Printable View
ok just getting into primes what would you say is a must have prime and which is the all time favorite prime or are they the same? Just bought the 85lmk2 and it rocks difficult learning curve but fun to say the least learning how to handle this chunk of glass is fun ..
You know there is going to be no consistency with the answers you get because everyone shoots differently.Quote:
Originally Posted by ROGERWILCO357
Must have prime? I must have all of them that have an L in the name and are made by Canon. "Must Have" really depends on what you are shooting.
No, not all primes are the same. I will say this, if I only owned one lens it would be my 500mm, but please do not make me choose.
If you wouldn't have gotten the 85mm already, I would have said the newer 100mm macro lens which also doubles for a decent portrait lens.
Not really it doesn't matter what i shoot I am asking what you consider the must have prime or at least your favorite?
Must have for me.. my 100mm macro 2.8L. I use that for portraits more so than macro. Although.. I have been lusting for the 85L ever since I rented it.
So it goes.
Lets rearrange my response then, instead of saying "Must Have" really depends on what you are shooting." Ill say "Must Have" really depends on what anyone is shooting."Quote:
Originally Posted by ROGERWILCO357
But I suppose if "Must Have" is really a key word, lets look at it like this. You can shoot landscape with about any lens. You can shoot wildlife and birds with a large array of zooms. Portraits can be done with zooms. Now Macro, lets say you want to do some really close 5x magnification, then ....this is a "Must Have" lens as there none other like it that can do the job. I think this lens when it comes to doing a specialty item takes it to the farthest extreme.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx
I will still keep my 500mm before all other lenses, is it a "Must Have"? From the time I realized I wanted it until I actually owned one took 29 years, but it wasn't a "Must Have" so I guess it is a favorite.
I pre ordered my 100mm macro F/2.8L IS the day it was announced. I have to say it is an awesome lens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocco
I completely understand where you are coming from, the only thing that has kept me from buying the 85 mm F1.2L is that I own the 100mm. I have picked up the 85mm several times at the local shop and was a breath away from buying it, then I think do I really need it? Owning the 100mm always stopped me.
The IS is incredible, don't you think? I find myself handholding macro the more I shoot with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by HDNitehawk
It is incredible. I already owned the 180mm L macro when I ordered the 100mm. For the most part if I am doing macro with a tripod I am using the 180mm, and the 100mm is great for chasing fast insects hand held. It really opens up allot of macro opportunities that you would have a problem doing if you had to use a tripod.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocco
50mm f1.4 is a great inexpensive way to start with a fast prime
I shoot prime for speed and bokeh
85 1.8 is a great lens and also not very expensive
So i would start with those (some of this depends if you are shooting full frame)
Then when are ready for an investment add the 24 1.4 L will let you get a wide angle close up
Then the 135 f2 will complete the package for a very sharp low light long lens
If you have those four in that order you will be satisfied
Personally the 80 1.2 is a great lens but is very very low to focus
Dont need a 35
And 17 is not in my bag
Hope this helps
Email me if you have more specific questions on any of these
I shoot weddings primarily
the 100mm is a very nice lens especially for shooting macro but the 85L and it’s bokeh rock for portraits and yeah once you use it well you will want it..you should get it anyway the 100 and 85 offer different aspects to this hobby ..good luck hope you pull the trigger.
Enabler. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by ROGERWILCO357
My choices:
Last spring I got the 100mm f/2.8L macro, and use it way more than I thought I would... so that would probably be my first choice also.
If there were not money restrictions, then I would want to get a TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II. I would go with the TS-E 17mm f/4L, but I guess I always assumed there would be more distortion with it (I do not know this to be true, but just assumed so).
The 100mmL has gotten me doing a lot of macro, and it has also managed to get me wanting more magnification... so the other one I would like to try is the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 Macro.
But before any of these (again assuming no money issues) I would absolutley love to have the 500mm f/4L II, or the 600mm f/4L II. With three kids going to college... not likely.
Hmmm....if this is a prime that I would want...I think I could be very, very happy with either of the 400 mm f/2.8, 500 mm f/4 or the 600 mm f/4. I think they would very quickly become my favorite lens.
But, in terms of lenses that I own. I have to join the chorus for the 100 mm f/2.8 L macro. Great lens.
I currently have the Zeiss 35 f2, 100L macro, and 85 f1.8. I've also owned and sold the 50 f1.4 and 1.8 and the 24 f2.8. The macro is the most fun. The Zeiss is the sharpest wide open (scary sharp even at f2) but hardest to use because it is MF only. And the 85 is the best value. If I had to pick just one, based on my experience only, I'd choose the 100L macro.
I got the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 in the mail last week. This is the first lens (and I've bought nothing but Canon L glass for a while now) that has focussed spot on out of the box.
It is incredibly sharp even wide open. The DOF is tiny and the bokeh is delicious. I've been missing a (good) fast prime from my kit and I tossed up for a long time between the Canon 85mm f/1.2L and the Sigma. I'm really glad I went with the Sigma. So far it has been outstanding and a pleasure to use. Focusing is slower than on my other lenses but it's not really fair to compare it to the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II, it's definitely fast enough though and for the price difference between it and the Canon equivalent I can't fault it.
It would be my number one must have prime now.
Must have prime for me is the Zeiss 35mm 1.4, it feels good and works good, it only comes off the camera when.... actually it stays there most of the time. The 100mm L macro is a sweet lens and I agree with all the votes it is getting. The 400mm 2.8 would be nice, but a bit expensive for a hobby lens for me.
Mine are 500 f/4L IS and 800 f/5.6L IS
Crap Nate. When did you buy the 800mm?
Buy them all then sell the ones you don't want at a discount here!
I used to shoot primes but found that with the newer glass that the zoom lenses are extremely sharp for my purposes. I do own the 85 1.2 and I favor it due to the bokeh but all my other lenses at the moment are zooms.