walk around prime lens for canon 7D mark ii

hi,

I have a bit of a nagging feeling about a purchase and I'm dying for some advise or feedback

i traded my 50mm f1.4 in and bought the sigma 30mm f1.4, i found the 50mm a bit to narrow on my 7D

i was originally looking at the canon 24mm or 28mm f2.8 is usm, but i have the 17-55mm f2.8 so technically 24mm f2.8 is already in my gear and so i convinced myself that the sigma having 1.4 would be nicer because of the option going all the way to 1.4

however when testing it yesterday and walking around in the city i found that i almost aways had to walk back (IF the possibility was there) to get everything in frame

does anyone has the 17-55 f2.8 and 24mm f2.8? is the 24mm f2.8 worth to sacrifice optional bokeh?

i also must add i prefer not to use the 17-55 i love the IQ but the lens creeping and the 'bad' plastic feeling it has is a bit of a let down for me

overall i would use the lens for evening walks and later this summer also for landscape and star photography (so yeah i imagine the IS will be quite nice)

hope to hear your thoughts

I have the 30/1.4 and 17-50 OS and have been struggling in how to get a faster wider prime too. It would seem the best options are the Sigma 18-35/1.8, 20/1.4 art and 24/1.4 art. The Canon 24/1.4 L II is there too but not as good as the Sigma Art version at twice the price. There is also the new Tokina 14-20/2.0.

I have the Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art. It is a great lens. I started with the Canon 28 1.8 but also found it was too narrow in certain situations. The 18-35 offers the flexibility of a zoom with the optical quality of primes. I would seriously consider it if I were you. It is on my 70D 80% of the time. Its price should be close to the Sigma Art primes in the same focal range. Main drawback is the size and weight, but I quickly learned to deal with it given the wonderful IQ it delivers.

There might be other good solutions though.

Good luck!

EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM

Go pancake or go home...

thanks for the input guys

the sigma 18-35 was also in my consideration i was almost tempted to think about replacing my 17-55 along and buy the sigma 18-35 f1.4  and a second hand canon 24-105 f4 L is usm i tried at the local photography shop

almost.....

however i will go and swap my sigma 30mm f1.4 back in and buy the 20mm f1.4.

especially because i will be going home to italy in a few weeks and that is in the alps so a lot of landscape and star photography in the first place and at the endow  the summer add the 35mm f1.4 intended as a 50mm-isch fullframe portrait lens (i sold my canon 50mm f1.4 because on my 7D mark ii i find it a little to narrow) for when i go on tour with a orchestra and have the chance to shoot some nice candid portraits

sound reasonable right? i hope...

also added benefit is the sigma 18-35mm f1.4 is apparently no good on a full frame and also the 30mm f1.4 so that would be a problem in the eventuality

thanks guys

I am not sure if I am following you correctly but the 18-35/1.8 not 1.4 is a great choice but I don't really see owning that and the 20/1.4 art. In fact the 20/1.4 suffers badly from coma which turns the stars in the corners of the frame into little flying saucers. The 18-35/1.8 performs better there. If you really want a good starscape lens, the Tokina 11-20/2.8 and 14-20/2.0 are probably the best options for crop now.

I have a 24-105 that I use on crop, but I bought it before the 18-135 STM and now the nUSM versions came out. I plan on buying a 6D2 or a used 5D3 once the 6D2 is out depending on specs but if I were staying on crop for sure, I would get one of the STM versions of the 18-135 now and trade in the 24-105.

So I think 11-20/2.8, 18-35, and 18-135 STM would make a great crop kit on the wide side. Add some EF tele lenses to complete the long and you are set.

Hi!

I am not sure to fully understand your post but if you meant having Sigmas 20 1.4 and 35 1.4 instead of 18-35 1.8 I think it is a bit overkill since each of the f/1.4 prime is more expensive than the 18-35.

But, the 18-35 is for APS-C only, so if you plan to move to FF it!s maybe not the best choice. It also depends on how much important is having f/1.4 over f/1.8...

I cannot comment about the other topics as I don't have experience.

Good luck!

the option having 10-18mm + 18-35mm f1.8 + 24-105mm f4 +70-200mm f4

was my dream kit for a moment but im still in doubt i loved the few times i used the 50mm f1.4 at its best i made some very proud worthy shots, so i prime will come in play at some point

but for now if i would go like this it would certainly eliminate the 20 f1.4, I agree on that

yes i realise its a bit overkill, but it would probably replace the 17-55mm f2.8 too

and i probably won't take them both at the same time on trips

20mm nature oriented trips

35mm group travel oriented trips, these are usually tours with orchestras where my foremost priority is playing cello, and our free time is usually late in the day or early morning so the f1.4 would probably be a big deal by then because of light conditions