2 primes or a zoom (canon)

Cleisthenes

Cleisthenes

Messages
212
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
OK, so for a while now I've been thinking that I'll buy the 17-55 or 24-105 when I get my some room pay through, and then I decided on the 24 as I wanted a bit more range.

Now I'm thinking whether I should get a 30mm and then something like an 85mm. I think the low light capability will be very helpful for me!

These would be the only 2 lenses I could be using, so what do you think? What would you do?
 
It depends what subject you primarily shoot.
 
I could live with a 35 and an 85, and indeed did for many years (full frame). But it's oh so personal, and only you can tell. The one thing I'm certain of is that no-one needs a range covering every flipping focal length, millimetre by millimetre - that's just obsessive consumerism.
 
85mm on APS-C might be a little tight on APS-C and in low light you'll probably need to keep the shutter speed up or have good stabilisation.

Personally on APS-C I'd go for a wide aperture prime in the 20-35mm range and a wide aperture 50mm as assuming you're a Canon shooter 85mm would give an equivalent field of view of 135mm which many would think ideal for portraits but I personally would find a bit long especially when shooting hand held with no IS in low light.
 
Thanks for all the responses!

Looks like I may get the Sigma 30mm (not art) and then something else. Does anyone have experience with this lens?
 
Cleisthenes said:
Thanks for all the responses!

Looks like I may get the Sigma 30mm (not art) and then something else. Does anyone have experience with this lens?
Click to expand...
I've had the older non art Sigma 30mm on an APS-C and loved it. If you have a body with MFA so you can sort out the AF i found it to be a sharp lens that was lots of fun.
 
Cleisthenes said:
Great, thanks sharky :)
Click to expand...
This was the last shot i took with it prior to selling it to fund my 35mm art purchase:

5409-1402995840-a7dc4eb0c4425c2c2e32a6e89328bd71.jpg


It got a lot of use and was generally my 'go to' walkabout lens.
 
On a crop I would look around 18-24ish mm instead of a 30-35 as my lower end prime - from personal experience doing the same thing, I felt very restricted with what I could (or couldn't) shoot.

Would only recommend a 30-35 if you could pick up a 17mm or less as well.

The 85mm is great, of course.
 
I have just gone from primes 35mm and 50mm on apsc to a 16-50mm 2.8 zoom mainly to keep up with my 2year old son. (Its easier to use the zoom than run after him). Havnt really noticed a change in image quality and in low light i tend to use bounce flash anyway. Only downside is the zoom is bigger and heavier but if i want small i can just pop the prime back on.
 
Cleisthenes said:
Thanks for all the responses!

Looks like I may get the Sigma 30mm (not art) and then something else. Does anyone have experience with this lens?
Click to expand...

I too had this lens and only sold it when moving from 20D to 5D.

I think it's a great lens and I have only two criticisms...

- It's a bit chunky.
- The focus ring feels a bit gritty when manually focusing. I tried another in a shop and it was just the same as mine so I assume that's how they are.

Other than that... great lens IMVHO.

PS. I've read that this lens suffers from field curvature but I honestly never found it to be a real world issue.
 
Last edited:
I sold most of my lenses as I really wasn't using them all enough to justify the cost.
I decided to keep my sigma 35mm f 1.4 and Canon 135mm f2, best thing I've ever done! Now when going out there's not which lens do I take and which do I leave at home, and whichever I took was always the wrong one.

I did add a 17-40 for those wide shots but that's it. For now! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top