Looking to add a "consumer grade" non-L prime: Which one?

gorben wrote in post #17023935
The 50 f/1.4 is not perfect but this is a very good lens on FF (although a bit soft wide open).

I thought my 50/1.4 was soft wide open until I deliberately and consistently increased my shutter speed, and it "sharpened up" considerably. The DOF at 1.4 is so thin that it is easy for your subject to move out of the zone of focus a little, or a slight camera movement to have the same effect. Faster shutter speed is not a complete solution, but it definitely seemed to help.

Eastport wrote in post #17023739
I recently rented the 35 f/2 IS to see what all the excitement was about. Then I bought it. Have not used the 50 f/1.4 since. That was my point above. Nothing against either of the 50 mm lenses. They are both great.

I also sold my 50 after getting the 35 f2 IS, after it sat unused for nearly 6 months.

hrblaine wrote in post #17023598
As has been said, almost any decent lens exceeds the abilities of most photographers and I'm pretty sure that the 1.8 exceeds mine!

If only more photographers would understand this.

gorben wrote in post #17023935
To me this sentence is the most important. I tried really hard to like 35 mm FL (I got the 35f2 IS, 35f1.4, EOS M + 22mm, X100). I never got used to it and systematically sold the lens after a short while. The lens could be the best lens in the world, if you do not like the FL it will just be wrong.

If you like 50 mm, that is what you should get. The 50 f/1.4 is not perfect but this is a very good lens on FF (although a bit soft wide open).

+1, I really tried to like 35mm and I'm tempted to try the Samyang 35mm to really fully test it... but ultimately I sold my 35/2 as I never used it and I still don't love the FL on my M, though it is useful as a one lens solution.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17023983
+1, I really tried to like 35mm and I'm tempted to try the Samyang 35mm to really fully test it... but ultimately I sold my 35/2 as I never used it and I still don't love the FL on my M, though it is useful as a one lens solution.

Pssshh... you know you want the EF 28mm f1.8 instead

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17023984
Pssshh... you know you want the EF 28mm f1.8 instead

Very best,

Oh trust me, it's on my watch list... Though I'm leaning more and more towards the Samyang 24mm now

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17023987
Oh trust me, it's on my watch list... Though I'm leaning more and more towards the Samyang 24mm now

The Samyang 24mm is a beast of a lens. NCHANT's review of it compared to the 24L sealed the deal for me. The coma performance of the Samyang 24mm is just worlds better. Sharper wide open. It's just a better lens, without electronics. Still pricey for a manual lens!

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17024004
The Samyang 24mm is a beast of a lens. NCHANT's review of it compared to the 24L sealed the deal for me. The coma performance of the Samyang 24mm is just worlds better. Sharper wide open. It's just a better lens, without electronics. Still pricey for a manual lens!

Very best,

Agreed, his pics are awesome! I'm really surprised the initial reviews of it were luke-warm, it definitely looks like a lens that warrants it's price tag, and now you can find the Bower and Rokinon versions as low as $399

GregDunn wrote in post #17023980
If only more photographers would understand this.

Took me a few years, but I am getting it more and more, every day.

I also vote for the 40mm/85mm combo. I've used the 40mm in dark environments. AF is good, roughly the same as my Canon 24-70mm. If you really want AF accuracy, a flash's AF assist beam will get the job done - even with your lowly 50mm f/1.8.

"You could get the 85 and the 40mm pancake for the price of the 35."

Sounds like a plan! Wish I'd thot of that.

I cover that prime territory with a 35 F2, a 50 f1.8 and a Sigma 105 macro. Using the 50 less now that I have the other two. The 50 was my go to lens for a long time and I was never disappointed with it. Harry