Replacing kit lens with 1 prime lens?

Replace a kit lens with a single prime? For me, the prime would be a 50mm f/1.8. Spent a couple of years (when I started with SLRs) with only a 50mm (and that was an f/2, if not f/2.2) until I could afford something else (35mm, can't remember what its max aperture was) and after another couple of years, a 135mm.

Far prefer zooms though - IQ is pretty damn close to that from primes (at normal print sizes and viewing distances) and they're way more convenient (foot zoom isn't always possible).
 
I have the Sony 35/1.4 G which is my default walkaround lens and probably 75% of my non-motorsport pictures are taken with it.
 
I think i'm leaning more towards the 24mm end as i have 18mpxel sensor on the 550d so cropping isn't so much of an issue.
 
I think that 24mm would be a great choice but as I already have 20 and 30mm I can't quite justify it for myself.

I went for the 30mm f1.4 as a "standard" and for the 20mm f1.8 because it works out as 32mm on my 20D and that's near enough to 35mm for me and as I was perfectly happy with a 35mm lens in the past I thought I'd like it.
 
woof woof said:
I went for the 30mm f1.4 as a "standard" and for the 20mm f1.8 because it works out as 32mm on my 20D and that's near enough to 35mm for me and as I was perfectly happy with a 35mm lens in the past I thought I'd like it.
Click to expand...

And did you?

What do you think of the 20mm f1.8 siggy for IQ?
 
I think it's great. I think it's possibly better than the 30mm f1.4 and if not it's a very close call.

It's bigger than the 30mm though and it doesn't have HSM. It has an auto / manual focus switch and the large focus ring can be pushed forwards / backwards to enable or disable movement during auto focus so you don't jigger the mechanism. It's a very nice lens IMVHO and it would be even nicer with HSM and full time manual focus override.

20mm on a Canon APS-C is nice too, great for landscape or indoor use when you can't back up as far as you'd need to with a 50mm and it's certainly useable at f1.8. I've used mine quite a bit and on my 20D there are no cross frame nasties that I can see.

I've read reviews that trash this lens and just as with the 30mm I think that they must have been testing a completely different lens.
 
Wouldnt replace it, i would complement it. You will restrict yourself with just 1 focal length, you will miss the flexibility of a zoom.
 
a1ex2001 said:
on my OM10 I get by perfectly with a three lens set up of 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8 and 135mm f3.5.

To get this equivalence on a crop sesnor your looking at 17mm, 31mm and 84mm the last two are easy to do you already have the 85mm f1.8 on the way which is a cracking lens and there is lots of choice around 30mm you could get the sigma that has already been mentioned the Canon 35mm f2 or one of Canons 28mm. The real problem is getting a decent wide prime as they are not hugely popular which is why for me going prime only isn't an option on a crop body.

If it had to be just one lens I would ideally want about a 40mm equivalence so on a crop you looking at 25mm so you ideal lens on the 24mm f1.4 is spot on but a tad expensive!
Click to expand...

Ta da.. http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/268-tokina-af-17mm-f35-at-x-pro-lab-test-report--review

:p

EDIT: Having said that you may as well just go for the http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/379-tokina_1116_28_canon as it's likely to be better and it's not exactly the biggest zoom around.

woof woof said:
Amp34, I've had the Siggy 30mm f1.4 for years now and I've used it in all conditions and at all distances and I have no problem with it. It's a good lens. It's sharp and it's fast to focus and optical quality across the frame is just fine.

This is a 100% crop of the bottom right hand corner of an in camera jpeg I down loaded from my photobucket page and even despite such mangling you can see that there's nothing wrong with it.

br.jpg


Dunno why the review site didn't like it but in the real world I can't find any significant optical fault.

There might be better lenses out there so we'll all just have to try them and make up our mind what's best for us.
Click to expand...

Each to their own etc. :)

I've given it a quick try (not for IQ just how it handles) and it's a nice lens to hold. Bit too expensive and more importantly large for what I want a lens for so I haven't looked into it as much. What I can say though is that most of the reviews I've read of it haven't been very positive about it.

I'd almost liken it to the 10-20 love. Nothing special compared to the rest of the super wides but for some reason it sells far more than the others. Just don't understand it. :shrug:
 
You find the Siggy 30mm f1.4 a little large? I think it's smaller than most, not exactly pancake but still pretty compact.
 
Amp34 said:
I'd almost liken it to the 10-20 love. Nothing special compared to the rest of the super wides but for some reason it sells far more than the others. Just don't understand it. :shrug:
Click to expand...


See this is the thing... all of what you have said particularly the bold part is debatable. Loved my 10-20, brilliantly sharp images and the focussing was incredible, and the price, well you just can't argue with it.
 
woof woof said:
You find the Siggy 30mm f1.4 a little large? I think it's smaller than most, not exactly pancake but still pretty compact.
Click to expand...

