"Walkaround" prime for FF?

[pwp]

It's an impossible question to answer because everyone has a subtley different shooting style. Lot's pf people have suggested to 50 f/1.4. Whether Canon or Sigma, they both great lenses. Bear in mind that the Sigma is much bigger and heavier than the Canon 50 f/1.4 which may be a consideration for a walkabout.

One way to find the answer to your question is to spend half an hour polling the exif data on your existing shots you've done with your 24-105 f/4is. For example if the greatest percentage of shots are done at the wide end, then your answer is you'd need a 24mm prime. If your budget allows, the 24mmL f/1.4II is unbelievable, and a lot of shooters favourite lens. If most shots are up at 105 then check out the 85 f/1.8 or f/1.2L or the stunningly good EF 100mm f/2.8L M.

You get the idea.

Then of course there is the rumored EF 40 f/2.8 Pancake lens that was discussed on CR on Feb 22. Lots of choices! Just a matter of making the one that's best for you.

Paul Wright

 

[Mark1]

I have the 24-105 F4L and it's a fabulous all rounder but as far as primes go you can't beat the Canon 50mm f1.4 on a 5D2. I use it frequently for indoor stuff with the kids and you can easily take it out for day trips etc and not struggle atall with the range.

50mm range is a no-brainer in my view. If you go for a 24mm or 35mm on a full frame you can't really say you have a 'walkaround prime' as they're quite wide. Which one you go for may be down to budget but I can tell you that the Canon 1.4 on a 5d2 is a dream to walk around with and hold as it's very light yet still balanced. Also you can keep the hood on permanently which protects the extending front barrell and it's still shorter than the 24-105mm.

 

[briansquibb]

For a prime walkabout on a ff it would be either the 85 f/1.8 or the 135 f/2.

For street then the 135 f/2 or even the 200 f/2.8 as it is better to be further away than closer

 

[lexonio]

Thank you everyone for your replies. Since I asked this question I got 2 smites for no apparent reason - I have no idea how does this system work.

As for 50mm, I currently do have the Sigma lens, and its autofocus bothers me to no end. Thank you for advising me to work with my EXIF data, I will devote some time to this specific task. But in the end I'll be interested to see that rumored 40mm pancake, thanks for bringing that up.

 

[wickidwombat]

As for 50mm, I currently do have the Sigma lens, and its autofocus bothers me to no end. Thank you for advising me to work with my EXIF data, I will devote some time to this specific task. But in the end I'll be interested to see that rumored 40mm pancake, thanks for bringing that up.

I like the canon 50 f1.4 i will usually stop it down to f2 unless I am going for maximum blur and bokeh
even wide open its not to bad, a bit softer but i find it a really nice all round lens
I am looking forward to an update to make it compete with the Nikon 50 f1.4G lens
I have been hoping for a L build similar to the 100 f2.8 macro that is considerably cheaper than the f1.2
and hope the size stays quite compact as the compact size is one of the major benfits

 

[Hillsilly]

I'd go for either an 85, 100, or 135mm. The 135 would be an interesting choice. Its slightly longer than your regular lens and therefore you're not doubling up. It would be ideal for isolating detail. Its a couple of stops faster, which would be good in low light photos where there's a bit of movement. Great bokeh and narrow depth of field. Also very sharp wide open. Its a fun lens to have.

 

[Mark1]

Since I asked this question I got 2 smites for no apparent reason - I have no idea how does this system work.

Don't worry. I got a smite just for my reply. I got 2 smites recently for starting a poll. There are some weirdos out there! Current smite was -4 before I write this but see what happens now!

 

[mb66energy]

I have no definite answer - just not for myself. But ...

1) I like round about 40mm (equiv to the 24mm on a crop body) for landscape, towns, nature ...
2) I like round about 100mm (equiv to the 60mm on a crop body) for landscape, towns, nature, macro, people, architecture, etc. - for me 100mm are the standard focal length.

If I had to choose just one lens: I would go for a 100mm (macro).
If I had to choose two lenses: I would go for the f/2.0 100mm and a f/2.0 40mm pancake.
If I had to choose three lenses: The three lenses mentioned above because the f/2.0 100 doesn't attract any attention, 40 + 100mm is lightweight and compact and a macro for special tasks.

Or the bottom line: It depends on each ones photographic style which lens is "THE" walkaround lens. With my 40D I like to use just the old EF 24mm/2.8 and the EF-S 60mm/2.8
as a light, compact and very versatile walkaround set. Sometimes two 40Ds with both lenses mounted - balances the weight on left and right shoulder

Best - Michael

 

[Caps18]

If I only had 1 prime lens, it would be the 24mm.

Why would you pick the 24mm?

It is wide enough to take pictures of landmarks and people. It is a compromise, I obviously picked the 16-35mm and still am ok with it over the 24 (TS or f/1.4), but I think the 24mm would still work the best for a one prime camera.

If I were going to a national park, I would go with the 17mm or 14mm...

 

[Legio]

One thing I laugh at are the tourists who carry their full size DSLRs with huge zoom lenses as they walk around at theme parks and other touristy places. I know how much that combination weighs and it doesn't get any lighter after a couple of hours of walking around. A pancake lens might help you have more fun at the park instead of feeling like a beast of burden.

Mike

I like to carry my 5D MII with a BG and a heavy lens but it's then I have the most fun on the theme parks.

 

[Hillsilly]

Carrying big lenses, a tripod and a backpack full of gear is good exercise. That's why we're all fitter, stronger. healthier, better looking and more interesting than non-photographers.

 

[tonyp]

I'd recommend the 35L 1.4 AMAZING LENS and tack sharp from f/2 on up

 

[dolina]

35 and 50 were the street lenses of Bresson. Choose the f-number of your budget.

 

[EOBeav]

I recommend the Canon 50mm f1.2L.

If you've got the bucks, sure. But for my money, the difference in IQ is negligible.

 

[ecka]

If there was a single best prime for everybody, then you wouldn't ask for advice, because the answer would be obvious. For me it is 35 or 50, but many are using 24, 85, 135 or even 200. Choose what is better for your style of photography.
Maybe it's just me ... but if you want to buy something and you don't know what exactly you want to buy, then perhaps you don't need it.

 

[Michael_pfh]

If I only had 1 prime lens, it would be the 24mm.

Why would you pick the 24mm?

It is wide enough to take pictures of landmarks and people. It is a compromise, I obviously picked the 16-35mm and still am ok with it over the 24 (TS or f/1.4), but I think the 24mm would still work the best for a one prime camera.

If I were going to a national park, I would go with the 17mm or 14mm...

For me the 24 is too wide to be my walk around (on APS-H), die 16-35 does a much better job so if not the 50 1.2L the 35 1.4L could be a good choice...