Sure, my pleasure!
I guess it depends if I had a crop body or FF. But I would say the 35mm works great on both! Remember that 50mm is pretty close to what we see with our eyes. So, 35mm on 1.6X crop body is 56mm.
You will have the normal view with the crop body and the not too-wide environmental view on FF.
The wider the lens more background you are going to have in the picture and less of your subject. Field of View (FOV), where you might be doing full body shots of two or three people at 24mm or 35mm, you might be doing cowboy portraits at 55mm and head shots when you use a 70-200mm. Of course it all depends on how far you are from the subject. Personally I shoot most of my indoor shots at home with the 35mm so I think it is just fine, and on a crop body for me it might actually frame a little tight.Originally Posted by Magijr
However, A 35mm lens on your camera is going to give you a very generic field of view since it will be equivalent to 56mm on a full frame camera. At 56mm it is close to the same Field of View the human eye has. Personally I wouldn't go for the 35mm F/1.4 L on a crop body like yours, what makes the 35mm great is what it can do on a Full Frame body. I would much prefer the 24mm F1.4L over the 35mm for a crop body, it would give me a similar FOV as I get with my 35mm.
In your situation I would get the 17-55 first then second the 70-200mm. After that start adding primes as you think you need them. From a financial standpoint I wouldn't buy any primes till you know that you actually need them, not because any one has told you that will need them. The IQ of primes is better than the zooms, usually. They are specialty tools that are very expensive. You can establish the need with experience from your zoom lenses.
Last edited by HDNitehawk; 08-18-2012 at 02:39 AM.
Not fair! ;-)
I would take the 17-55 zoom for the versatility (or my 15-85 zoom if it is a sunny island and I'm outside a lot). I would always recommend one high quality zoom first before adding primes like the Sigma 30, or the 35L or one of the 85mm lenses. The zooms cover a lot, from a group shot with grandparents and in-laws around the baby, to portraits of the baby's face. That's why they usually stay on the camera a lot, and you can take a lot of different pictures without swapping lenses in between, so it better be good quality, and for your purpose, it better have a wide aperture/low light capabilities.
.
Then I'd add a prime later, either a 30 or 35, or a 85 if you prefer tighter head/shoulder portraits. But thekingb and Richard also have a point, use the existing kit lens for general purpose and add a 30 or 35 prime with even greater low light capabilities than the 17-55. Looking at my neighbor's pics of his baby, he get's a lot of good pictures out of the 17-55 with 2.8 aperture, so I would still recommend it as the first purchase.
As you can tell by the length of this thread and the other threads you found, there is not only one right answer. All the recommended lenses are good, the questions are
1) where do you put your money first, and
2) out of which lens will you get the best value for the intended purpose?
My money is still on the 17-55, then a flash, then a faster prime or a tele.
Let us know how you decide, and please share some pictures.
Good luck!
Arnt
Im not sure what Rich will say; But I would take my 500mm so I could start camp fires and watch for ships going by. Do we have electricity to charge the camera batteries and run our computer as well?
If I knew help was coming soon I would want this filled with a margarita; http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ug-Review.aspx
I want to change my vote to campfires and Margaritas too!
mmmm, great choices and an even better answer to the FF vs. crop body. Do you have a FF camera? In your opinion, do you think the full frame is better to have than the crop body?
I read few articles and it seems that the full frame is the clear favorite, its just really expensive.
Its amazing, the more I learn, the more I want to know. Photography is very subjective, very interesting and very exciting.
I am now intrigued about the FF bodies, I have 30 days to return the rebel... if you were me, would you start with a FF, or a crop?
Thank you again, your responses as well as the other forum members' responses have certainly given me a lot to chew on. I really appreciate your comments, and I will definitely share my decision and share my pictures with the group; it seems the photography world is a tight nit communityI am very happy to have joined.
Now we are talking; I own a staffing company that specializes in providing clients with bartenders and an off premise bar service; you guys bring the lenses; I'll bring the tequila!!
That really depends on how serious you are. If you are just documenting your kids growing up the crop body will do a good job for much less money.
When my kids were young, I wouldn't even think about spending $3,499 for a new 5D III and in a month or two when the new 24-70mm L II is released spend another $2,200. Kids cost to much, but at this point in my life I would go the Full Frame route because I can afford it and I enjoy photography as a hobby. If money isn't an object in the discussion of course go with Full Frame. You will get better IQ and better a Auto Focus system.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote