Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 24 Nov 2007 (Saturday) 09:07
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which prime to compliment a 17-55?

 
breakdown
Senior Member
302 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Bogota and Vancouver
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:07 |  #1

I've finally decided to go ahead and get the 17-55. I've been dreaming about it for so long now that I figure I might as well just go ahead and get it. I think my photography is at a level now where I can warrent spending that much. Besides, I absolutely love the hobby. My question is, in your opinion, which prime would be the best to compliment the 17-55?

Right now, I have a Sigma 30 f/1.4 and the Canon 50 f/1.8. I really like both focal lengths. I love the quality of the Canon 50 but I can't live with the focusing. I use this lens at night most of the time and I find myself having to manual focus way more than I'd like to.

I'm wondering, which focal length would be more useful to have the large aperture for? As of now, I'm thinking I'd rather have f/1.4 at 50mm instead of at 30mm because 50mm is such a good focal length for portraits on a crop camera. With my f/1.4 lens, I'm after the ability to get creative with OOF areas and to take nice portraits.

What does everyone think?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Skrim17
The only TPBMer without a title. Enjoying my anonymity.
Avatar
40,070 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2006
Location: In my tree
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:15 |  #2

Get the 17-55 first and use it as you would you 50 before deciding on another prime in that focal range, it is an amazing lens.


Crissa
PLEASE HELP ME FIND MY PHOTOS!! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,887 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:19 |  #3

Given what you have and assuming you MUSt spend then I would get an 85mm. the 30mm 1.4 is an awesome lens and will do you for low light when needed. The 17-55mm will fill in at most other times such that you won't need the 50mm. So, the logical choice IMO is to get something that you don't have and that adds value. the 85mm will do that.


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stathunter
"I am no one really"
Avatar
5,651 posts
Likes: 48
Joined Aug 2006
Location: California & Michigan
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:21 |  #4

In my opinion the 70-200 2.8 IS -------is a perfect complement to the 17-55............I do most of my shooting with those two.


Scott
"Do or do not, there is no try"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Leonard ­ Wong
Member
Avatar
206 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:26 |  #5

I am in a similar situation. I have an 17-55 and my next lens will be an 85mm prime as it will fit in best.


40D | 10-22 | 17-55 | 30 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 85 1.8 | 70-200 F4 IS | 2x580EXII | YN CTR-301P | Lowepro Slingshot 200 | Kata R-103 | Manfrotto Monopod 679B
HV20 | WD-H43 | DM-20 | Manfrotto 390RC2
G12 | D10

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bacchanal
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,284 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:41 as a reply to  @ stathunter's post |  #6

I had both the 17-55 and 50 1.4 for awhile and sold the 50 1.4. I kind of regret that now, but for portraits I think you'll find that the 17-55 at 50mm is both sharp enough and capable of producing sufficiently narrow dof.

What kind of low light/night shooting do you do? The 50 is a great length for performance shots, so it might be worth getting if that is something you do often. Since you're MFing, I would assume you're shooting stationary objects at night...in that case, the 17-55 will work wonders with the IS. Also, I wouldn't get rid of the 30...there is really nothing like a 'normal' prime, and the Sigma 30 is a great one.

And I agree that the 85 would be nice (as I currently I have a gap between 55 and 135)!


Drew A. | gear | photosexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
breakdown
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
302 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Bogota and Vancouver
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:51 |  #7

Thanks guys.

I'll hang on to my Sigma for a while and see if I find myself wanting a different focal length with wide aperture capabilities. As of now, I haven't found myself really wanting anything longer than the 55mm (90mm equiv) that I have now. I guess I don't know what I'm missing until I try it out at least.

To be honest, one of my biggest reasons for wanting a 50mm prime on my crop camera is so I can practice with that FoV. My dream is to one day own a 5D with an 85L. I absolutely love the pictures I've seen that combo produce. Although, I've also seen some amazing pictures produced with a 5D and 50L combo so maybe practicing with that FoV (the Sigma 30) would be good as well.

As was recommended, I'll give the 17-55 a good workout and then see which focal length I'm actually using the most. If I find myself at 55mm constantly for example, I'll have my answer made up for me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BobbyT
Goldmember
Avatar
1,202 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2005
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:51 |  #8

I also say get the 85 1.8. It would go great with what you already have.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
liza
Cream of the Crop
11,386 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2005
Location: Mayberry
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:51 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

The 85mm would probably be the most versatile and would give you a fast-focusing lens with nice bokeh and a bit more reach.



Elizabeth
Blog
http://www.emc2foto.bl​ogspot.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rkkwan
Member
134 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Hong Kong
     
Nov 24, 2007 09:55 as a reply to  @ breakdown's post |  #10

I had a 50/1.8 for years. After getting the 17-55/2.8IS, I found that I hardly use the 50 anymore. So I sold it and got the 50/1.4 instead. It focuses fairly fast and quiet, it's well built, it has great bokeh; and the difference in DOF between 1.4 and 2.8 is very significant that it compliments the 17-55 very well for me.


rkkwan.zenfolio.com (external link)
5D/BG-E4; 70-200/2.8L IS II, Sigma 8-16, Tamron 28-75 Asph, Tokina 10-17 Fish, 1.4x III; 580EX II; G7 X
Full Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,473 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 725
Joined Aug 2006
Location: West Tennessee, USA
     
Nov 24, 2007 10:04 |  #11

Another vote for the 85 f/1.8. It's a nice addition to the 17-55mm, especially when shooting portraits.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pourmeaguinness
Senior Member
Avatar
341 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Toronto, Can
     
Nov 24, 2007 10:42 |  #12

85 1.8 or the often overlooked 100 f2


Some bodies. Some primes. Some zooms. Same as everyone else.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
Return of the Jedi
Avatar
9,911 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jun 2005
     
Nov 24, 2007 10:51 |  #13

Sigma 30 F1.4, Canon 17-55 IS, Canon 100 F2. Excellent three-some.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elader
Goldmember
Avatar
2,374 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Maryland
     
Nov 24, 2007 11:09 |  #14

The 17-55 is as sharp at f.2.8 as you would ever need. buy the 85mm f/1.8 or the 100mm f/2

the sigma gives you a very fast normal focal length lens as a lighter walk-around if you think you need that instead of a headshot lens.


Eric
FJR1300 rider
5D mkIII and 1D MkIII

16-35L | 24-105L | 70-200L f/2.8IS | 85 f/1.8 / 50 f.1,4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ALaS
Goldmember
Avatar
2,205 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Aug 2007
     
Dec 03, 2007 00:00 |  #15

I'm in the same boat. I think im going to go with 85 1.8 FIRST then 30mm f/1.4.


Best Regards,
-Ericson.
flick (external link)r (external link) | Gear -Canon 1Ds Mark II, 50L & 28mm f/1.8 for SALE!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,828 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which prime to compliment a 17-55?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Dirtstar
859 guests, 231 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.