Which Canon L Prime

The_Bulb

The_Bulb

Messages
659
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
Having caught this photography bug I recently took delivery of a new Canon 70-200 2.8 IS L lens and am on the look out for a prime lens to add to my kit. The two I am looking at is the 35mm f1.4 L and the 50mm f1.2 L and my simple question is which is the best?

I am looking for a fast piece of glass for low light conditions (hence the reason for the prime) and they will be used on my 30d with it's crop sensor. This will be my last lens purchase for a good while so want to make the right decision.

My thoughts are to go with the 35mm as the 50mm could be a bit close to the focal length of the 70mm-200mm.

Does anyone own these lenses and have an opionion of which one performs best optically?

Any help and comments would be much appreciated.
 
Have you read this thread?. May help you on one aspect.
 
It's a nice piece of kit, excellent IQ and very snappy focus for a lens with relatively large elements.

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
It's a nice piece of kit, excellent IQ and very snappy focus for a lens with relatively large elements.

Bob
Click to expand...

Thanks Bob. Having read the previous post and your comments about the autofocus issue on the 50mm 1.2, would you choose the 35mm over the 50mm?
 
On your crop sensor, the 35 1.4, or even maybe the new version of the 24 1.4.

The 35 1.4 is my favourite lens at the moment, very sharp, great contrast & colour. I have the 50 as well and don't use it anywhere near as much.
 
Personally I'd choose a 35mm over a 50mm for the focal length.

Do Canon publish MTF graphs for their lenses? You should be able to just compare them for the 35mm and 50mm and see which is sharpest.
 
The_Bulb said:
Thanks Bob. Having read the previous post and your comments about the autofocus issue on the 50mm 1.2, would you choose the 35mm over the 50mm?
Click to expand...

Yes, on a crop body. On a FF I'd go for the extra stop of the 50L. The 85L is still the star of the show though.

Bob
 
WeddingHack said:
On your crop sensor, the 35 1.4, or even maybe the new version of the 24 1.4.

The 35 1.4 is my favourite lens at the moment, very sharp, great contrast & colour. I have the 50 as well and don't use it anywhere near as much.
Click to expand...

Thanks Duncan. You actually photographed my sisters wedding in 2007 - the pictures were fab - should've taken more notice about what equipment you were using :naughty: but I only had a point and shoot at the time and all the numbers wouldn't have meant anything back then anyway ;)
 
WeddingHack said:
On your crop sensor, the 35 1.4, or even maybe the new version of the 24 1.4.
Click to expand...
Sorry Duncan, I have to disagree with that.

The new 24mm f/1.4L Mk II is about £1,400!! But the original 24mm f/1.4L is still a very good lens - and so it should be for £800. People weren't exactly clamouring for a new improved 24L. Maybe somebody using a 1Ds Mk III or a 5D Mk II or a 50D might notice a difference with the Mk II version of the lens. But I doubt very much whether the difference would be noticeable on a 30D.
 
StewartR said:
Sorry Duncan, I have to disagree with that.

The new 24mm f/1.4L Mk II is about £1,400!! But the original 24mm f/1.4L is still a very good lens - and so it should be for £800. People weren't exactly clamouring for a new improved 24L. Maybe somebody using a 1Ds Mk III or a 5D Mk II or a 50D might notice a difference with the Mk II version of the lens. But I doubt very much whether the difference would be noticeable on a 30D.
Click to expand...

Quite true.
 
Why are you getting one "L" prime, when you could easily get two or three very good primes for the same price or less covering multiple focal lengths.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 is only £220 instead of £930 for the f/1.2, leaving you only half a stop slower but with £710 to buy a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (£265) and Canon 85mm f/1.8 (£240) and STILL have £200 in your pocket
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
Why are you getting one "L" prime, when you could easily get two or three very good primes for the same price or less covering multiple focal lengths.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 is only £220 instead of £930 for the f/1.2, leaving you only half a stop slower but with £710 to buy a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (£265) and Canon 85mm f/1.8 (£240) and STILL have £200 in your pocket
Click to expand...

Not sure if the methodology is a bit foolish, but I am working on the basis that you get what you pay for. I would like to develop my kit bag and get myself to a situation where I can earn some extra money from my photography, and who knows where it will lead from there. I have a non L lens and got my first L a couple of months ago and noticed the difference in the step up to 'L' glass. I know people earn extra money with kit lens etc.

From what I understand, decent glass doesn't loose lots of money, so if things don't work out I can always sell them, but the flip side is I don't want to get more and more into this and find I have a kit bag full of stuff which I am outgrowing and have to start the saving process all over again.

Does this make sense to anybody or am I being foolish?
 
It makes sense when thinking about the kit lens but not others.

If you only want "L" glass you run the risk of lens snobbery, you'll never experience some truelly great lenses such as the 10-22mm which I can see you already own - if you appreciate that lens surely you could appreciate other non-L glass?

3 lenses I named don't lose value either, the only lenses that do (compared to RRP) are those that are ever sold bundles with cameras (18-55, 17-85 etc) as the market is flooded with them
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
It makes sense when thinking about the kit lens but not others.

If you only want "L" glass you run the risk of lens snobbery, you'll never experience some truelly great lenses such as the 10-22mm which I can see you already own - if you appreciate that lens surely you could appreciate other non-L glass?

3 lenses I named don't lose value either, the only lenses that do (compared to RRP) are those that are ever sold bundles with cameras (18-55, 17-85 etc) as the market is flooded with them
Click to expand...

That is a good point Rick, I certainly don't want to restrict myself to just L glass, as I love the 10-22. I suppose I thought that if I had a 10-22, 35mm and 70-200 I have a reasonable coverage so say at a wedding I could have one body with the 35mm and one body with the 70-200 with the 10-22mm in reserve and then I wouldn't have to swap lenses all the time.
 
I suppose it does. Photographing people is the main thing that interests me, not in a formal way, but say raportage wedding, gig photography, images where you can see a persons true expressions, not the ones put on for the camera!!!!!! I also enjoy city photography, especially at night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top