robert (Phoenix, AZ) - Canon EOS 30D

Since the beauty of this world is a reflection the Creator's brushstroke, then my hope is to capture but a glimpse of that exquisiteness.
 
I hardly ever take it off. And I miss the IS in low light situations.

I really could sell a few. Although I was thinking of getting the sigma 30mm1.4, and keep changing my mind....I'd just need it for the 1.4 tho...I guess that is your final answer. Keep only the low light ones.

The 24-105 is a workhorse.

Same situation here, I am going to the flower fields and need 17mm. So thought of bringing my tamron 17-50 and my 90 Tamron macro. AND I STILL find myself dreading to leave the 24-105 home. I know it could be on it all day, no prob, and I don't want to carry 3 lenses.
--



Linda~ http://netgarden.smugmug.com/
You don't take a photograph. You ask, quietly, to borrow it. Author Unknown
 
riversen said:
Okay, so do I keep the primes or not. Do you recommend that I get
the smaller bag and try out the prime switching thing? Do you think
that I am crazy for even debating this?
Click to expand...
Why shoot primes at all? For me, it's primarily shallow DOF. Having a shallow DOF gives my images the look I want. I'll shoot deeper DOF on occasion, such as a landscape, but it's really quite rare.

It's also size. The 50 / 1.4 and 100 / 2 are very compact lenses compared to the zooms in their range. In fact, the primary reason I sold my 135 / 2L is because the 100 / 2 was smaller and lighter. Turns out I like 100mm better, anyway, but the primary reason was size and weight.

And, of course, is likely the most common reason to use primes: to get a fast enough shutter in low light to avoid motion blur on a moving subject and/or to be able to use a lower ISO.

As far as IQ goes, the differences between primes and quality zooms is, in my opinion, negligible. In fact, the zooms sometimes have higher IQ than the primes (the 70-200 / 4L IS, for example).

So, what do you value in photography? Shallow DOF? Size and/or weight? Moving objects in low light? Or do you value convenience and IS for static objects in low light?

It's kind of a simple choice, actually. You value one, the other, or both. Buy the lenses that you find most useful for what you want to do.

--
--joe

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/joemama/

Please feel free to criticize, make suggestions, and edit my photos. If you wish to use any of my photos for any purpose other than editing in these forums, please ask.
 
i shoot primes-only but i think your strategy is sound as long as you don't need f/2.8 or faster for low-light action. that 70-200 f/4L IS looks pretty darn awesome. i shoot the 35L for walkaround, but lately i have been wondering whether the 24-70 2.8L would be more practical.

that said, there is no way i'd ever give up the 85L. and no zooms could keep me from lusting for the 300 2.8L IS and 200 1.8L.

bottom line: Canon zooms are getting better, but make room for the great primes.

--
Bob Alfieri
Chapel Hill, NC
http://alfieri.smugmug.com
 
Mistake #1 - thinking you have to bring it all, when in fact you dont always

Mistake #2 - thinking one bag fits all occasions

Mistake #3 - thinking fast lenses are for low light/no flash work

Mistake #4 - thinking you need a prime or zoom focal length for every occasion

I'll stop there.
  1. 1. I used to be in the school of "have it all ready to go, in case you need it". Then as I gained more experience, and thought about things, I was able to reduce my kit for any given occasion, and not be under equipped. It means thinking about things differently then your typical "stand in one place and compose with a zoom" mentality. Having said that, I usually have some odd backup film camera - one of the Leica M's with a 35 or 50 on it, thats a given.
  1. 2. I've found that I'm using my smaller bags more often, or, packing my larger bags with things like spare tshirts and socks, large garbage bags (in case of rain), lunch... you get the idea. I don't need all my stuff with me, so smaller bags often work fine. I've become pretty fond of the Domke bags, and have more or less dedicated the "little bit bigger" bag as my two cameras and spare clothing bag on overnighters (or a few days). They've got a "little bit smaller" bag that does great for most things, and the standard bag when want to carry the 300mm or 350mm lenses but no clothes.
  1. 3. Fast lenses help in low light, but their reason for being is shallow depth of field. You know this already, but have not gone as far as to shoot everything at f/2 in Av mode for a day or two. Gives you new perspective. Try it, you'll keep the primes.
  1. 4. What ever happened to our feet, and brains, and eyes... I can get by with a super wide, wide-normal and medium tele for 99.9 percent of shooting. Of that, the wide-normal is gonna see 70 to 80 percent of the shots. Carry wide, normal-ish and short tele, and use your feet and brain and eyes creatively.
Sometimes... when I shot more with film, I'd carry two bodies, one wide, one normal, or two with similar wide lenses. I'll probably get to that point again with digital, just waiting to see what the next generation of EOS body brings.
--
Livin' the blues, one note at a time
 
