Wide EF prime for Canon?

[mom2rtk]

I have the nifty fifty. And I have the Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4. I have the 6D so need an EF lens.

The Sigma is a stellar lens. But it's a little larger and heavier than I would like right now, but mostly I'd like something a little wider (something 1.8 or 1.4).

The nifty fifty isn't as great, but it sure is a small light package.

Suggestions?

 

[Spork3127]

I have the 28mm f/1.8 and love it, just don't use it a lot. it gives a great bokeh and has a short minimum focusing distance, I think about 12 inches. Plus it doesn't have the L series price tag.

 

[havoc315]

I have the nifty fifty. And I have the Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4. I have the 6D so need an EF lens.

The Sigma is a stellar lens. But it's a little larger and heavier than I would like right now, but mostly I'd like something a little wider (something 1.8 or 1.4).

The nifty fifty isn't as great, but it sure is a small light package.

Suggestions?

How wide? I have fun with the Rokinon 14mm/2.8. When used properly, gets some outstanding shots.

 

[mom2rtk]

I have the 28mm f/1.8 and love it, just don't use it a lot. it gives a great bokeh and has a short minimum focusing distance, I think about 12 inches. Plus it doesn't have the L series price tag.

I think that might be a nice possibility!

How wide? I have fun with the Rokinon 14mm/2.8. When used properly, gets some outstanding shots.

I do have the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 that works on full frame at 16mm. I sort of treat it as a 16mm f/2.8 prime. I'm looking for something a little faster for dark rides.

Is that a fisheye though? I do keep thinking a fisheye would be fun to try at some point.

 

[havoc315]

I think that might be a nice possibility!



I do have the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 that works on full frame at 16mm. I sort of treat it as a 16mm f/2.8 prime. I'm looking for something a little faster for dark rides.

Is that a fisheye though? I do keep thinking a fisheye would be fun to try at some point.

I believe their 12mm is fisheye. Technically, the 14mm is rectilinear, but whenever you go that wide, you get the distortion of a mild fisheye effect (especially if you don't keep your horizon perfectly straight).

So you don't find full frame 35mm wide enough for dark rides?

I'm really considering my August Disney vacation, cruise + Disney World. To keep weight down, I was planning on relying mainly on my Sony A6300 (aps-c). But I do enjoy shooting dark rides, so I was thinking on bringing my D750 + Tamron 45/1.8 primarily for dark rides. (yes, 2 cameras... keep an ultrawide on the A6300 for walk-around landscapes, keep the 45 on the D750 for dark rides and family pics, only carry 1-2 more lenses on a daily basis).
So now you have me second guessing whether 45mm is wide enough.

For your purposes, have you looked at the Sigma 20/1.4?

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/973-sigma20f14art?start=1

 

[mom2rtk]

I believe their 12mm is fisheye. Technically, the 14mm is rectilinear, but whenever you go that wide, you get the distortion of a mild fisheye effect (especially if you don't keep your horizon perfectly straight).

So you don't find full frame 35mm wide enough for dark rides?

I'm really considering my August Disney vacation, cruise + Disney World. To keep weight down, I was planning on relying mainly on my Sony A6300 (aps-c). But I do enjoy shooting dark rides, so I was thinking on bringing my D750 + Tamron 45/1.8 primarily for dark rides. (yes, 2 cameras... keep an ultrawide on the A6300 for walk-around landscapes, keep the 45 on the D750 for dark rides and family pics, only carry 1-2 more lenses on a daily basis).
So now you have me second guessing whether 45mm is wide enough.

For your purposes, have you looked at the Sigma 20/1.4?

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/973-sigma20f14art?start=1

The 35mm length is pretty decent on a FF. I just like some variety and always find myself wanting to go wider (as a matter of personal preference). I guess my biggest issue is that it seems kind of heavy for what I'm after. I found myself leaving it behind on our last trips. The 50mm is so small and light that it's an easy choice to throw it in. I just don't like that 50mm length. The Sigma 35mm lens is really great, but not if it's back in the room in the safe.