No it's not big in lens terms (it would be the smallest lens I own or owned, other than the old kit lens) but it is big compared to the 35 f/2 for example (and to a lesser extent the 28 f/1.8). That size difference is important to me, especially if I end up buying another prime to go with it.

Obviously most people aren't carrying their kit alongside their camping equipment for weeks on end, just be carrying it from the car to the viewing platform/town centre instead. For the latter situation that size difference isn't an issue, for mine.. Definately.

trencheel303 said:
See this is the thing... all of what you have said particularly the bold part is debatable. Loved my 10-20, brilliantly sharp images and the focussing was incredible, and the price, well you just can't argue with it.
Click to expand...

It's a nice lens but it isn't any more special than the others of similar focal lenghts, which are the same price (just taking out the canon 10-22 and the couple of more expensive Nikon ones). It is however far more popular for no reason that I can really see (other than it is more "advertised" on forums etc).

To be perfectly candid about it all, I knew someone would make a comment like that, completely missing the point of the comment...
 
trencheel303 said:
My sig says it all really.

The rough equivalent on crop will be a 30mm lens. Perhaps the Sigma, or Canon 28?

I have one camera and one lens. No fuss, no messing about deciding which lens to use, just put the camera to my eye and shoot. I like it this way; some don't...
Click to expand...

I have just, in the past few months, gone this minimalist rout, on the Nikon trail. One body D5000, (D90 in sheeps clothing, with extras that suit me . . . !!) and the much underrated 18-70mm 'old kit lens', its a cracker.

. . . this is approx., a 50% crop:
1aSweetwilliamrw800DSC_0295copy_edi.jpg


Simplicity . . . a pressure lifted, I do have a f1.8 50mm prime, but dont see the need to use it . . . cramping my style, weight my bag down . . . Another good point, camera/lens/hood, spare battery and SD cards, polarising filter and cleaning cloth, all fit in half my 'man bag', in its own KATA mini bag . . . pick up and go . . . !!! :naughty:

. . . Do Canon have an equivalent, underrated short zoom that can be latched onto?
 
Going back to the OP, is that a 17-50 Tamron? If you want sharp, then upgrade to the Canon 17-55 2.8.

The Sigma 30 1.4 is a great little lens, and it's well sharp enough, but its main virtue is f/1.4. The Canon zoom is sharper, plus it has IS. I've had both.
 
HoppyUK said:
Going back to the OP, is that a 17-50 Tamron? If you want sharp, then upgrade to the Canon 17-55 2.8.

The Sigma 30 1.4 is a great little lens, and it's well sharp enough, but its main virtue is f/1.4. The Canon zoom is sharper, plus it has IS. I've had both.
Click to expand...
Oooh yes, the 17-55 Canon.... Nice but very expensive & heavy so I hear. I'll check out some image examples.:thumbs:
 
AndyWest said:
Oooh yes, the 17-55 Canon.... Nice but very expensive & heavy so I hear. I'll check out some image examples.:thumbs:
Click to expand...

Not that heavy. If you sell your Tamron, you could get one for not far off the same total cost as the Sigma 30? I sold my minter 17-55 for £600.
 
Well I just bought a 35 f/2 to cover the gap between 24 and 70... I'll let you know how it goes when I get it...

Do small primes work ok after being thrown out the window a few times?...:help::lol:
 
Not yet.:p However if I get frustrated with it it may find itself flying... :lol:
 
Well throw it in my direction (via Royal Mail) please!! :D :D
 
Quick point on the 1/8000th subject.

If I'm expecting to be shooting in bright light at 1.4-2.8 I sometimes pop an ND filter on there just to be safe.

Have once or twice ended up with wildly over-exposed images because the shutter speed hit the limit.

A 2-stop filter will not kill your viewfinder but will save you from hitting that limit.
 
AndyWest said:
Well throw it in my direction (via Royal Mail) please!! :D :D
Click to expand...

Well it arrived this morning (I love RMSD!:D) and I've only had a quick sweep round the garden so far but it seems pretty good. f/2 seems a massive step from f/2.8 (even though it is just a stop...) and the focal length looks about perfect for general shooting (but then that was expected). Not 100% sure it's really wide enough for anything landscapeesq yet but that will have to wait a bit...

Doesn't look like i'm going to be throwing it anywhere it seems. ;)
 
Amp34 said:
Doesn't look like i'm going to be throwing it anywhere it seems. ;)
Click to expand...

Awww Nuts! :nuts:

Enjoy the lens. I'm testing my Tamron 17-50 next week extensively to see if I can get away with just a prime instead of the zoom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top