I carry a 20D, 17-50, 100/2 and 200/2.8 in a Slingshot 100AW.

I have finally ended up with a zoom/prime mix (after a 80-200L) combo because the primes give aperture without weight and bulk.

A zoom is great as a walk around, but for more considered stuff, I choose the best prime for the situation and work with it.

I'd find 24mm too narrow for my wide end, but if it's OK for you, stick with a zoom/prime mix IMHO; there can be different approaches for different kinds of use.

Stuart
--
- -

 
Thank you to all of you for your advice. I am keeping the 50mm f/1.4 USM lens afterall and after a lot of advice. I am selling my 100mm f/2 and my 200mm f/2.8L lenses to buy the 70-200mm f/4L IS lens. I think this is what I need to do at this time. Thanks, again.
--
Robert (Phoenix, AZ) - Canon EOS 30D

Since the beauty of this world is a reflection the Creator's brushstroke, then my hope is to capture but a glimpse of that exquisiteness.
 
think about the 24mm f2.8 prime

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=21&cpage=2&perpage=15&cat=2#poststart

With the 2 big zooms you might end up buying a compact and using that more than the big guns. Whereas with primes you'll take them out more, save your back and be less intimidating if shooting people etc.

That was the case for me anyway.
riversen said:
I am debating yet again. I was about to sell my 50mm f/1.4, 100mm
f/2, and 200mm f/2.8L lenses and keep my 24-105mm f/4L IS lens and
possibly buy a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens. I was all set, but now I
don't know. Could it be that I am willing to part with my primes
because I use my 24-105mm so much and have never really used my
primes and find that I don't have the right back to truly switch my
lenses. Sometimes, too big of a bag can really limit what you do.
So in my search for a smaller carry bag/shoulder bag/etc., I am
reconsidering keeping my primes and possibly selling the 24-105mm
lens. That would give me the widest lens with 50mm. What should I
do then? Is there a good 20mm or 24mm prime lens?

Okay, so do I keep the primes or not. Do you recommend that I get
the smaller bag and try out the prime switching thing? Do you think
that I am crazy for even debating this?

Thanks for everyone's thoughts and experiences!

--
Robert (Phoenix, AZ) - Canon EOS 30D

Since the beauty of this world is a reflection the Creator's
brushstroke, then my hope is to capture but a glimpse of that
exquisiteness.
Click to expand...
 
I sold my 50mm f/1.4 afterall to buy the 70-200mm f/4L IS. I am waiting for this to come in. After experimenting with ISO 3200, I think I will like it very much. Sorry for being annoying, but I the cost of the 70-200 required that I let go of some of my lenses at this moment. I think I have a strong arsonal of lenses - 24-105mm f/4L IS and 70-200 f/4L IS.

Thanks to everyone!
--
Robert (Phoenix, AZ) - Canon EOS 30D

Since the beauty of this world is a reflection the Creator's brushstroke, then my hope is to capture but a glimpse of that exquisiteness.
 
I obviously like to be one. Thanks for NOT telling me that I am crazy.
--
Robert (Phoenix, AZ) - Canon EOS 30D

Since the beauty of this world is a reflection the Creator's brushstroke, then my hope is to capture but a glimpse of that exquisiteness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top