I have actually toyed with the same decision on carrying cameras. On our summer road trip, I used 2 cameras (T2i with a long zoom and 6D with a mid range zoom). When we went out into Monument Valley I went with both bodies and can see that as an alternative at Disney. (Just need to figure out how to stop tangling straps).

I would probably prefer the Sigma 20mm to the 35mm (just in terms of personal preference) but it's just as heavy.

I'm thinking the 28mm f/1.8 might be where I end up. (If I do anything, still not sure.)

 

[havoc315]

The 35mm length is pretty decent on a FF. I just like some variety and always find myself wanting to go wider (as a matter of personal preference). I guess my biggest issue is that it seems kind of heavy for what I'm after. I found myself leaving it behind on our last trips. The 50mm is so small and light that it's an easy choice to throw it in. I just don't like that 50mm length. The Sigma 35mm lens is really great, but not if it's back in the room in the safe.

I have actually toyed with the same decision on carrying cameras. On our summer road trip, I used 2 cameras (T2i with a long zoom and 6D with a mid range zoom). When we went out into Monument Valley I went with both bodies and can see that as an alternative at Disney. (Just need to figure out how to stop tangling straps).

I would probably prefer the Sigma 20mm to the 35mm (just in terms of personal preference) but it's just as heavy.

I'm thinking the 28mm f/1.8 might be where I end up. (If I do anything, still not sure.)

Ahh, the ongoing struggle in deciding between weight and quality.

I'm going to Universal Orlando soon..... Not a camera-friendly place. At least not as friendly as Disney. I think I will solely bring the A6300. It's just a few days.

August is 10 days of cruise + Disney. Disney is including a special safari tour at Animal Kingdom. So really a huge variety in shooting needs.
On the cruise ship -- Weight is less of an issue. I'm not constantly on the move and walking around. Probably not a whole lot of telephoto needs on the ship. I love doing some sunrise/sunset landscapes from the deck. Inside the ship, it's often low light. So full frame and/or fast lens would be beneficial.
On the Caribbean islands -- excursions, a small camera would be preferable then lugging around a big camera. Low light won't be an issue.
At Disney --- Full frame + 45/1.8 is my ideal for the dark rides. Need telephoto zoom for the special safari. And in general, I like shooting Disney World landscapes. Plus, it would be nice to keep weight down a little bit. (which certainly goes against 2 cameras).

So I need to decide what to pack in the camera bag (and overflow into a suitcase?). And then what to carry each days.
So far, the definites:
Nikon D750 with 45/1.8 lens (dark rides, maybe family pics)
Sony A6300 with 10-18 lens (ultrawides for Disney World and excursions)
Sony 70-200 for Animal Kingdom.

Still debating:
The Tamron 24-70 for the D750. That makes it a rather heavy combination. But I'm thinking I might use it primarily on the cruise ship, where I'm less concerned about the weight. And at 24mm, I can get some nice sunrise/sunset shots on the ship. (or alternatively, do I just stick to the A6300 with 10-18 for those landscape shots? The D750+24-70 would give me sharper images with better dynamic range for post processing).
The Nikon 18-35 for the D750. If I really really want to use it for sunrise/sunset landscapes, this is the way to go. But there is no way I'm packing this lens AND the 24-70. I could always use the Tamron 45, cropping it, to effectively get the same shots I'd get with the 24-70.
Rokinon 14mm/2.8 -- If I don't bring the 18-35, this is a contender for some ultrawide shots on the Nikon. And I can even use it with an adapter on the Sony. But it's a kinda bulky lens. May not be worth bringing this time around for limited uses.
Tamron 85/1.8 -- I LOVE this lens for portraits. I just need to decide whether I really plan on doing family portraits. And I could use the 24-70 at 70mm for nice portraits as well.
For the Sony -- Debating the 24/1.8 and 50/1.8. They are both small. Will probably bring both. And there may be times I leave the entire D750 in the hotel room and just rely on the A6300, in which case I may want to change lenses for different perspectives. (for example, I won't lug both cameras to Animal Kingdom.)

So for definites, I have 2 cameras and 3 lenses. I will bring a speedlight. I figure I'll pack 2-3 additional lenses. I don't want to go crazy, packing lenses that I'm not even going to use.
Any suggestions?

 

[Spork3127]

The 35mm length is pretty decent on a FF. I just like some variety and always find myself wanting to go wider (as a matter of personal preference). I guess my biggest issue is that it seems kind of heavy for what I'm after. I found myself leaving it behind on our last trips. The 50mm is so small and light that it's an easy choice to throw it in. I just don't like that 50mm length. The Sigma 35mm lens is really great, but not if it's back in the room in the safe.

I have actually toyed with the same decision on carrying cameras. On our summer road trip, I used 2 cameras (T2i with a long zoom and 6D with a mid range zoom). When we went out into Monument Valley I went with both bodies and can see that as an alternative at Disney. (Just need to figure out how to stop tangling straps).

I would probably prefer the Sigma 20mm to the 35mm (just in terms of personal preference) but it's just as heavy.

I'm thinking the 28mm f/1.8 might be where I end up. (If I do anything, still not sure.)

The 28 f/1.8 is about the same size as the 50 f/1.4. Forgot to mention that earlier. And for your earlier comment about a fisheye seeming like a fun lens, it certainly is. I used a Canon 8-15 f/4L a ton at Epcot for night shots of Spaceship Earth and Illuminations. Really fun lens.

 

[mom2rtk]

Ahh, the ongoing struggle in deciding between weight and quality.

I'm going to Universal Orlando soon..... Not a camera-friendly place. At least not as friendly as Disney. I think I will solely bring the A6300. It's just a few days.

August is 10 days of cruise + Disney. Disney is including a special safari tour at Animal Kingdom. So really a huge variety in shooting needs.
On the cruise ship -- Weight is less of an issue. I'm not constantly on the move and walking around. Probably not a whole lot of telephoto needs on the ship. I love doing some sunrise/sunset landscapes from the deck. Inside the ship, it's often low light. So full frame and/or fast lens would be beneficial.
On the Caribbean islands -- excursions, a small camera would be preferable then lugging around a big camera. Low light won't be an issue.
At Disney --- Full frame + 45/1.8 is my ideal for the dark rides. Need telephoto zoom for the special safari. And in general, I like shooting Disney World landscapes. Plus, it would be nice to keep weight down a little bit. (which certainly goes against 2 cameras).

So I need to decide what to pack in the camera bag (and overflow into a suitcase?). And then what to carry each days.
So far, the definites:
Nikon D750 with 45/1.8 lens (dark rides, maybe family pics)
Sony A6300 with 10-18 lens (ultrawides for Disney World and excursions)
Sony 70-200 for Animal Kingdom.

Still debating:
The Tamron 24-70 for the D750. That makes it a rather heavy combination. But I'm thinking I might use it primarily on the cruise ship, where I'm less concerned about the weight. And at 24mm, I can get some nice sunrise/sunset shots on the ship. (or alternatively, do I just stick to the A6300 with 10-18 for those landscape shots? The D750+24-70 would give me sharper images with better dynamic range for post processing).
The Nikon 18-35 for the D750. If I really really want to use it for sunrise/sunset landscapes, this is the way to go. But there is no way I'm packing this lens AND the 24-70. I could always use the Tamron 45, cropping it, to effectively get the same shots I'd get with the 24-70.
Rokinon 14mm/2.8 -- If I don't bring the 18-35, this is a contender for some ultrawide shots on the Nikon. And I can even use it with an adapter on the Sony. But it's a kinda bulky lens. May not be worth bringing this time around for limited uses.
Tamron 85/1.8 -- I LOVE this lens for portraits. I just need to decide whether I really plan on doing family portraits. And I could use the 24-70 at 70mm for nice portraits as well.
For the Sony -- Debating the 24/1.8 and 50/1.8. They are both small. Will probably bring both. And there may be times I leave the entire D750 in the hotel room and just rely on the A6300, in which case I may want to change lenses for different perspectives. (for example, I won't lug both cameras to Animal Kingdom.)

