Canon 50mm f/1.4 for Canon 17-40mm f/4L ?

would it make sense to exchange my current Canon 50mm f/1.4?

or is it worth keeping both lens? if so, pls explain it to this newb!

thanks in advance!

Keep both. The 50 f/1.4 can get you shots that the 17-40 will not able to.

They are 2 different lenses for different purposes and both are great. In door, low light, you'll love the 50 1.4.

As a "short" walk around, the 17-40 is very nice.

Keep both.

4x4rock wrote in post #6683167
Keep both. The 50 f/1.4 can get you shots that the 17-40 will not able to.

They are 2 different lenses for different purposes and both are great. In door, low light, you'll love the 50 1.4.

As a "short" walk around, the 17-40 is very nice.

Keep both.

make plenty of sense, thanks!

i'm curious, and excuse my ignorance, how do you shoot pics of an active child in low lighting? other than M, what settings would you shoot at?

i tried with the 50mm and it would get very blurry when the child would move abruptly. thanks in advance.

It's really depends on how low the light is. If it's too low, the camera can not focus fast enough to acquire focus point even with AI Servo.

Another thing is handshake, if the speed is too low, it could result in handshake.

I'd say, try AV with AI Servo focus and bump ISO up a bit to get the shutter speed up.

Otherwise you can give flash a try.

MacFly wrote in post #6683201
make plenty of sense, thanks!

i'm curious, and excuse my ignorance, how do you shoot pics of an active child in low lighting? other than M, what settings would you shoot at?

i tried with the 50mm and it would get very blurry when the child would move abruptly. thanks in advance.

Even in good light I find I use Shutter-Priority (TV) set at 1/100 or 1/125 second speed to "stop action" of my kids. But indoors that setting requires use of a flash (even just the built-in, pop-up, which is all I have) or the pictures are too dark (with my 17-85 F4-5.6 lens).

I'm contemplating purchasing the 50 F1.4 myself for better indoor, low-light shooting. But I find a zoom much easier to work with for shooting kids that move around a lot. I'm torn between the 28mm F1.8 and the 50 F1.4. To me faster is usually better, but the 28mm focal length might be better for my indoor shooting.

I would think twice before getting a prime like 50/1.4 over 17-40L

The zoom is a consistent performer with excellent optic.

50/1.4 on the other hand has dodgy autofocus with quite bad CA wide open and at best neutrol background bokeh.

MacFly wrote in post #6682997
would it make sense to exchange my current Canon 50mm f/1.4?

or is it worth keeping both lens? if so, pls explain it to this newb!

thanks in advance!

No. Keep the 17-40L and pick up the 50 1.8 for $70 to compliment it.

roentarre wrote in post #6683384
I would think twice before getting a prime like 50/1.4 over 17-40L

The zoom is a consistent performer with excellent optic.

50/1.4 on the other hand has dodgy autofocus with quite bad CA wide open and at best neutrol background bokeh.

Mike55 wrote in post #6683392
No. Keep the 17-40L and pick up the 50 1.8 for $70 to compliment it.

I had the 50 .18 and went to the 1.4 version and I can assure you it's a better lens altogether: focuses faster and locks on focus much better, solid build, very sharp above f2.0

My recommendation would be to keep both 17-40 and 50 1.4. Very good pair!

MacFly wrote in post #6682997
would it make sense to exchange my current Canon 50mm f/1.4?

or is it worth keeping both lens? if so, pls explain it to this newb!

thanks in advance!

My recommendation is to keep the 17-40L and exchange the 50mm f/1.4 for an 85mm f/1.8. AF is faster and more accurate than the 50mm.

You should keep both. If sometime in the near future you decide to get a 70-200 you have a 50mm in between.