Ugh! 35L = 50 1.4+100 2.0+10-22

Ugh, I rented a 35L for my 50D and now I love it too much!

Would you sell your 50 1.4 + 100 2.0 + Canon 10-22 for this lens?

I never realized how awesome the 35L is. The color, contrast, everything!

If I part with those lenses then I'm left with 17-55 2.8 IS, 70-200 f4 IS.

Impulsive? What would you do?

The 35L could sort of replace your 50/1.4, so it depends on how much you use your 10-22 and 100/2. I think this could be a good move. You could replace the 100 later, but you will have to get an 85L now that you are addicted to L primes

Think I would go for the 35, can you live without 10-22?

I am sure it is blasphemy, but since you are using a 50D, why not try the Sigma 30 first. It is also very good and MUCH more affordable. Wouldn't have to dump your whole kit for 1 L lens.

http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/30v35_1st

malla1962 wrote in post #8502853
Think I would go for the 35, can you live without 10-22?

Yes the 10-22 is not bad, but I haven't really been wowed by it. Sadly I haven't used it as much as I anticipated. I probably won't miss it.

I can see the 35L being an all purpose walkaround for myself.

How much do you use your 35L?

sebr wrote in post #8502850
The 35L could sort of replace your 50/1.4, so it depends on how much you use your 10-22 and 100/2. I think this could be a good move. You could replace the 100 later, but you will have to get an 85L now that you are addicted to L primes

I was looking at the 85L, very nice but its so heavy and it reminds me of chicken pot pie

Me, personally, Id go for it. If you dont use the 10-22 that much and arent really impressed by it then you wont miss it . The 35 can take the place of your 50 and with your other lenses im sure you can live with out the 100

tkbslc wrote in post #8502864
I am sure it is blasphemy, but since you are using a 50D, why not try the Sigma 30 first. It is also very good and MUCH more affordable. Wouldn't have to dump your whole kit for 1 L lens.

http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/30v35_1st

The only problem is that the Sig 30 1.4 is a crop lens only. Not a problem but I worry about the resale value later when I need to upgrade the lens/to FF.

The great thing about the lenses I am letting go, are that I bought them used. I can easily break even with the price I paid back then.

For the Siggy 30, I'm not sure I would be able to break even with it when I sell it in the future. I could be wrong.

I haven't tried the lens but I have heard of the borders being quite soft.

Personally, yeah, I totally would.

You have a supernice range covered with your zooms, so you might as well start experimenting with a professional prime collection, right!?

Unless you find yourself really using said trade-away lenses a lot, that is.

Foggy wrote in post #8502888
The only problem is that the Sig 30 1.4 is a crop lens only. Not a problem but I worry about the resale value later when I need to upgrade the lens/to FF.

The great thing about the lenses I am letting go, are that I bought them used. I can easily break even with the price I paid back then.

For the Siggy 30, I'm not sure I would be able to break even with it when I sell it in the future. I could be wrong.

I haven't tried the lens but I have heard of the borders being quite soft.

So buy the Sigma used, too. I got mine for $320 shipped. I could easily get that back. And you can view sample images to make sure it is a good copy.

The corner softness is blown out of proportion, IMO. No it is not a landscape lens with razor sharp corners at F8. The 35L will win that contest - if only because it is a FF lens on a crop cam. The 30's corners are not soft, just softer than the center. And besides, in any real world situation where you want a f1.4 fast prime, the corners are probably not going to even be in focus.

If you wanna buy the L, great, I was just trying to save you a buck or two. For a crop camera, the Sigma 30 is 95% of the L lens for 30% of the price.

I was thinking about some "nearly 30 mm" lens and bought 28 1.8. On a crop it's really sharp. Will 35L take care better of flare? Yes. Sharper? Yes. Better build? Yes. Cheaper?

I think you shouldn't sacrifice so many lenses for 35L if you don't take 90% pictures with that focal length. But if you rarely use them and think you will benefit from 35L - go for it. Life is too short for making those kind of decisions . Who doesn't need an L glass?

I was looking for a Sigma 30 and had one problem. From 1-2 m they focused perfectly. Further away? Tragedy... :/ Mine copy of 28 1.8 is superb sharp. 1.8 maybe not, but 2.0 is great. Sigma would be a little sharper.
Try out some Sigmas - but I think that Canon has better contrast and colour...

In my opinion the 35L is as disappointing as the 85L, no matter how hard you try you will be disappointed in not owning a copy , unaffordable expensive & amazing IQ !!

The 35 L is a great lens. Another option is to sell the 17-55 f2.8 IS and keep the others if you want to stick with primes.

Sell the lenses, buy the 35L, and don't look back. You'll be making a great purchase and perhaps a great "investment"