Is one single 50mm F1.4 on FF enough for a light travel lens kit?
- Thread starter ombre
- Start date
:thumbsup:i used 5d2 + 28 f1.8 for anywhere (travelling, i meant) enough for me
Hm, a lot in favor of the 35L hm?
After all that searching, I actually have trouble deciding between these 4 lenses.
24-105L (No shallow DOF. Expensive for an F4 lens.)
24-70L (Heavy, price-perf, mixed reviews, some says not sharp?)
35L (Price concerns, no zoom also, gotta be darn sure its the focal length i want. If i got to stop down to F2.8 for sharp shots, then why not just 24-70L?)
50mm F1.4 (Budget compared to 35L, but tighter)
Of course one alternative is to get the 24-105L + 50mm, but thats like the price and weight of the 24-70L. 50mm F1.4 may not perform.
I think I'm too used to the sharpness of the 135L, nothing seems to match.
Actually I did consider staying on my Tamron. and getting another body to use the 135L, but 2 bodies seems like unnecessary weight.
Does anyone know if the Tamron 17-50mm can be used on full frame bodies? I could just crop every shot to the APS-C size.
As you can see above, I am quite confused.
After all that searching, I actually have trouble deciding between these 4 lenses.
24-105L (No shallow DOF. Expensive for an F4 lens.)
24-70L (Heavy, price-perf, mixed reviews, some says not sharp?)
35L (Price concerns, no zoom also, gotta be darn sure its the focal length i want. If i got to stop down to F2.8 for sharp shots, then why not just 24-70L?)
50mm F1.4 (Budget compared to 35L, but tighter)
Of course one alternative is to get the 24-105L + 50mm, but thats like the price and weight of the 24-70L. 50mm F1.4 may not perform.
I think I'm too used to the sharpness of the 135L, nothing seems to match.
Actually I did consider staying on my Tamron. and getting another body to use the 135L, but 2 bodies seems like unnecessary weight.
Does anyone know if the Tamron 17-50mm can be used on full frame bodies? I could just crop every shot to the APS-C size.
As you can see above, I am quite confused.
sinned79
Senior Member
personally i tried holding 24-70L before but never shoot with it.
but in theory, all lens suppose to perform better at 2 stops of their widest aperture. so going by this theory 24-70L performs better at f4.
35L is sharp at f2 already. although f1.4 may be a bit hard to control due to the shallow DOF. f1.8 isn't that bad.
here's some examples photos (unedited) I took using 35L at f1.4:
Kiwira
Senior Member
sinned79
Senior Member
this is what happens when you shoot tamrom 17-50mm on a FF.
*censored my friend's face
u sure you want to do cropping for all photos u took?
Last edited:
Canon cannot set DX mode? 5DII high res leh...
sinned79
Senior Member
cannot... u will get the vignetting corners...
but u can still use CS4 to remove it. but troublesome.sorry. This is a killer feature where Canon reserves for 0D series...
In that case I think i'd just use the tamron with the full frame. As long as the mirror doesn't hit the rear of the lens.
Is the sharpness affected? I have this impression that the FF sensor is slightly further from the lens than an APS-C sensor, might have different focusing?
The cropping can be easily done in batches with a simple photoshop action yea. I can live with that until I can convince myself to spend money on a FF lens. Probably can get the 50mm F1.4 to compensate for stuff meanwhile. Tamron for the wide.
Is the sharpness affected? I have this impression that the FF sensor is slightly further from the lens than an APS-C sensor, might have different focusing?
The cropping can be easily done in batches with a simple photoshop action yea. I can live with that until I can convince myself to spend money on a FF lens. Probably can get the 50mm F1.4 to compensate for stuff meanwhile. Tamron for the wide.
engrmariano
Senior Member
2stops of f/2.8 is f/5.6...
Not only do they not do what is possible, they will go and disable available features. It is only with the stiff competition from Nikon that they are slowly changing this policy. Quite sad so lucky you not familiar with this.
Yes, I would actually. L lens poison in a way. I can't somehow leave my 135L. For a very long time I considered getting the 85mm F1.8 to replace, but it doesn't quite cut it. In fact I went through (bought and resell 2nd hand) 6 copies of 85mm F1.8 throughout my 3-4 years using Canon DSLRS, trying to figure out this decision. Good thing I kind of broke even for most deals.
Also I found it really hard to sell my 135L. Two main reasons because it is my favorite lens (Its L and sharp wide open!), and secondly because no one wants to match my asking price (which is not very high to start with). For the price they offer, I rather keep.
So yup. The only reason i want to go FF is because of the 135L. I can't tell you how much I appreciate a fast lens that can be shot wide open and is at superb IQ corner to corner. I really wish the 35L has the same performance.
Halfmoon
Senior Member
I read a comment by a photographer recently..... the reason why some pro uses 1 - 2 lenses at time is because it will allow them to compose much faster, and when they need to react fast, and instead thinking of chaning lens for this and that scenario, they can focus on shooting instead....
I think some pro only uses just one fix lens, and that's it... so why not??? Just use once single lens.... only thin is to find the range you are comfortable with.
I think some pro only uses just one fix lens, and that's it... so why not??? Just use once single lens.... only thin is to find the range you are comfortable with.
You thinking of selling the 135L and yet you are upgrading to FF because of the 135L. I think you need to clear up your mind. Know what you want and what you need.
The 35L is fast and can be shot close to wide open. It deserves a FF sensor even more than the 135.
Budget is key.
I was considering compromising on IQ, stay crop, and keep my budget low.
Now I'm compromising my budget by keeping the 135L. Hope I enjoy that in the long run.
Ok I see. I wish you the best in your quest. One single 50mm is not enough though. Good luck!
Similar threads
