What's your walkaround portrait prime on FF? >> 50 Art <<

Last weekend I did a walk with my daughter at the beach, in past I would take my 35 1.4L (now Art) with me to have the subject + environment on the picture.
As the 50L had mixed reviews I bought the 50 Art a while ago to give it a try, also seen that the bokeh would be noticable different between 35 1.4 & 50 1.4.
I took some great shots, about 90% supersharp.

35mm is my favorite walkaround prime but not especially for portraits, 85L is superb but too tight for a walkaround.

The most difficult choice is keep or sell 35 Art (I have to do a wedding but only for once, maybe I sell it back for a 24-70 2.8L I or 24-70 2.8 VC)
On the other hand, the ability to go back to f1.4 is gold offcourse, maybe I just love primes too much

I think for general use, the 50 1.4 (that's what I have) is a bit too narrow. I prefer the wider perspective of the 35 IS. Shooting a 6D. Sorry, I don't play with the fancier glass you play with, but the focal lengths are the same!

My most used focal length is 35mm most used aperture is f2 in the last 12 months , next followed by the wonderful EF 135 L F2. Just overshooting the 50 Art by a bit.
50mm is nice for out and about, kinda covers both ends.

I'm more of a 50 shooter, but these days shoot 40mm.... I do miss the lovely 50 bokeh, as it's quite significant compared to 35. 35 is no doubt easier to use, but 50 creates better looking images. 50 works most of the time for group photos..... but sometimes it doesnt.

85 definitely too tight to walk around, but if I could, I would.

I always like a 50mm prime back when I shot 35mm film. These days I'm shooting a zoom on crop, the Sigma 20-40 f/2.8 EX DG. I see to either use it at 20mm or between 30 and 40 mm mostly. I do like that just a little longer than standard focal length look.

Alan

Charlie wrote in post #17637934
85 definitely too tight to walk around, but if I could, I would.

I've used a 150 macro as a walkaround a number of times. I've also used 35, 50 and 85 at different times as well and if I had to choose it might be the 35 by the slimmest of margins. They're all fun for me and whichever you choose you are going to have times when a different focal length would be better.

I think Sigma 50 primes have mixed reviews as well.
50L and 1.2 for me.

I've been thinking about the Art series lately. I'm tempted to look into purchasing the 35 Art.

The 50mm FL is still a prime I struggle to use for story telling when running around shooting family sessions. For personal use for non family oriented shooting I can use the 50mm but otherwise it's typically a 16-35 f/2.8mk2 or 24Lmk2.

We are so specific to our needs so this is what's fantastic about photography. Each and everyone's style is so dependant on your "eye" and the perspective you want to create..

Yep that's what I meant, the bokeh difference & 50mm focal length makes it more a portraitprime for halfbody shots, 35mm is to add too much scene.
But that was my fault in past, I added always too much scene, for portraits the model must be in focus.
If both the background & the model are great the viewer sees 2 great things and isn't drawn to the model.

Charlie wrote in post #17637934
I do miss the lovely 50 bokeh, as it's quite significant compared to 35. 35 is no doubt easier to use, but 50 creates better looking images.

I have both instead of a 24-70 2.8, when i'm out for a family trip it's 35 1.4, when i'm out with the purpose of portraits I take 50 Art with me.
The 50 was also the last lens I doubted to buy, now I love both

AlanU wrote in post #17638935
I've been thinking about the Art series lately. I'm tempted to look into purchasing the 35 Art.
The 50mm FL is still a prime I struggle to use for story telling when running around shooting family sessions. For personal use for non family oriented shooting I can use the 50mm but otherwise it's typically a 16-35 f/2.8mk2 or 24Lmk2

Maybe you are talking about the casual 50 1.4, but I'm talking about the 50L vs 50 Art, the Art is really a bomb!

kf095 wrote in post #17638888
I think Sigma 50 primes have mixed reviews as well.
50L and 1.2 for me.

Heya,

For general walk around on my full frame, I use a 35mm. Even when I'm using APS-C, I use 22mm (35mm equivalent field of view). It's classic for a reason.

I only use 50mm for specific purposes when I want a specific bokeh pattern from my lens (Helios), otherwise, I don't bother with 50mm and go straight to 85mm when I'm doing non-environmental portrait.

I commonly take 85mm outside with me when we're doing outdoor portraits, it's my go to.

35mm is for when I'm not just doing portraits, but also just general stuff. Wide enough for context, but still fast and a bit isolating if you need it to be.

Very best,

CanonYouCan wrote in post #17639017
Maybe you are talking about the casual 50 1.4, but I'm talking about the 50L vs 50 Art, the Art is really a bomb!

I've tested so many 50L's that I've given up on the focus shift issue. My style I do not shoot wideopen on every frame so this is where the focus shift rears it's ugly head at f/2.2 to f/4.

This is where I'd use my 85L or 70-200 for portraits.

I'm considering the ART 35 for the cheap price and it's my "almost 50mm" prime I seldom touch 35mm so this is why I'm considering a Sigma for the first time in almost a decade.

The colours are quite nice in the 50L. Sigma looks nice as well in the ART 50mm. The draw to the ART series is the micro contrast. Virtually all new mrk2 canon glass has this micro contrast characteristics that is less organic and more digital looking.

Ive had them all. The 35A is a winner.

As 98% of my shots are things that fly, walk or run, my current walk around prime is a 500. I should be fitter.

I've using the 50A since Oct 2014 and really like it. The only downside is the weight, it is the heaviest 50A out there. Had had a couple of the 50Ls in the past and sold due to focus shifts and so as 50 1.4 both canon and sigma non Art. The 50A produces sharp images and more micro contrast than the canon primes. Its on par with the new 24-70ii and 70-200ii and 100L macro. However if you're seeking for soft smooth/dreaming bokeh than canon lenses win.

Isn't the 55mm Otus is heavier