Replace or Augment EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6?

[EricPvpi]

thekingb / ham - I had been looking at primes and keeping my existing zoom and considered:
EF 28mm f/1.8 USM
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
EF 35mm f/2.0
EF 50mm f/1.4

I'll look through the forums for recommendations on those. I have just been hesitant since I am not sure where I want to fall yet. Maybe after a little more time, I will have a better feeling.

17-55 and 24-105 is a lot of overlap that costs several thousand dollars to achieve! If you do it, I'd suspect the 17-55 will be used indoors and the 24-105 outdoors. This just may be the right combination for you. I carry the 24-105 on a FF almost everywhere I go. On my crop body it covers the equivalent of around 40-180 mm focal lengths. If you don't do landscapes and do lots of portraits the range is great but the f4 DOF isn't going to be a strongpoint.

Primes or really good zooms is a choice most people eventually make. Either of the two zooms are good lenses, but the questions you need to ask yourself is whether the aperture, wider angle, or reach is most important to you? Or do your existing photos tell you primes are the answer?

The cost verse overlap is definitely why I posted this to get some feedback. In my mind, I would use the 17-55 indoors and 24-105 outdoors. So a bunch of overlap, but I was thinking it would be one or the other depending on where I was shooting. So my thought is I could be using 1 lens instead of carrying 2 and I would be paying for that convenience. I imagined any portrait shots would be on the 17-55. But as you mention, the hard part is deciding the zoom/prime verse aperture verse range of the zoom. I love the range of my 15-85, I would just like it to be a little faster at times.

Eric

[thekingb]

thekingb / ham - I had been looking at primes and keeping my existing zoom and considered:
EF 28mm f/1.8 USM
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
EF 35mm f/2.0
EF 50mm f/1.4

The non-L prime market in the 24-35mm range is maddeningly thin. Canon hasn't updated their affordable options in this range in a LONG time. The EF 28 f/1.8 is a 17 year-old design; the 35 f/2 is 22 years-old; the 50 f/1.4 is 19 years-old. Come on, Canon!

The EF 28 f/1.8 gets mixed reviews. I'd read Bryan's review on this site. He's certainly not in love with it.

Some people say that they have focus issues with the Sigma. I haven't and am very pleased, and I know that forum member Sean Setters is very happy with his.

I have no experience with the EF 35 f/2.

I sold my 50 f/1.4 for two reasons: it was often too long indoors, and the focus was unreliable wider than f/2.5 or so. It was maddening.

A good, fast prime is a nice addition to your kit.

Brian