What between a 35mm 1.4 and 105 VR 2.8?

Started May 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
jsr4522 Regular Member • Posts: 110
Re: What between a 35mm 1.4 and 105 VR 2.8?

Two questions to ask yourself:

1. In looking at your portfolio, what are the 3 focal lengths you used most often and what are the percentages they represented in your collection of images?

2. You mentioned that you were concerned about stopping down lenses.  What do you value more - fast glass for low light shooting / subject isolation, or flexibility?

If you want reasonably priced fast glass, then go with the 85 1.8 or 50 1.8.  Both produce great images with great subject isolation (if that is what you want).  I have shot both and they are light weigh and easy to travel with.

The 60mm macro is great on DX.  I use it for underwater photography and like it a lot.  Its sharp and fast focusing in low light.  Above water, I find myself reaching for the 105 or the sigma 150 if I am shooting macro.

The new 24-85 seems to be getting great reviews and is a great focal range.  If you want a general walk around for shooting in good light or when you don't need a great deal of subject isolation - this would be my choice.

ne beginner wrote:

The Sigma 35 1.4 is a great walk around lens.  This one is a keeper.  I have a 105 VR coming in to replace a defective refurb I just sent back. I like this lens for reach as a short general purpose tele, which is fast enough to be used indoors at events, and can do macro.

So what goes in between?

- Is a 50mm is too close to the 35mm?  Just a few feet?

- Is 85mm too close to the 105 at just 15mm?

- I'm thinking the 60mm f/2.8G ED Macro: 25mm past the 25; 45mm short of the 105.

- Or a cheap zoom like the 24-85 VR for snap shots, beach, etc.

Does anyone use this setup?  How about the 60 as a general use lens?

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow