then u have never shot wildlife correctly
you only have a second or so to get thee shot
quite often u are waiting to shoot an animal, but something totally different happens in a different spot

1stop difference is not gonna make you miss the shot, that is easily compensated

reaction times need to be far faster in wildlife and sport photography, that's why they always use cameras with fast AF etc

135mm primes and under are better than zooms in not only image quality, but also that they can usually have much lower F-numbers, so you can control dof in much wider range with them than with zooms. However when it comes to lenses like 70-200's and longer than that, primes start to lose to zooms in a way that zooms can now have same f-numbers than primes(in most cases) and image quality starts to be similar, but zooms naturally being much more versatile than primes cuz zoom. When it comes to primes 135mm and under i think that the qualities of a prime is needed in some cases and zoom is more important in others, therefore if you want a good set you should get some normal zoom like 24-70/105(or some equivalent on crop sensor), maybe some wide zoom(really wide angle is also where zooms > primes) and some primes depending on what you shoot(and at least a 50mm regardless of what you shoot). But if you dont want to spend money on lenses that you might not use so often and your needs are on prime lenses, then just buy what ever focal lens primes needed.

This post was edited by Antichrist- on Jul 6 2013 12:02pm

It's this that makes me second-guess why I got a 16-85mm lens + a prime. I might've been better with an 18-200mm zoom lens + primes.

Then again I'm looking at my pictures now and they're turning out better and better.

This post was edited by Canadian_Man on Jul 6 2013 12:33pm

16-85 and 50mm would be a good starter set imo. then if you want a portrait lens you could get 85mm or 135mm prime(some old manual focus lenses are cheap and really good quality for the price) and if you want longer lenses, i wouldnt suggest a lens that goes from wide to tele, that just screams bad image quality, large size and not wide enough. 70-200 would be a nice add, or some other 300+mm if you need that

This post was edited by Antichrist- on Jul 6 2013 12:50pm

i dont shoot wildlife, sports i have but i rather watch the game LOL

i have my camera glued to me and normally only have a 50 on me and sometimes a 28. i regret not having reach and flexibility but never really thought about a zoom.

for what i shoot primes are all i need, only zooms i would consider are f2.8 constant or lower and fuck me they are expensive

I know I'm talking a lot for a beginner... but I can completely see where you're coming from on that >_<;

I'm realizing more and more with my zoom lens why having f3.5 at 16mm and quickly shooting out to f5.6 or so at the 40mm+ focal length ends up being a nuisance... it makes me want to only carry around primes... sort-of makes me feel like (other than for the wide-end) I should have gotten two primes instead of the 16-85.

yeah must be fast zoom obv
I absolutely love my 70-200
wish I could afford the 200-400mm f/4 1.4x, but that's just never gonna happen