Holy trinity for a crop sensor ?

Just wondering what would a wedding\portrait photographer use. If only primes on a crop sensor ? I love primes right now I have a canon 60mm macro and a sigma 17-70 zoom. Looking to upgrade to all primes
Considering the sigma 30 1.4, canon or sigma 85

When i owned a crop (60D) i had the sigma 30mm (equals to around 50mm), the canon 50mm f1.8 (around 84mm), and the rokinon 85mm (around 135mm). Worked great for me with all well rounded portrait shooting.

I wasn't thrilled about my 85L on a 7D, it spent a lot of time in a drawer until I picked up a FF body.

I don't know, it sort of depends on why one is looking to use primes.

Is it because you like to have a camera with a small and light lens in your hands? If so, I might suggest picking through the various Canon standard primes (28/1.8, 35/2, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8) as well as the Sigma 30/1.4.

Is it because you like to have very thin DOF and very low light capability? If so, you might be better off getting a larger format body like a used 1D3 or a 5D Mark II. In the long run, a larger format couple with one or two fast zooms can deliver better results (and be more convenient to use) than a 1.6X body with a whole bag of expensive fast primes.

That's the rub. A lot of the really fast primes are expensive, and this is especially the case at the very short focal length end of things which is where a 1.6X shooter winds up looking. Once you get wider than the 28/1.8, there are not a lot of cheap options that are f/2 or faster.

And if you are going to buy lenses that are all near f/2 (28/1.8 or 35/2 or 85/1.8) then you are not getting any better low light capability or shallower DOF than you would get with a 5D2 and a 24-70/2.8 zoom.

Putting a quality prime on a crop sensor that is designed for a FF sensor isn't going to give you the best. I tried my 35L on a friends crop and I think you lose 35% of what the lens is capable of. OK they work but if you want the best teh FF is the way to go.

As Jeffrey said a FF with a 24-70 2.8 would give you so much more.

I would always rather use a 7D with a 17-55 2.8 IS on it rather than a 24-70 L or any other L lens.

JeffreyG wrote in post #13743714
And if you are going to buy lenses that are all near f/2 (28/1.8 or 35/2 or 85/1.8) then you are not getting any better low light capability or shallower DOF than you would get with a 5D2 and a 24-70/2.8 zoom.

Listen to him. If you are going to stay on crop, don't bother spending big money on fast prime. It's simply a waste.

Why is APS-C even brought up in the conversation? Don't understand why people think it's such a limiter when it comes to photography.

cepaw wrote in post #13743530
Just wondering what would a wedding\portrait photographer use. If only primes on a crop sensor ? I love primes right now I have a canon 60mm macro and a sigma 17-70 zoom. Looking to upgrade to all primes
Considering the sigma 30 1.4, canon or sigma 85

yes, the holy trinity for crops are the 30 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85
But others may answer to a different holistic trinity

Boy, you guys are sure skilled at raining on someone's parade; the OP didn't ask for a litany of the shortcomings of crop versus FF.

I have the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and love it.

kin2son wrote in post #13744467


Listen to him. If you are going to stay on crop, don't bother spending big money on fast prime. It's simply a waste.

don't listen to him!

Also if you need to cover the lower end of the field for crop, pick up either a canon 24mm (the cheap one not the L). You could also wait until Samyang/Rokinon release their 24mm f1.4 next month. Their 14mm f2.8 ultra wide angle "fisheye" lens works great with the crop factor bring it close to 22mm or so for a really wide angle prime for you.

davidc502 wrote in post #13744482
Why is APS-C even brought up in the conversation? Don't understand why people think it's such a limiter when it comes to photography.

It's not a limiter. Canon makes several 1.6X bodies that are excellent.

My point is that putting together a selection of several fast primes on 1.6X might not be the most cost effective way to achieve some goals. If a person is really looking for shallow DOF or very low light capability, it may be the case that a larger format body with a different lens approach winds up being more capable or lower cost.

This is not a suggestion that 1.6X is a bad format. But if one's goal is geared towards extreme low light or shallow DOF most of the time, then 1.6X may be the wrong format to try and build on.

Something like a 1.6X body and then a set like the 24L, 50L and 85L doesn't make a lot of sense to me I guess.

Where did that happen? I think a fast prime like the 30/1.4 is a nice lens on 1.6X. My caution to the OP was based on the fact that he was working towards having several fast primes. As a person who once owned a 30D with 35L, 50/1.4 and 85L II, I can tell you from hindsight that at some point changing to a larger format is lower cost than buying a string of fast primes.

With this thread, I am thinking very seriously about going FF. Come on Canon where is 5D mark iii? I have been waiting a year to go FF, while at the same time been collecting some fast primes.

For the OP, I think a must have prime for either format is 35L. Go out buy one right now while the rebate is one, run, run, run, don't walk, then come back and thanks me later.

davidc502 wrote in post #13744482
Why is APS-C even brought up in the conversation? Don't understand why people think it's such a limiter when it comes to photography.

Exactly. Did you know that 35mm film was heavily frowned upon when it first came out in the early 1900's. Substandard quality and all that jazz. Back then medium and large format were the bomb. Anyone not using that was a joke.

Anyways, the holy trinity is what ever you want it to be. If you find that the 14L, 24L II, and TS-E 24 II are your thing then by all means go with it. Do not be swayed by what others use or want. Get what you need and what you can afford.

Cheer.S!

forget primes! 10-22, 17-55, and 70-200!!