So for definites, I have 2 cameras and 3 lenses. I will bring a speedlight. I figure I'll pack 2-3 additional lenses. I don't want to go crazy, packing lenses that I'm not even going to use.
Any suggestions?

I doubt I'll ever be done solving the struggle between weight and quality. The truth is that sometimes I feel like I can stand carrying more for better quality and sometimes I don't.

The cruise + Disney sounds like a "bring it all" sort of a trip (or most of it anyway). At least you don't have to carry it all every day. I enjoyed our road trip if for no other reason than it allowed me to bring it all without needing to carry it all most of the time.

I have that Tamron 24-70 for my Canon and do love it. It's sharp, the colors are great and the low light capability combined with high ISO on full frame is hard to beat. But lately I've been opting for the 24-105 f/4 more and more just for the lower weight. Still, that Tamron is so good it will never be out of the rotation for good.

All I can offer is...... it's great to have options, isn't it? You know..... until you have to pack.

I think you're doing pretty well on your decision making already. Try putting it all on the dining room table in 2 piles, one to bring and one to leave. Then look at it every day as you mull it over. I always err on the side of taking more. I generally don't regret taking more but often change my mind once I'm there and leave some in the room. You'll know better once you arrive what you feel like shooting that day.

Can I assume you have some sort of rolling case for your equipment?

For my own issues, I need to get across town to a real camera store and compare the size and weight of the Canon 28mm f/1.8 with the ones I have now.

 

[mom2rtk]

The 28 f/1.8 is about the same size as the 50 f/1.4. Forgot to mention that earlier. And for your earlier comment about a fisheye seeming like a fun lens, it certainly is. I used a Canon 8-15 f/4L a ton at Epcot for night shots of Spaceship Earth and Illuminations. Really fun lens.

My daughter really wants me to get a fisheye. That's probably not next on my list, but it's there. It would definitely offer me a new way to photograph the parks.

 

[havoc315]

I doubt I'll ever be done solving the struggle between weight and quality. The truth is that sometimes I feel like I can stand carrying more for better quality and sometimes I don't.

The cruise + Disney sounds like a "bring it all" sort of a trip (or most of it anyway). At least you don't have to carry it all every day. I enjoyed our road trip if for no other reason than it allowed me to bring it all without needing to carry it all most of the time.

I have that Tamron 24-70 for my Canon and do love it. It's sharp, the colors are great and the low light capability combined with high ISO on full frame is hard to beat. But lately I've been opting for the 24-105 f/4 more and more just for the lower weight. Still, that Tamron is so good it will never be out of the rotation for good.

All I can offer is...... it's great to have options, isn't it? You know..... until you have to pack.

I think you're doing pretty well on your decision making already. Try putting it all on the dining room table in 2 piles, one to bring and one to leave. Then look at it every day as you mull it over. I always err on the side of taking more. I generally don't regret taking more but often change my mind once I'm there and leave some in the room. You'll know better once you arrive what you feel like shooting that day.

Can I assume you have some sort of rolling case for your equipment?

For my own issues, I need to get across town to a real camera store and compare the size and weight of the Canon 28mm f/1.8 with the ones I have now.

No rolling case. I'll pack most of it into the Crumbler 7 million, and maybe a bit extra just into my regular suitcase. I have a bigger camera bag, but it would actually weigh me down too much.

