Companion to 85mm 1.8 full frame

I love the 85mm 1.8 on a 5dmkii. Now I'm looking for a companion. Most people use either 35mm or 28mm lens. 24mm is too wide for me.

• The 28mm 1.8 has the same built as the 85 but optically people say it's very poor until f4.
  
  
• The 35mm 2.0 has weak built but if the optics are as good as the 85, I won't worry much about the weak mechanics.
  
  
• The 35mm 1.4 is significantly heavier and bigger than the 85, which for me is a drawback. I've also heard it's quite soft wide open, like most fast wide angle lenses.
  

hairyharry wrote in post #14788887

The 35mm 1.4 is significantly heavier and bigger than the 85, which for me is a drawback. I've also heard it's quite soft wide open, like most fast wide angle lenses.
[/LIST]

Does your 5DII feels too heavy for you too? You have no idea what you are missing out...

35L wide open is soft? It's funny you say that when you also have the 28f1.8 and 35f2 as your consideration

- The 28mm F/1.8 pairs well with the 85mm as far as build quality, focusing speed, and color rendition goes - if you pretend it's an F/2.8 lens and not an F/1.8 lens (it's soft wide open for sure). For a while those were my only two lenses, the 28mm and the 85mm, and they were a great combo.

- The 35mm F/2 is decently sharp, but the copy I've played with I wouldn't say was any sharper than my 28mm was at comparable apertures. Plus, the bokeh was rough and it wasn't super contrasty. Oh, and the build quality and focusing motor are definitely dated.

- The 35mm F/1.4 is NOT "quite soft wide open" - it easily bests the other two lenses wide open (I'd say it bests them when they're stopped down a bit, too). It sharpens up a bit stopped down, but F/1.4 is perfectly useable - I have 13"x19" prints taken with that lens wide open that are pin sharp after post-processing.

If you can swing the cost, the 35L is the unquestionable winner. I've owned the 28mm twice trying to convince myself I'd be happy with it as a normal prime on my 60D, but after renting the 35L a few times I'm done fooling myself and am saving for the red ring.

If not, the 28mm is a great mate for the 85mm F/1.8 - they complement each other well.

manfesto wrote in post #14788995
I'm done fooling myself and am saving for the red ring.

I like your comment! I was in the same boat when it came to the 50L

+1 on the 35 L.

The 28 1.8 is a much better lens than it's reputation suggests. I'm not a pro but have done quite a few assignments and with the 28 1.8 (as well as the 85 1.8 or other lenses), I've taken many shots that my clients loved.
Maybe not the best pixelpeeping lens, but shooting it at f/2 will render you great shots.

All that said, the 28 1.8 is a budget option, and the 35L would probably be a better choice. If you are budgetary limited, I don't think you'll be able to find a better lens than the 28 1.8 for that price range.

TweakMDS wrote in post #14789372
I don't think you'll be able to find a better lens than the 28 1.8 for that price range.

Sigma 30....

Used to own one and loved it

kin2son wrote in post #14789419
Sigma 30....

Used to own one and loved it

The Sigma 30 is a crop lens.

hairyharry wrote in post #14788887
I love the 85mm 1.8 on a 5dmkii. Now I'm looking for a companion. Most people use either 35mm or 28mm lens. 24mm is too wide for me.

• The 28mm 1.8 has the same built as the 85 but optically people say it's very poor until f4.
  
  
• The 35mm 2.0 has weak built but if the optics are as good as the 85, I won't worry much about the weak mechanics.
  

This is incorrect. My 28 isn't poor (any more than the 85) at large apertures.

While I decided to get the 28 and never owned the 35 I looked at the available tests and test pictures on the interwebs which to me made the more expensive 28 look a lot better.

35 1.4L for sure Love that lens.

TweakMDS wrote in post #14789444
The Sigma 30 is a crop lens.

Oops my bad

When the 28f1.8 and 35f2 were mentioned, I automatically switch my brain to crop, as all I can think of are 24L or 35L on ff

35L is a nice choice as a companion

If you look at my gear list, you'll see that the 28/1.8 is the only non L in my bag. After extensively comparing it to the 24L, I found the 28 fits my needs better. I like the 28mm FOV better than 24. I don't typically shoot wide-angle with really wide apertures, and at 2.5-2.8 sharpness and color between the two are nearly indestinguishable.

35L if money is no object,Obviously

I will say that my 28mm certainly isn't soft at 1.8/2
and i'm very happy with it.

TweakMDS wrote in post #14789372
The 28 1.8 is a much better lens than it's reputation suggests. I'm not a pro but have done quite a few assignments and with the 28 1.8 (as well as the 85 1.8 or other lenses), I've taken many shots that my clients loved.
Maybe not the best pixelpeeping lens, but shooting it at f/2 will render you great shots.

All that said, the 28 1.8 is a budget option, and the 35L would probably be a better choice. If you are budgetary limited, I don't think you'll be able to find a better lens than the 28 1.8 for that price range.

My copy seems to agree with this statement. While it is not my sharpest lens wide open, I don't think it is poor either. Would I rather have the 35L - yep. The 28mm is enough for me now. Keep in mind I'm only using the center portion of the lens, as I'm on a crop. I think wide open on a FF, the edges might not be great (but I don't know for sure).