A question for anyone who has the 40mm pancake and the Canon 35 f2 IS: do you see yourself keeping the 40 and 35 in your kit long term or do you see them as largely redundant? Which of the two do you prefer? I realise the 35 is a stop faster before you even take into account the IS, while the 40 is much smaller and lighter (although I gather the 35 is still fairly small and light), but I'm keen to hear from anyone who's used them both.
I've currently got a 40mm pancake, a Sigma 50 1.4 and an old Canon 28 1.8 (which I used as a general purpose prime on crop, but which hasn't seen much use since I got a 6D). I'm planning to sell the 28, and I'm thinking about getting the 35 f2 IS but I wonder if I need (can justify!) having a 35 and a 40 (And a 50!). I'd be using the lens mostly as a general walk around/street/low light prime when I want to go small and light (so something like the Sigma 35 1.4 isn't so appealing to me despite it's IQ reputation). Another option is to sell the 40 as well as the 28, and replace them both with the 35. Or I could just forget the 35 and stick with the 40. To the extent relevant, I do have a Sigma 24-70 2.8 HSM as well. (I'd actually like to reduce the number of lenses I own, but somehow I seem to find buying easier than selling!)
Thanks for any comments you can offer!
Which focal length do you prefer? Wide or normal? Or a bit of both? It's really down to personal pref.
You could sell all of them and replace with the 35 IS. The 28 and 40 are very similar in terms of focal length. You can easily replicate the "look" of both with one 35mm lens.
A 50 is different though and has a unique look all of it's own. You might still find it useful.
Personally I'd sell the 28 no matter what. Keep the pancake for travel and keep the 50 for shallow dof stuff and creative uses.