I keep going back and forth with the 24-70. I keep thinking, "yes! Of course I'll take the 24-70!! Can use it for top notch landscapes at 24, and portraits at 70!"
Then I keep thinking, "nah... skip the 24-70... You are definitely bringing the Tamron 45/1.8, which effectively gives you great coverage from 45-70.... Instead of bringing a focal length that duplicates the 45... why not bring the 85/1.8 and an ultrawide option. And those lenses even adapt pretty well onto the Sony..."

 

[mom2rtk]

No rolling case. I'll pack most of it into the Crumbler 7 million, and maybe a bit extra just into my regular suitcase. I have a bigger camera bag, but it would actually weigh me down too much.

I keep going back and forth with the 24-70. I keep thinking, "yes! Of course I'll take the 24-70!! Can use it for top notch landscapes at 24, and portraits at 70!"
Then I keep thinking, "nah... skip the 24-70... You are definitely bringing the Tamron 45/1.8, which effectively gives you great coverage from 45-70.... Instead of bringing a focal length that duplicates the 45... why not bring the 85/1.8 and an ultrawide option. And those lenses even adapt pretty well onto the Sony..."

It sort of makes your head spin, doesn't it?

I'm generally not a big prime user, so I'd go with the 24-70 and leave the 45 behind. But I haven't shot with the 45 and can completely understand an irrational attachment to a specific lens.

I finally decided a couple years ago to bring 2 backpacks when I fly somewhere. I have one with wheels that I use on travel day. Huge help! But it's not comfortable to wear on my back for long periods of time, so I put an empty comfortable backpack inside my suitcase to use once I arrive and carry less stuff day to day.

 

[havoc315]

It sort of makes your head spin, doesn't it?

I'm generally not a big prime user, so I'd go with the 24-70 and leave the 45 behind. But I haven't shot with the 45 and can completely understand an irrational attachment to a specific lens.

I finally decided a couple years ago to bring 2 backpacks when I fly somewhere. I have one with wheels that I use on travel day. Huge help! But it's not comfortable to wear on my back for long periods of time, so I put an empty comfortable backpack inside my suitcase to use once I arrive and carry less stuff day to day.

I considered doing something like that. But I figure limited myself to one fair sized camera bag is a way to force myself, to not overdo it. Though I do think my 70-200/4 will just go in a suitcase.

I'll be using the 45 for dark rides. So it's definitely coming. If I wasn't doing dark rides, then I likely would take the 24-70 and leave the 45 around.
Also undecided on a tripod... I have a small gorrilapod for the A6300. Undecided whether to also bring a full tripod.

Here is my dilemma --- For telephoto at Animal Kingdom (possibly the only telephoto I'll do on the trip), I'm happy with the A6300. So I'm not bringing a telephoto lens for the D750.
For dark rides, I want the D750 and 45/1.8. If I really don't want to carry the D750 on a given day, and a dark ride pops up, I can use the A6300 and 24/1.8.

Problem is areas where they are really duplicative --- I totally intend to use the A6300 for some wide landscapes. It does well in good light, it is really small and easy to carry with the 10-18. And with the gorrilapod, it is very useful for fireworks and long exposure night shots.
....... but... the D750 is a tad better for landscapes, especially at sunrise/sunset, etc. The lenses are a bit sharper, and I get a lot more dynamic range to play with in post. But do I really want to carry an APS-C ultrawide lens AND a full frame ultrawide lens? And that might mean the need to carry a full tripod as well......

Okay, I've just answered my own question, I think. The Nikon 18-35 works pretty well on the A6300 with adapter. So it's ultrawide on the D750 and basically a normal walk around lens if used on the A6300...
My 45/1.8 also works ok on the A6300.. focus can take a half a second. Same with my 85/1.8 -- Maybe I should only take Nikon lenses that can serve a dual purpose -- also be used on the Sony.

