Pietro Marchesi
Forum Enthusiast
Very true, lenses keep their value over time and I love using fast lenses but on DSLRs the better they get, the bigger and heavier they are becoming too. The 35f/1.4 II is nearly as big and heavy as my 24-70f/2.8L II.I have used both. 5DIV is a better camera, but you will have much more diversity of photographic options getting the two lenses. Its also a much better investment over time.Is the difference in resolution, better AF and frame rate worth it? Or should I buy more lenses and keep my soon 5 year old but still very good 6D?
If I stay with my 6D I can buy a 35f/1.4L II and a 100f/2.8L Macro IS instead of a 5D IV.
I mainly shoot to document my family, my kids sports. I shoot a lot on family trips, especially on our vacations abroad. I only shoot stills.
My current gear: 6D, 16-35f/4L IS, 24-70f/2.8L II, 70-200f/4L IS. I will soon add a longer lens. Eider a 100-400f/4.5-5.6L IS II or a 400f/5.6L for some occasional wildlife and birds.
Since you do not have a fast prime the 35L II will open up for an entire new world of low light photography and also allow shallow DOF shots. Its a lens you can probably use 15 years from now with super results.
Also, the Macro lens will let you do - well macro! For some people its a whole new ballgame that opens up.
For all its bells and whistles the 5DIV will only produce marginally better shots than the 6D under certain condition. The two lenses will let you do take lots of shots with the 6D you could never get close to with the 5DIV (without adding new lenses).
A question, why did you sell your Sigma 50f/1.4 Art?