Hey everyone! I'm on a tight budget and I currently have a 5d2, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 24-105L, 50 f/1.8 and a 35 f/1.4L. I'm happy with my 35mm generally speaking but lately I've been looking more into a 50mm f/1.2. I have the opportunity to buy obe from a friend and I just can't afford to buy the fifty L and the 35 L. My question is of you could choose one: 35L or 50L, which would you choose? Oh, I do most portraits , wedding, and lifestyle/fashion photography. Thanks! Looking forward to hearing peoples' thoughts!
Help me decide; keep my 35L or get a 50L?
- Thread starter aaronh
- Start date
- Status
I really like the 35L but love the 50L ;D
Hope you have tried your friend's lens on your own camera body and are happy with it, if so sell the 35L and get the 50L.
Cheers
Hope you have tried your friend's lens on your own camera body and are happy with it, if so sell the 35L and get the 50L.
Cheers
Upvote
0
Depends on which focal length you prefer, although I suspect that you'd prefer a longer FL for portraits. See if you can borrow your friend's 50L and see which FL works better for you. The 50L is more difficult to master than the 35L.
Upvote
0
For stunning story telling images you need to have a wide angle in your bag, although you could use the 24-100 I propose a sharp wide is important to have especially since you can go down to 1.4 if needed. The 50L can come later since you already have a 50 F1.8, and your zooms, well you def don't need an 85 but if your focus is on portraits the 85 is much better and nicer to use since its much smaller even though the weight isnt necessarily lighter than the 70-200 zoom by much, don't know the exact weights. For weddings i have the 24 on a 1dm3 making it 31mm and i was shooting the 50L on the 5dm3. I liked both looks the wide tells more of an overall story and its great for group portraits on a crop sensor since the distortion is almost non-existent. Even so LR4 fixes distortions. When i needed the really wide shots i went to my fisheye or my 24 on the 5DM3. I just sold my 50 because i got the 85L and thus thought about scenarios id want the 50 with my two cameras and figured it would sit in my bag alot since the 85 is now the king on the 5DM3. Whether you have similar shooting experiences as i do I don't know but being that i shoot weddings and portraits this is my logic. Oh, and i sold my fisheye and old 5D too so i really trimmed down my options but like a prime over a zoom it forces you to put more thought into your shots, but the results pay off.
Upvote
0
I have both and love both. For being only 15mm apart they are very different.
I owned the 35 first but craved the 50 but couldn't financially justify owning both. So I bought the 50 and sold the 35. That is when I realized how different they were and I ended up buying another 35.
So my advise is to keep the 35 and save up for the 50. While I'm pretty sure you'll like the 50, I'd bet money you will miss the 35.
I owned the 35 first but craved the 50 but couldn't financially justify owning both. So I bought the 50 and sold the 35. That is when I realized how different they were and I ended up buying another 35.
So my advise is to keep the 35 and save up for the 50. While I'm pretty sure you'll like the 50, I'd bet money you will miss the 35.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 7828
Guest
I'm in the SAME, EXACT situation you are. I was using the 35L with the 60D and love it, but once on the 5D it's a bit wider and suddenly I'm not quite liking it as much. a 50mm feels more natural...but then I tried a 50L on the store 5D and noticed some backfocus around f2.8 or so...and optically it really wasn't blowing me away...I like that it's weather-sealed, though (the 35L isn't).
What to do?
What to do?
Upvote
0
Might I suggest?
Consider keeping the 35, and get the 50 f/1.4 rather than the f/1.2. The f/1.4 is a wonderful lens. The f/1.2 is better, yes, but it's not a thousand dollars better. It's worth getting if you can afford to buy it without worrying about spending that kind of money. But for somebody on a tight budget?
Cheers,
b&
Consider keeping the 35, and get the 50 f/1.4 rather than the f/1.2. The f/1.4 is a wonderful lens. The f/1.2 is better, yes, but it's not a thousand dollars better. It's worth getting if you can afford to buy it without worrying about spending that kind of money. But for somebody on a tight budget?
Cheers,
b&
Upvote
0
Thanks for the thoughts guys! I shot a wedding tonight and really tried to decide what focal length I like more. The 35 sure comes in handy for storytelling shots as one of you said, especially the as it got darker. I like the idea of upgrading to the 50 f/1.4; the only thing is I really love the build quality of L lenses.
So much to think about...
So much to think about...
Upvote
0
aaronh said:
You could buy three 50mm f/1.4 lenses and still have more money left in your pocket than if you bought a single 50mm f/1.2L.
Again, the 1.2 makes great sense if you can afford to buy it without thinking, "Gee, that's an awful lot of money." And lots of people can easily afford to do so. If you're charging your clients thousands for a wedding and you're doing a few weddings a week, you'd be a fool not to have a few of them with you at the gig in case the drunken uncle smashes one of them. If you're a Microsoft Millionaire, you're wasting more money deliberating over the decision than by just buying it.
But it makes little if any sense to those on a tight budget.
b&
Upvote
0
I cannot recommend the 501.4, I sold it because the bokeh and performance in general left me needing more. If you just need the focal length get the 1.8 or the shorty 40. Personally if i feel a need for that focal length i will go shorty 40 for the quality of images it produces. Anyway i bought the 50L for the look it gave my images, price is rarely a factor for me, not because i like to spend or because i have a pile of cash that i burn to keep warm at night but because i want my images to have a look and only the best lenses give you that. That is why i just bought a 85LII over a sigma 85 1.4 after testing them both. While the look was similar the canon version just was spot on focus and just better at everything.
Upvote
0
I would consider the 50 f/1.4. According to photozone and lenstip, the 50L isn't that good. It's nice that it can go to 1.2, but you will give up image quality and it's a lot more expensive. So unless you really need the f/1.2, I would go for to 50 f/1.4.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