Ok..... subject to a million more revisions:
D750 + A6300
Sony only lenses: 10-18/4, 24/1.8 and 70-200/4
Nikon lenses that can be adapted: 18-35, 45/1.8 and 85/1.8
1 speedlight
1 gorillapod (I'll make do without a full tripod)

Camera bag can probably hold the 2 bodies, 4 or 5 of the lenses and the speedlight. The 70-200/4 will go into a suitcase, only being pulled out for Animal Kingdom and maybe Fantasmic.

Camera bag, on cruise ship, at sea: D750 + 18-35 + 45/1.8 + 85/1.8 + speedlight
Camera bag excursions: A6300, lens adapter, 10-18, 18-35 and maybe the 70-200.
Magic Kingdom mornings: A6300 + 10-18, D750 + 45/1.8, maybe a speedlight. Yes, it's 2 camera bodies, but only 2 lenses. (maybe toss in the 24/1.8 for the Sony)
Animal Kingdom: A6300 + 10-18 + 24/1.8 + 70-200.
Nights... we will be doing Epcot and DHS... So for nighttime fireworks and long exposure night shots at those parks, the A6300 + goriliapod + 10-18 + 24/1.8. May or may not also bring D750 + 45/1.8 depending on whether Im planning any dark rides and whether I feel like carrying the weight.
... I think I've got a plan!

 

[mom2rtk]

It sounds like you have a plan! You're way ahead of me. I usually make my decisions the night before when I'm throwing things in the bag.

You're way more trusting than I am though if you'll put your 700-200 (even the f/4) in a suitcase. I would worry about it the entire time. The one mistake I made last time was that I accidentally left my memory card wallets in the packed backpack and I worried about it the entire trip back. Nearly every shot I took on our trip was in a checked bag. I won't do that again.

 

[bob100]

I'm generally not a big prime user, so I'd go with the 24-70 and leave the 45 behind. But I haven't shot with the 45 and can completely understand an irrational attachment to a specific lens.

I finally decided a couple years ago to bring 2 backpacks when I fly somewhere. I have one with wheels that I use on travel day. Huge help! But it's not comfortable to wear on my back for long periods of time, so I put an empty comfortable backpack inside my suitcase to use once I arrive and carry less stuff day to day.

if you're not a prime user then I suppose the 24-70 is your 'wide' lens
lately I've been mostly a prime user
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[mom2rtk]

if you're not a prime user then I suppose the 24-70 is your 'wide' lens
lately I've been mostly a prime user
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

On full frame, 24 is my wide angle. Although the Tokina still works on full frame at 16mm, so that's my "ultra wide angle". What I'm looking for is something faster (but still fairly small and light) to use on dark rides.

 

[SkaGoat]

I have the nifty fifty. And I have the Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4. I have the 6D so need an EF lens.

The Sigma is a stellar lens. But it's a little larger and heavier than I would like right now, but mostly I'd like something a little wider (something 1.8 or 1.4).

The nifty fifty isn't as great, but it sure is a small light package.

Suggestions?

Sigma has both a 20mm f/1.4 and a 24mm f/1.4 in their Art line. Probably doesn't solve the weight issue though.

 

[mom2rtk]

Sigma has both a 20mm f/1.4 and a 24mm f/1.4 in their Art line. Probably doesn't solve the weight issue though.

You know, I probably would enjoy the wider focal lengths of either of those. But you're right, I bet they are just as heavy.

I did end up buying a used Canon 28mm f/1.8 and sold the Sigma. (Yes, it was hard to let go ) But I really think I'm going to be a lot more likely to use this smaller, lighter, wider lens. And the best lens the world does me no good if it's not in my bag.

I have only taken a couple test shots but so far it looks great. I'll try to share more back on this thread when I get a chance to really try it out.

Thanks for everyone's suggestions!

 

[photo_chick]

My daughter really wants me to get a fisheye. That's probably not next on my list, but it's there. It would definitely offer me a new way to photograph the parks.

I love the Samyang/Rokinon fisheye. Amazingly sharp at a great price.