Prime doubt

Hi all,

I want a new prime lens and i want something like a 50mm on a 35mm camera.
So on a 40D it's better a 35mm or 28mm? (for my budget i can buy the 28 f2.8 or the 35 f2.0)

Thank you all for your opinions

Bye!

What about Sigma's 30mm f/1.4? It's a stellar piece of glass. Loved mine.

The sigma would be the closest (and is the lens I personally use) but the 35/2 is a good lens also (not as familiar with the 28). I personally couldn't deal with the buzzy AF motor which was a huge plus for the sigma, but you don't say how much you want to spend so it may be more than your budget.

Of those two, I would probably pick the 35 2.0 (just for the speed) although I like the 28mm focal length a little better on a crop. However, I think the Sigma 30 1.4 is really worth saving for (or try to find it used at a decent price).

I rented the Sigma 30mm for two weeks and came away suitably impressed by the lens. While having the 35mm L would be nice, the Sigma is closer to a "standard" lens on a 1.6 crop at roughly one-third the cost.

and don't discount the used market if you can find a sharp sigma 30mm. But if you want canon, I say go w/ the 28 1.8 for USM. Both aren't the best compare to other primes, but the 30 sigma stays on my camera 90% of the time.

*edit*.. you said 28 2.8.. whoops, heh. My opinion still stands if you can save up for the 1.8 or the sigma

I also second the 30mm 1.4

If the Sigma 30mm or Canon 28mm F/1.8 aren't in your budget then go for the 35mm F/2.0 - I have one and it's a great little lens, sharp, reasonably fast, and the autofocus is fast and precise although noisy (however not as bad as some make it out to be).

Dorman wrote in post #5511513
If the Sigma 30mm or Canon 28mm F/1.8 aren't in your budget then go for the 35mm F/2.0 - I have one and it's a great little lens, sharp, reasonably fast, and the autofocus is fast and precise although noisy (however not as bad as some make it out to be).

The noise is far too subjective IMO. I love my 50mm 1.8 for what it is, but I cringe when I use it, heh. I may be unreasonable, but I admit that

randomlinh wrote in post #5511140
and don't discount the used market if you can find a sharp sigma 30mm. But if you want canon, I say go w/ the 28 1.8 for USM. Both aren't the best compare to other primes, but the 30 sigma stays on my camera 90% of the time.

*edit*.. you said 28 2.8.. whoops, heh. My opinion still stands if you can save up for the 1.8 or the sigma

I just sold mine for $330 shipped *WITH* a Hoya Pro1 polarizer (about $60 on its own). I had only owned it since September. Loved the thing..it's a shame it won't work on my new 5D.

get the 30! You can just zoom the 30 to get the same FOV as the 50, with no IQ loss! Trust me!

Canon Soldier wrote in post #5512389
get the 30! You can just zoom the 30 to get the same FOV as the 50, with no IQ loss! Trust me!

*groan*

Canon Soldier wrote in post #5512389
get the 30! You can just zoom the 30 to get the same FOV as the 50, with no IQ loss! Trust me!

You just don't give up do you

MuffYz wrote in post #5510733
Hi all,

I want a new prime lens and i want something like a 50mm on a 35mm camera.
So on a 40D it's better a 35mm or 28mm? (for my budget i can buy the 28 f2.8 or the 35 f2.0)

Thank you all for your opinions

Bye!

The whole point (for me) with primes are the fast f/stop. Why get F/2.8 if its not a long prime or macro? A 28-85 prime should be faster than f/2.8 IMHO. My vote is either:
28 1.8
30 1.4

Otherwise 35 2.0

24mm f2.8 or 24L.