New 5d Mark 3 on the way

[Captdanno]

Went from Rebel to 5d M3, big jump I know.. Camera coming today any firmware advice? I guess I need to see what version I have on camera first.

[ebiggs1]

Great buy!  Congratulations, you will love it.  The only thing that would have made it better is the 24-70mm f2.8 instead of the 24-105mm f4 but that is still a to die for combo.

I would nix the idea of any prime unless you have a specific need.  Get the 16-35mm when you can and be done except for a long tele maybe. The zooms of today and the outstanding high ISO performance negate the once usefulness of primes.

I have a dozen primes and I rarely use them unless I just get to feeling sorry for them just sitting there.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

I have a dozen primes and I rarely use them unless I just get to feeling sorry for them just sitting there.

---

You know, I never thought of that. I suppose the decent thing to do would be to take out my 30mm f/1.4 now and then and treat it to a few reps. Thanks for the suggestion.

I think the only other prime we have is my wife's 60mm macro, and she uses it often enough that it shouldn't feel neglected.

[cale_kat]

Congratulations with your new camera. You should not want for body or lenses for a long while.

[ebiggs1]

Bob from Boston,

"I think the only other prime we have is my wife's 60mm macro ..."

A good point.   I have a couple (prime) macros.  Very fun to mess around with although I don't do macro very often either. 

[Skirball]

It's a difference in shooting styles and types of photography that people shoot, something people seem to forget when giving advice to people online.  I probably use a prime 90% of the time.  If you need fast then a zoom won't do.  If you want 1:1 then a zoom won't do.  If you want perspective correction then zoom won't do. 

[Captdanno]

Any recomendations on a portrait lens assuming 24 to 105 zoom is not ideal? 85mm maybe?

[RobertTheFat]

---

@Captdanno wrote:
Any recomendations on a portrait lens assuming 24 to 105 zoom is not ideal? 85mm maybe?

---

The only criterion I'm aware of for a portrait lens is that it be long enough to keep the subject's nose from appearing unnaturally large. (A peculiar side effect of that criterion is that the closer you get to your subject, the longer the lens arguably needs to be.) 85mm is widely regarded as suitable for portraits on a FF camera, but I've seen good results at 135mm. It makes no difference whether the lens is a prime or a zoom, assuming it's of good quality. Since 85mm is well within the range of your 24-105, I suggest you try it and see what you think. If it works for you, use it. The tendency to buy lenses one doesn't actually need is one of the reasons photography is so damned expensive.

[mitch236]

The main reason to get a prime lens for portraits is to get better bokeh. The 85mm f/1.2 comes to mind and is my favorite portrait lens.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@mitch236 wrote:
The main reason to get a prime lens for portraits is to get better bokeh. The 85mm f/1.2 comes to mind and is my favorite portrait lens.

---

So that's true for you. But I'm guessing that the greatest consumers of portrait lenses are studio photographers, and I doubt that they care much about bokeh.

[ebiggs1]

Was there something wrong with the bokeh in my posted sample?
It broke all the rules you have read. And it is 2 1/2 stops off your favorite.
People should start shooting and forget the numbers. Use what works.