Sell 35L for 16-35 or 10-22 and 35 IS

I really like the 35L especially for low light situations. However, I need something a bit wider (crop body). Both lens packages are about the same price so that doesn't matter. If the 10-22 had a higher aperture that would have made the decision easier.

Have you ever though about the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8? I'd recommend that to every crop user

A 10-22mm is ultra wide angle. It's quite very different from your 35mm, let alone a 24mm.

the 18-35mm seems like the clear choice...just have to find a place that has it in stock

I thought there are issues with Sigmas and AF?

hang your cross wrote in post #16568043
I thought there are issues with Sigmas and AF?

I have a friend who owns a Sigma 18-35mm. No complaints from him. He takes really great pictures of his family and newborn with it. I think the more you shoot with a lens, the more you learn it, and then you can learn to compensate with it. If there is slight front or back focusing, to lean a little backward or forward, to choose better focus areas with high contrast such as the eye, and to learn which of your focal points is more accurate. Or which of the four corners of your center focal points if not center is more accurate in locking focus

I think the above can go with any lenses, canon included. It takes a lot to tame a beast!!

i think a lot of the focusing issues are really overblown...i haven't seen much in the way of complaints with the 18-35mm, and if there were any focusing issues you can get the USB hub to adjust the lens to your camera

If you don't need a zoom sell the 35L and buy the 24L. It is a 38mm FOV on your crop and excellent on FF later. I used it exclusively in place on my 17-55 by preference. I am selling both my 10-22 and 17-55 now that I use a FF camera. Or keep your 50mm and your 35L, sell or keep the 60D and get a 6D.

hang your cross wrote in post #16568043
I thought there are issues with Sigmas and AF?

There are some issues with some Sigmas. Just like there are some issues with some Canons. Sigma's issues may be a bit more prevalent in the AF department, but the majority are issue-free.

I forgot about the 17-55 lens. That might make a bit more sense for me especially with the F/2.8. And I'll have some money left over for a 28 f1.8 to use during extreme low light / close conditions.

I don't plan on going full frame for at least another year or so (when the 5d3 or 6D drop in price) as I just picked up my 60D this month. And selling the 17-55 doesn't seem like it would be a tough thing to do.

Heya,

I wouldn't get a zoom unless you just want one lens to do "wide angle" and normal view. On a crop, really wide angle doesn't even begin until you drop to around 14mm and less. 10mm, 11mm, 14mm and 16mm are your break points really, in wide angle. There's a few 8mm out there, but they're fairly extreme. Don't know how extreme you want to get. Combine that with the need for low light performance, and you're going to meet a bust. Wide angle and zooms for wide angle just don't have great low light performance in the form of really wide aperture and things like IS, etc. The reason being, wider aperture means bigger physical parts in the camera, and wide angle being such a short focal length, it's hard to physically make that work. Most super wide angles just won't top out apertures beyond F2.8. So that said, I would get two lenses. One for wide angel. One for low light performance.

On a crop, look at the Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 DX II or the Rokinon 14mm F2.8. That's wide angle with a splash of low light. Or get the 10-22mm if low light isn't a priority on the wide angle.

For the low light lens, the EF 24mm F1.4L woud be my top choice, unless you need wider even still.

Very best,

hang your cross wrote in post #16572768
I forgot about the 17-55 lens. That might make a bit more sense for me especially with the F/2.8. And I'll have some money left over for a 28 f1.8 to use during extreme low light / close conditions.

I don't plan on going full frame for at least another year or so (when the 5d3 or 6D drop in price) as I just picked up my 60D this month. And selling the 17-55 doesn't seem like it would be a tough thing to do.

another reason to possibly think about the sigma 18-35mm

here's comparing it to the 17-55mm wide open for both:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0
and compared to the 28mm at f1.8:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=3​&APIComp=0

there's a reason many are happy about this lens coming out...i also think the arrival of this lens is part of the reason that the price of the 17-55mm has gone down recently

hang your cross wrote in post #16567775
I really like the 35L especially for low light situations. However, I need something a bit wider (crop body).

I agree with the others, sounds like the sigma 18-35mm f1.8 might be a great choice for you.

hang your cross wrote in post #16568043
I thought there are issues with Sigmas and AF?

All lenses AND bodies have variations so you'll find that most lenses (even those from canon) can do well with a little micro focus adjusting. Some sigmas do have issues. The 18-35 has shown very little issues and almost all the reviews I've seen have been praising this lens. For good reason, it is damn good!!

If you like the f1.4 of the 35L then you'd only be losing 2/3 of a stop going to f1.8. Going to f 2.8 will cost you 2 full stops of light from f1.4 (1 1/3 from f1.8)