Like most people, I use zooms mostly and I have a few of Canon's finest. But I try to use my primes as much as possible. Attaching one to my camera gives me more of a sense of seriousness and I anticipate making some really compelling images that just don't seem possible even with the best zooms. I've been surprised how many photographers, even serious ones with expensive equipment, don't own a single prime. Everyone should at least own a nifty fifty where if nothing else, you can experiment with the shallow depth of field at 1.8 that's not available in any zoom. And it's as sharp or sharper than even the best zooms. Another I like is the 40mm pancake. While not as fast as the 50, it's a bit sharper and smaller. I find it to be extremely versatile with closeups, landscapes and anything else. You can just stick it in your pocket. At 179., this a gift from Canon. One more: the 135 2.0L. I call this my magic lens because it produces magic images. It's been on the market since 1996 and some still say it's Canon's best lens ever! Since Canon just raised the price of the 100 2.8L, the 135 is now the cheapest L series prime, a relative bargain. I invite others who use primes to make recommendations to help out our primeless brethren!

You've beat me to a topic I've been kicking around for the past few weeks ... I agree about the 135L. When you have the 135L mounted, there's nothing you can't point it at and fail to create an great image. Add an EF25 extension tube to the 135L and you have an excellent close-up / macro lens. For years, my 35L was my 'documentary' lens, either on a cropped sensor for a 50mm ish FoV or on a full-frame body. Although this lens has been out a lot in the past few weeks, I've found my style (or maybe my subjects) has changed to a 24mm prime. The 24mm is an older FD prime mounted to a Sony mirrorless. Maybe the migration to smaller IBIS-enabled bodies will breathe new life into typically smaller and non-IS prime lenses?