DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

56mm as necessary with new 35mm?

Started Mar 7, 2016 | Discussions thread
slimandy Forum Pro • Posts: 17,161
Re: 56mm as necessary with new 35mm?

bowportes wrote:

slimandy wrote:

Kalinus wrote:

TORN wrote:

I would instead raise the question: Why would you want a 35 if you already have a fast 23 and 56? Well, the answer is most probably because you can...

They all have their own purpose.

I have the 35 but can't get the 23 or the 56 because It's a lot of money for a hobby. In case I had the 23 I would use the 35 instead for an everyday carry because of weight and size. I take my 35 with me in my bag everyday. Carrying the camera at all hours was the purpose when I switch from a big canon dslr. The 23 and 56 are big in my opinion but the 90 it's just a monster in a mirrorless system. For a professional/serious use yes, of course, I'd get them, but in my case, the 35 1.4 is a gem on portraits and general purpose.

I'd recommend the 60 for portrait. The extra reach helps get a nicer perspective and it matches the 56 in terms of sharpness and bokeh, just lagging in max aperture and focus speed. It's good for close-up too of course, and it's cheap.

It may match bokeh, but doesn't begin to match for subject isolation and throwing the background out of focus. I own both and never use the 60mm for portraiture

It does at the same apertures and I'm not likely to use the 56 wide open for portrait because DoF is so shallow. You have the option to if you need to of course.

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
rxb
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow