I changed my mind again and now don't know

OK, I was going to go with two lenses, a zoom and a fast "cheap" prime. I'm having trouble finding a good copy of the prime and always said I would go with the L if I just can't find one I like. Well I can't afford both the L and the zoom. I could switch to a wider L that may work OK for both situations, but may not be ideal, but I could probably make it work. Or I can go with a different cheap prime and the zoom.

Now ideally I really want this 1st L prime, but I don't know if it's wide enough for my other need. The 2nd L prime is one that is very nice but I worry about it being too wide for the other need. Very confusing I know.

The longer prime would be used for a situation that does't happen that often, maybe once a month at the most. The shorter one would be used weekly or more. Both could be used for the third use. All three situations are very important to me personally for my style of shooting.

I'm purposely trying not to say which lenses I'm talking about because I don't want lots of bias towards one or the other (or as most things here go towards another lens that I'm not even talking about!) I'm mainly wondering if I should just go with what I really want or something I can use and be OK with. I have been saving for a year for this and it's my 10th anniv so it's partly a gift too. I don't want to buy something only to sell it to get the thing I really want. Honestly I'd take both Ls but that'll take another year of saving!

Hmmm. It's going to be very difficult to get meaningful advice with such sketchy information. Good luck.

Get the wider one.

Well, I always considered my 5D + 24-105/4L and my 50/1.4 a complete kit for 90% of my shots. The best non-L primes can get equal or better images as compared to an L-zoom. The 50/1.4, 85/1.8, and 100/2.8 macro are some of them.

If you gotta have an L prime, I'd go for the 35/1.4L.

OK I'll add what I'm shooting.
garden landscapes, landscapes while hiking, my husbands band (gigs and promo shots) all kinds of lighting, and indoor natural light.

I worry the wider lens will be too wide for the gigs and the longer lens will be too long for the landscapes. I don't shoot UW landscapes only moderately "wide."

I am leaning more towards the wider prime because I think it'll be more useful for both, if I get the longer I can't take it out on the hikes like I'd need it.

What are you currently thinking about getting, what do you have already and what is your overall budget.

Get the one that is the proper fit for more shots. You can crop the wide lens when its not long enough, and you can stitch multiple shots with the lens thats not wide enough. Maybe..., depending on the subjects.

Spending that much on a single lens, you want to be happy with it most of the time, and only struggle with it occasionally.

There, a vague answer, for a vague question


edit: Oh, and once you own one, you better start saving for the other

Fine I'll tell you what is going on, but PLEASE do not tell me other lenses to think about!

I was going to get the 17-40 and the sigma 30. After going through 3 copies of the sigma I cannot get one that focuses correctly. The last one wouldn't focus on anything!? I told myself that if it didn't work out I'd get the 35L. I was going to buy the L as my only lens for a bit, but sold off all my FD lenses to buy other stuff. The one sigma I used for a gig worked great but front focused horribly, but I liked the FOV. But if I get the 35 it'll be too long for the garden shots I want and I can't afford both the 35 and the 17-40. So Now I'm thinking of the 24L. I would consider the 20 and the 35L but I can only spend about $1000 give or take a bit. The 24 will be fine for the type of landscapes I shoot. It would be great for when the niece and nephew are over for indoor shots. It's wide enough for group promo shots of the band. But it may be too wide for some gigs, but not the small bar gigs.

If I ever go FF I'd sell the 24 to buy the 35, I don't really shoot wider then that. I'd prefer the normal range of the 35, but I feel the 24 would be more useful.

If I'm in the pit with the band on stage would the 24 produce too much distortion compared to what the sigma did? Is 6mm really that big of a deal in that situation?

JC4 wrote in post #5658668
edit: Oh, and once you own one, you better start saving for the other

man that'd take another year of saving!!

Save you money and get a 70-200mm 2.8 L (sorry, couldn't resist!)

Anyway. My experience with 3rd party lenses (all tamron) has always yielded poor performance in low light with regards to AF. Remember, those lens are "reverse engineered" in the sense that they don't get any help from Canon in building them. Doesn't mean that they are bad glass, but on the tech side, I don't think they communicate as efficiently with the camera when compared to the OEM glass.

Now, for the final verdict. In the same price range, although you don't want to hear it, is the 16-35mm 2.8. No, it's not as fast as the other L glass you are looking at, and that may slow you down. My opinion on "super fast glass" though, for moving subjects, is that it can be "dangerous". Shooting lower than 2.8 can yield some ugly OOF results when things get jazzy.

The 16-35mm is a standard in any pro kit. And, if resale is an issue, it will hold its value much better than the other two.

My thoughts -- sorry I didn't follow directions too well, but i meant it all with love!

Good luck!

Well the problem there is the one bar they frequent the lighting more then sucks! I had ISO 3200 with f/1.4 and the shutter speed was still 1/6, so I really need fast glass, otherwise I'd just get the 17-40 and not worry. For the stage gigs I could use my 100 macro wonderfully, so yes there the zooms would work ok. But that's maybe once or twice a year.

Well there is always the 35mm 2.0, which is a fine little lens and cheap, and the 28mm 1.8 Canon. There is the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 which will cover your landscape needs. The 17-40mm is really good and maybe with the 35mm 2.0 you can still get it. I have the 24mm 2.8 with is similar vintage/build and a tad buizzy but AF seems decent. The USm AF works better IMO but worth testing the 35mm at least. If I could find one SH I'd have one for sure.

gardengirl13 wrote in post #5658852
Well the problem there is the one bar they frequent the lighting more then sucks! I had ISO 3200 with f/1.4 and the shutter speed was still 1/6, so I really need fast glass, otherwise I'd just get the 17-40 and not worry. For the stage gigs I could use my 100 macro wonderfully, so yes there the zooms would work ok. But that's maybe once or twice a year.

Uh oh......

If you are "with the band", then how about this.......

Pick up a couple speedlights -- don't fight the light, control it!

Based on the photos I saw at Pbase, you have lots of room to throw two lights up there on stands. With a couple wireless triggers, you're in business. You could do 2 420EX's and an ST-E2 for $600. Then you could do some cool shutter drags, second curtain syncs, on and on......

(Quickly discount this idea, and I won't mention it again -- promise!)

A friend of mine has the 24mm f1.4L and loves it. He also has the 35mm f1.4L and finds the IQ very close...and little to no distortion around the edges of the frame. Only he shoots with a 40D (I'm not sure what body you're using). Not sure I'd get the 17-40 with the 24 though. I'd be tempted to get the 24-70mm f2.8L for more range (I know you said not to suggest other lenses - sorry!).

OK, I'm going to try one more sigma. That's it! If this one stinks, I think it'll be the 24L. I'm trying to get the best of what I need and what I'll use the most. I don't like having lenses just sitting in my bag (well I do have the 28-105 which i don't use much, but it's great for a walk around and not worth it to sell it.) In all honesty I have no use for the 24-70. It's not long enough for what I shoot as a walk around. The 16-35 is too fast for the landscapes I shoot and too slow for the gigs.

I'm knocking on wood that this last sigma will work.

gardengirl13 wrote in post #5658994
I'm knocking on wood that this last sigma will work.

Good luck!