Parents prime lens choices on a FF....

adamg5 wrote in post #13658775
that's funny, I have just been doing a little research on the sigma 85. Is the sigma that much better than the canon 85 1.8? $550 difference.

I think the 35/85 or 50/135 would work really well for me.

I thought it was.The lens is very nice, its extremely sharp wide open, focusing is slower but nothing drastic. The filter size on the sigma is what I like (77mm) and the chromatic aberrations AKA purple fringing is better controlled. Also I get 2/3's stop of light extra. Who doesnt want more shutter speed haha

kin2son wrote in post #13659291
I know exactly how you feel. Used to have the sigma 30 before I upgrade to ff and loved the focal length. After I upgraded to ff, I couldn't help myself to get the 35L as everyone praises about it. I even thought about the 24L over 35L (glad I didn't!).

And guess what, quite often I find 35L too wide and have to crop a bit little. 50mm focal length seems to be just right to me....

Well much to my advantage I have a sigma 50 1.4 on the way to me, so I can try that FL and hope it's focus is good.
I would hate to part ways with the 35L, but If I can get a sigma 85 or 135L with the money it might be totally worth it. Having both the 35 and 50 just wouldn't work for me.
Thanks again

I had the sigma 50mm f/1.4 it was such a great lens but compared to the 50L and the 35L it falls short. I let my 50L go for a 35L and my sigma 50 for the sigma 85mm It seriously feels so comfortable at both focal lengths. I always found the 50mm (on full frame) to either be too short or not wide enough. Now when i wan a little more environment I throw the 35mm L when i need the tighter crop out of the way photo, i grab the 85mm fits my style perfect.

I thought about a canon 135mm L but I love f/1.4 and I have a 70-200mm that I can use if I need longer. I know the 70-200 isnt f/2 but it works well.

I just got a Canon 85mm 1.8 to supplement my Sigma 50mm 1.4

So far I love the Canon 85 for portraits. For full body shots on adult sized subjects I need to step back about 15 feet. I'm thinking that for small children it would be a very nice focal length.

On a side note... I recently installed a Brightscreen spit image focus screen in my 5D classic and have been practicing my manual focus technique. The Canon gold ring 85 works very nicely. The focus ring is slow and smooth. On the Sigma 50, the focus ring is not as smooth and it has a very short range of motion. I found that manual focus was a waste of time with the Sigma, although maybe with a lot of practice I could make it work.

It's always nice if you can borrow or rent a lens before you buy your own copy. And of course I ALWAYS recommend buying your lens from a place where returns are easy, since quality control for both Canon and Sigma leave something to be desired, especially with anything related to autofocus.

when my daughter was just getting to walk, 40D + Sig30 was nice but couldn't keep up as far as AI Servo focusing would go... jumped to the 24-70 and that was much better for AI AF, but overall the Sig30 was more fun to shoot her...
5D2 + 35L AI Servo has no issues with her walking towards me, and she's way faster now (just turned 3)

Like I said I am mostly a tele shooter. Having 35L on FF gives a different perspective which I am liking, like where I want to include more of the environment in the shot. With my sigma 50mm f1.4 I feel it is not wide enough. If I wanted close by shots of my kids I might as well use 85mm f1.8 or my 70-200mm zoom.

I would recommend shooting with a Samyang 35mm f/1.4 (manual focus) lens on a ff body, I'm having excellent results with this lens on my Canon 5D Mk1.

macvisual wrote in post #13659698
I would recommend shooting with a Samyang 35mm f/1.4 (manual focus) lens on a ff body, I'm having excellent results with this lens on my Canon 5D Mk1.

I don't know how you guys do it. Personally even with AF and nice body (1dmk2) hard to focus at f1.4 when shooting kids. With manual focus I would have to see some shots before believing it.

An alternative to an 85, would be to add the 100 L macro to your 35 L, which would make a very versatile pair for the OP on full frame.

jrscls wrote in post #13661321
An alternative to an 85, would be to add the 100 L macro to your 35 L, which would make a very versatile pair for the OP on full frame.

I also thought about this lens....It's a tough one, all really good lenses

^^^The 100 L will get you close ups of the baby and makes a great portrait lens on full frame. The IS will be helpful in many situations as well. And about the same cost as the Sigma 85, without playing the Sigma lottery.

jrscls wrote in post #13661359
^^^The 100 L will get you close ups of the baby and makes a great portrait lens on full frame. The IS will be helpful in many situations as well. And about the same cost as the Sigma 85, without playing the Sigma lottery.

The only thing I would worry about is the 1.4 vs 2.8 aperture...
135L f2 is so tempting to

35 and 85 are my preference, cover both indoor and out. have 3 and 8yr old

ben805 wrote in post #13661424
35 and 85 are my preference, cover both indoor and out. have 3 and 8yr old

Thanks for response. 85L is out of my price range, but been thinking a 85 1.8 could be a good place to start because its the cheapest and if I feel I need more could got most my money back...

adamg5 wrote in post #13661448
Thanks for response. 85L is out of my price range, but been thinking a 85 1.8 could be a good place to start because its the cheapest and if I feel I need more could got most my money back...

As a parent, I'm very happy with my 35L and 85 1.8 combo...