jylitalo
21st of February 2005 (Mon), 15:32
I am currently using 17-40/4, 70-200/4 and 50/2.5 macro. While these lenses provide nice coverage on a sunny days, I've started to look for something that I could use in parties, concerts (gospel and classic) and winter time in Finland, when daytime can be quite short.
Concerts are something, which I would probably get done with 50mm lens. 50/2.5 won't cut it, since its focus is too slow and hunts in low light, but based on my experiences from 50/1.8 II in couple concerts, 50/1.4 would probably do it nicely with its USM.
That still leaves parties and winter time in Finland as problematic areas. My experience from 50mm lenses (in 20D, so we are talking about 1.6x cameras) is that their field of view is too narrow for my taste. I've seen lot of nice reviews about 35/2 and 35/1.4, but I am wondering which one I should get ...
35/2 is small, light and relatively cheap, but it doesn't have USM and if you have to stop it down, we're getting closer and closer to using 17-40/4 at wide open (or pumping ISO up).
35/1.4 on the other hand is suprisingly close to 17-40/4 in physical size and weight (72mm filter and 580g vs. 77mm filter and 500g), which would mean that you don't take it along unless your certain that your going to use it and its price would make it my most expensive lens without any real competitors, but it would definately give me couple stops worth extra speed.
Have you confronted similar situation, what was your solution and how did it work out?
P.S. I guess we shouldn't forget Sigma's new 30/1.4, but since we don't know how much its going to weight, cost, ... its just hype at this point.
Concerts are something, which I would probably get done with 50mm lens. 50/2.5 won't cut it, since its focus is too slow and hunts in low light, but based on my experiences from 50/1.8 II in couple concerts, 50/1.4 would probably do it nicely with its USM.
That still leaves parties and winter time in Finland as problematic areas. My experience from 50mm lenses (in 20D, so we are talking about 1.6x cameras) is that their field of view is too narrow for my taste. I've seen lot of nice reviews about 35/2 and 35/1.4, but I am wondering which one I should get ...
35/2 is small, light and relatively cheap, but it doesn't have USM and if you have to stop it down, we're getting closer and closer to using 17-40/4 at wide open (or pumping ISO up).
35/1.4 on the other hand is suprisingly close to 17-40/4 in physical size and weight (72mm filter and 580g vs. 77mm filter and 500g), which would mean that you don't take it along unless your certain that your going to use it and its price would make it my most expensive lens without any real competitors, but it would definately give me couple stops worth extra speed.
Have you confronted similar situation, what was your solution and how did it work out?
P.S. I guess we shouldn't forget Sigma's new 30/1.4, but since we don't know how much its going to weight, cost, ... its just hype at this point.