35mm f/1.4L vs. 70-200mm f/4L IS

Hey All, wanted to get your opinions on this...


I'm going to purchase one of the two lenses for my 7D (and 40D), but cannot decide. I know they're not even the same ballpark of lenses and what's it going to be primarily use for, etc. If I have to answer that question, it'll probably be portraiture of my 5-mo old. The next question is indoors or out?


I get all that and I don't really want to compare the lenses based solely on functionality. Rather, I'm looking at it more for the FUN factor. I already have the 50mm f/1.4, which will probably never get used again if I get the 35mm f/1.4L. I hear the IQ is night and day. Then, there's the opinion that the 35mm f/1.4L doesn't look as sharp on higher pixel density cameras.


So, pound for pound, which would you choose and why? For those who have both, can a decision be made without regard to functionality?


Thanks for your time!

35L hands down. Why? It's freakin' amazing.

Personally, 70-200 is my favorite focal length rage when it comes to fun factor, but of course that is just opinion. But I also think it is a better range for portraits than 35mm, especially portraits of small people (as no doubt your 5-mo old is).


The 35, of course, is faster, and fast lenses are fun. But you know that from using your 50 f/1.4 (which reminds me of another reason I would recommend the 70-200: it's more different from what you already have).


Opinions, you'll probably find, will vary wildly. Take mine with a teaspoon of salt.

More fun ...my 35L butmy 70-200mm f/4 IS has definitely been used more around my toddler grandkids who don't stay in one spot for long (and your baby won't pretty soon)! The zoom range of that lens has really come in handy!

Denise

I agree with Garrett, its amazing go with the 35L.


Although I do not have the 70-200 I have other primes in the focal range. The 35L will go with me before any other lens for just walking around.


There are two reasons I would choose the 35mm L.


First is that I would use that focal range a lot more than I would 70-200.


Second, and I say this without ever using the 70-200 so I am basing this on my experince with other Canon Zooms, if I could only have one I would pick a Canon's top prime in that lens range over a Zoom of any other range. I am not bad mouthing the 70-200, its just my preference to use Primes.

Some good info so far and so far, I'm leaning a bit on the 35L... [:D]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deltasun

I already have the 50mm f/1.4

---

Do you have more lenses than the 50mm?? [A]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deltasun

So, pound for pound, which would you choose and why?

---

I don't have experience with the 35mm, but here's what I think. I think the 35mm will be fine right now, since a 5-mo baby doesn't move that much and so you can easily frame a shot with the 35mm.


However once they start crawling and walking which should be within the next year or so...they get very mobile. I personally prefer a longer range lens for snapshots and unposed photos of children. With the 35mm you'll always need to frame correctly and so be at a certain distance of your kid. Of course you can crop with 18MP, but I personally like to frame right the first time and keep all my MP[;)]


I also assume you'll have the wide end covered with something like the 17-55 or so?? In that case I don't really see a 35mmL as a huge benefit. But then again it depends also on what you like and how you like to shoot.


Good luck,


Jan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deltasun

If I have to answer that question, it'll probably be portraiture of my 5-mo old.

---

If that is going to be your primary use than keep in mind 35 is pretty wide for a subject so small. When you get in close there will be more distortion. Faces become elongated, noses become larger, etc. 70-200 is way more versatile for kids as they grow and get involved in all kids of activities.


Tom

I don't have the 35L, but my 70-200 f/4 IS is the most fun lens I own, especially for kids. If I'm going to be outdoors shooting my kids, it's almost always my choice(even though using a fill flash becomes nearly impossible due to its length)because it's versatile, IQ is fantastic, and I can stand back from the action and get natural shots. Kids do weird things when they see the camera.


BUT, this lens is essentially useless indoors, which is too bad during the long Wisconsin winter.

I have 35mm and 70-200 4.0 but non IS


I prefer 35mm 1.4 of course and would suggest to trade your 50mm for a 85mm1.8, then indoor, outdoor, close up, candid, stationary, action, low light... you all covered.


70-200 is very good too, if you don't mind to use your 50mm for indoors but 50mm on a cropped body sometimes still too long for indoor shots