Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Considering going without my 70-200 and replacing it with 3 fast primes, 35, 50, and 135. Wondering what people think of such a silly idea. I think what got me on to this is that I have two high resolution full frame bodies and I use my first generation 70-200 mostly for portrait, I also already own a 85mm f/1.8 and the Canon 100-400 MII. The new Sigma Art lenses resolve much better than anything Canon is currently producing including the 70-200 MII.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

How much would you use those primes? To me, it depends on what would best suit the majority of your normal opportunities.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

I have three Sigma Art primes (20mm, 50mm, and 85mm F1.4's) and they are absolutely AMAZING!
Maybe you could rent one or two and check them, out for yourself. I highly suggest the 85mm F1.4 ART to compare to your current Canon 85mm. It will SCARE you when you see the difference in sharpness, clarity AND color!

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

I use a 35mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 58mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, and a 105mm 1.4.
Still, I will keep my 70-200 2.8.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Maybe less convenient, but faster, sharper and lighter. My 135 f2L with a 1.4x extender (if needed, provides ~190mm) is actually sharper than my 70-200 F2.8L IS at 200 mm and a lot lighter. I started with zooms, but find that I am collecting and using more primes. I have a 50 f2.5 Macro, 85 f1.8 and 135 f2, and my next lens will be a 35 f2.

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

Hmmm. Compelling question.
You've got me thinking.

I have the Sigma 50mm 1.4Art (crazy sharp) and the recent Canon 85mm1.4L IS. (Not sharp however has 4stop IS, great transmission and the AF is fast and actually works). My research and personal experience with the 50 has Sigma not as fast or accurate as a Canon lens....but MAN Sigma ART has great optics !

The Canon 70-200mm 2.8 is really good in every possible category....my favorite go to lens. I would not give it up as it is the lens I pick when not sure what I need....24-70 similar
....but those primes are sooo sweet in low light, for sharpness and for bokeh.

I think I am with kmgw9v, keep the 70-200 and get the primes anyway. GAS before food I always say :-)

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

I'll send you my address and even postage so you can send it to me LOL

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Hard to say... I would like to get into more street photography type stuff and that big white lens can be a bit obnoxious. I am getting ready to unload a bunch of gear because I have kept several lenses that I replaced over the last couple of years, and I have a 5DS that I am going to be selling along with them. I can probably do with out the 35mm, when I think about it, I loved that focal length on a crop body but now I only have full frames, so the 50mm would probably give me an angle of view very similar to that of the 35mm on the crop. and if I really felt the need for the 35 I could just use my 16-35 f/4, I don't think that I would have too much need for the large aperture at that focal length. But, I am thinking that since I use my 70-200 mostly for portraiture that the new Sigma 135mm may be a better choice, and it has good close up ability. Crap!, I just have way too many lenses already and here I am talking about getting more, the 100-400 in addition to being a great walk around birding lens does a great job on compressed landscapes and sunsets so I don't think that I would greatly miss the 70-200.

Nikon Shooter17 Loc: Glenwood, MN

Thanks for asking the question! My lenses are a 10-24, a 24-70 and a 70-200 all on a crop. I also have a 35 prime. Even though I am a beginner, I have to say I love using that 35 and it is all around more "crisp" for lack of a knowledgeable word. I have often debated going to a simple series of primes but including a 200 prime. Maybe a 50, the 35, 85, 105 and the 200. Money and ease of the zoom stops me though....would primes be better? Never mind the convenience, are primes really that much better to make that change? I think its a good question.

BebuLamar

No!

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

My 24, 50 & 85 Sigma ART lenses could easily replace my 24-70 f/2.8. It hasn’t been on a camera since I got those lenses. I’ll hold on to my 70-200, though.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

If resolving is the ONLY thing that's important to you, then sounds like you ABSLUTELY gotta have them!
There's a reason why the 70-200 is probably the most used lens in the world.
Seeing how you didn't even give a clue to how you will use them, don't see how you can get any real advice!!!
SS

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Yeah, I think that I am going to start with the Sigma 135, its sharpness is supposed to be off the charts and I really want to see how a lens engineered for higher resolution sensors can perform on my camera bodies. I already have the older Sigma 50mm EX 1.4 and the Canon 85mm f/1.8 and although they don't compare to the new Art series lenses they are not quite slouches either. I made an offer on Greentoe, we will see where it goes.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I think that I did explain that, but just in case, I mostly use the 70-200 for portraiture, grand kids, family reunions that type of stuff. I am well aware that it is a great lens for landscape compression but I also have the 100-400 Mk II which is also pretty fine for that. I don't shoot sports so I don't need the fast mid range telephoto for basketball games and such. I get a lot of enjoyment in photographing people but I don't like to be right up on them and in their space so to speak. I think that I will take the advice of others here and just start with the 135, and keep the 70-200 for now. I have the old Canon 85 f/1.8 and a Sigma EX 50 f/1.4 so there is no rush, they may not be art lenses but they still do their jobs pretty well. I guess the GAS that I am dealing with is having a 5DSR and wanting to see the full capability of that sensor, that and I like shooting primes I find that I slow down and put a little more time into the framing the shot rather than just zooming to where it looks to be the right size. I, unlike you, am not a pro but rather an enthusiast and am not so sure that I need that 70-200, but I don't have to get rid of it so fast either...

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

There is nothing silly about using primes, you will always have better resolution in prime lenses than zoom lenses.
I use prime lenses most of the time.