another "should I sell my zoom for prime" thread

If you do this, get the 35 L for about the same cost.

jrscls wrote in post #9008992
If you do this, get the 35 L for about the same cost.

But he could get 99% of the 35L's performance with a Sigma 30mm 1.4 for about $1000 less. I don't think the 35L makes a lot of sense unless you need FF coverage.

tkbslc wrote in post #9008967
That makes no sense. You can't use a zoom if shutterspeeds require faster than f2.8, can you? Both are handy, but a fast prime is flexible for light levels, where a zoom is not. Yes you lose framing flexibility by not being able to zoom, but that's the compromise.

Ok, fair enough. I was thinking from a framing perspective, rather than light gathering ability. As you said, it's about compromise and which is a higher priority to you. Light versus framing.

Sell the zoom, pick up a Sigma 30mm and a third party zoom like the Tamron 17-50. $300 probably wouldn't kill you and it may be nice to have a zoom for when you need it.

Great idea Cosmo. I had the tamron 28-75 which was an awesome lens. It wouldn't be an L, but I would still have that flexibility if needed.

sigma 30 1.4 researching now......

splitslim wrote in post #9008583
35L

I have both the 35L and the 24-70. Love them both, but the 35L is my b*tch

looks like we have a new nickname for the 35L!

to the OP... a 60mm 2.8 might be a consideration.

tkbslc wrote in post #9008998
But he could get 99% of the 35L's performance with a Sigma 30mm 1.4 for about $1000 less. I don't think the 35L makes a lot of sense unless you need FF coverage.

it takes all kinds I suppose. I recently went through the "should I get the 30/1.4 or 35/1.4L" phase, and ultimately got the L. I shoot weddings though, and after dealing with the noisy, hunting autofocus of my siggy zoom, I felt pretty resolute in what I wanted. I also had no desire to roll the dice on whether or not I would have to send it in for calibration. I realize others probably have differing opinions and experiences, and I'm okay with that.

and sometimes you just have to get the L because owning 'em feels good.

I just got a 24L for my 30D and absolutely love it, the focal length, color rendition, and build of the lens are fantastic. I don't have a midrange zoom that I use very often, normally the 16-35mm f/2.8 L is glued to the camera, now it is the 24L and I am thinking of selling the 16-35mm for a 17-40mm f/4. I know I will regret dumping the 16-35mm if I do ever go full frame though. I wouldn't take the chance with the Sigma 30mm, the salesman at B&H wouldn't even sell me one after I had questioned about the focusing problems...Then again he did convince me to purchase a refurb 16-35mm and I don't regret that one bit.

Between the 16-35mm f/2.8 L, 24L, nifty 50 and 70-200mm f/2.8 L, I have everything covered.

I'd guess that 90% of non-newbies to DSLR have both primes and zooms.

The other 10% are just too stubborn to consider the other type