Went full frame, now need help with buying my own Christmas present . . .

Hi all!

So I'd love some advice. I've searched and read a bazillion threads, but still would appreciate some handholding.

Recently, I made the jump to a 5Dii from a T3i . . . am now researching to figure out my next lens move. Budget around 1000. Primary subject is taking pictures of the fam.

Currently, I have:
a 50 1.4, 85 1.8

My old set up:
t3i
15-85
sigma 30 1.4
50 1.4
55-250

So basically, I had been pondering a walk-around zooms, but have run into feeling like I may be a "prime only" person. With my old set up, I really relied on my 50 and 15-85 - When I got my 15-85, I basically stopped using the 30 (previous to the 15-85, I had the IS kit, and previous to that, a sigma 24-70) - which I know, contradicts my theory that I'm a prime person. However, as I've been processing photos for my family's yearly blurb book, I noticed that my general pattern was to snap some shots of the general layout and "atmosphere" of a situation using the 15-85 at it's widest, then to switch lenses and move to the 50 for more intimate captures. I just had lightroom analyze and confirm that - thousands of shots at 15, only a smattering here and there at other focal lengths.

So now I think I'm pondering the 17-40 plus a flash vs 24 2.8. Maybe also with a flash. I did previously own a speedlight that I never really learned to use outside of bounce flashing, but lost it in a move (possibly stolen?).

Open to other suggestions as well. Thanks in advance for your assistance!

Does the 2.8 matter? If not, and you need a wide lens, then I'd go with the 17-40 as it's fairly versatile in the wide range.

If you don't mind MF, then you can try a Rokinon 24 1.4. It's cheap, wide, and fast. And it would have the equivalent FOV as 15mm on your crop body.

The 15-85 is going to be equivalent of 24-135 in full frame. If you liked that lens then I suggest you get a 24-105 f/4L. It is a very useful lens.

Bob

I'd second the 24-105. It's sharp and produces great images.
You could look into the 24-70 vc tamron if you don't need the added range.

Thanks for the replies. Quick thoughts:
-Can't do manual focus: my subject matter is kids.
- what I'm saying is that I used Lightroom to analyze my shots taken with the 15-85 and they were overwhelmingly shots at 15. So I'm not sure I'm a walkaround lens girl. I self taught seven years ago with only a 50 1.4.
- worried that I do need the 2.8 for indoor lighting situations. Again, my subject is primarily family, not landscape.

lookingforaname wrote in post #16470833
what I'm saying is that I used Lightroom to analyze my shots taken with the 15-85 and they were overwhelmingly shots at 15. So I'm not sure I'm a walkaround lens girl. I self taught seven years ago with only a 50 1.4.

Right...so, with the 24-105, they will be at 24mm and you will still have the option to go longer. Shooting your family with anything wider than 24 is likely going to be less than pleasing. Just about everyone who goes full frame ends up with a 24-70/105. It is a really useful focal range. If you don't get one now, you'll just have to get it later. Why delay the inevitable?

Bob

15 on the crop is 24 in FF. If you want f2.8, you either go Tamron 24-70 VC if you can get it used for your budget, or go prime EF 24 f2.8 @ $549, EF 28 f1.8 @$449 or both...

If you keep the 50 the 17-40 sounds good. It's also sealed. However, it's pretty short for walking around.

I used to have the EF50f/1.4 and became fed up with the 'noisy' bokeh....but having a large, widest-aperture prime is soooooo fun!

So, I'll add my recommendation that you try out a Sigma 35 f/1.4 'Art'.

I use mine for business and pleasure, and I'm so pleased I exchanged my old Sigma 30 (APS-C only) lens, for the 35mm Art, as it works wonderfully on both APS-C and FF bodies. It's quick to focus (accurately), build-quality is right up there alongside my Canon L-lenses, and shooting my 2 year-old son with it is great!

After a while, you'll also be able to sell on your 50mm, and look for something in a different FL-range.

As to the 24-70/105 ideas....yes, good lenses, but if you're a "prime girl", you'll feel let down by them, IMHO.

Regards,

Simon

Get a used 24-105 (there are tons available that were bundled as a kit lens), and shoot with it to see if it fits the bill. 17-40 is more of a specialty lens on fullframe, but 24-105 really is a very good lens at a lot of things. If you're really looking into primes, then I'll suggest the 28/2.8 IS - adorama is running a special for $349 right now (you have to go to checkout to see the discount price). You could actually get both for your price range.

lookingforaname wrote in post #16470833
- what I'm saying is that I used Lightroom to analyze my shots taken with the 15-85 and they were overwhelmingly shots at 15. So I'm not sure I'm a walkaround lens girl. I self taught seven years ago with only a 50 1.4.

Sounds like you might be leaning towards a prime. If thats the case you may want to think about a used 24mm f1.4L (usually around the $850 mark), or if you can swing a couple hundred more maybe even a used 24mm f1.4L II (usually around $1250).

I second the 24L. Or go the 35L which is closer to your price range. Either would be a great addition.

If you're a prime person, definitely get the Sigma 35 at some point.

Hi,

I have just upgraded to full frame with a 5DIII, and I had to replace my old kit as well but that was mainly due to my daughter wanting my 7D /10-22 and Sigma 24-70.

Anyway I went for the 24-105 f4 and love it, it is wide enough for me on Landscapes and great for family / walkabout shots and it is very sharp. I also went for the 70-200 F4 IS which is fantastic.

I was looking for 2 lens to cover this range and went with the above but my other option was the 17-40 and 70-200, but I went for 24-105 as it had IS which would give me a 3 extra stops and allows me to use indoors without a flash.

If I were in your shoes I would get the 24-105.