Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 25, 2013, 12:39 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default Lens suggestion for New born

Was trying to make a decision between 6D and 5D mark III and i am going with 6D and use a little extra on a couple of lenses or just save the moolah.

Current set up as a 851.2, a 40mm pancake, 70-200. Was wondering if i should get a 100mm IS or a 35mm F1.4sigma.

I have not done this type of photography. So need some advice for a baby on the way and want to revive some photography left in me.
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 25, 2013, 6:25 PM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 10,964
Default

I'll go for the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 because I want one too !!!
Why the 100mm IS when you already have an 85mm and a 70-200?
__________________
photos (ϕοτοσ), light
graphos (γραϕος), painting

Last edited by NHL; May 25, 2013 at 9:00 PM.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2013, 1:15 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

@NHL

The macro just for getting the extra details up close. I had a sigma 150 long time back and sold it along with some of my set up when it started to collect dust.

Sigma is very enticing, wide enough and fast . Not to mention the quality of this lens. 85mm is something terrific that i am unable to let go even during the time of dusting
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2013, 6:55 AM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 10,964
Default

I would stay with the Sigma (it now has IS too) and you'll gain the extra 50mm for extra working distance (a big deal when you have to add lighting), beside the 100mm is too close to your 85mm already. Sigma has been famous for their macros over the OEM's, and their price has now doubled since I got mine, but still on par with Canon.

This guy like me use both systems:
http://danielecuccia.com/sigma-150mm...-macro-review/
__________________
photos (ϕοτοσ), light
graphos (γραϕος), painting

Last edited by NHL; May 26, 2013 at 7:10 AM.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2013, 10:15 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

@NHL - Ok i think i confused myself here. When i meant sigma i meant the 35mm. Baby photography is absolutely new and i am not sure with the FL. 35 or should i go the macro route as some say macro is great for those wonderful details that you can capture in the first few weeks of the baby.

For the macro i am definitely favoring the 150mm having used it for quite some years.
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2013, 12:10 PM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 10,964
Default

Definitely the 35mm f/1.4.

The 100mm will be useless indoor for most shots (beside the slower focus), and you always will have your 85mm when you need thoses extra close ups... How much sharper do you want an 85mm to be? Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 ;)
__________________
photos (ϕοτοσ), light
graphos (γραϕος), painting
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2013, 12:16 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

Thanks NHL. The 35mm focal length is what i am after. 85 is more than sharp enough for me


pooled out the red this time by Heavenhated, on Flickr

I am sticking to the 6d and 35mm at this point. Have another month to play around.
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2013, 1:52 PM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 10,964
Default

Wait you already have the 40mm, Do you really need a 35mm f/1.4 for DOF?
__________________
photos (ϕοτοσ), light
graphos (γραϕος), painting
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 1:25 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

@NHL - Tempted by the DOF. The 40mm is brilliant. No second thought. In fact i am blindly recommending the 40mm over the 50mm F1.8 to anyone in the market for a decently priced prime and one can get it almost at the same price as a new 50mm in used market.

F2.8 is good but not sure if its fast enough and i hate to use a flash. I am also thinking of spending on a softbox(bigger) one than the lens itself to use my existing set up and a FF. Dont ask me why i need FF, i just miss the FF. The prints were looking personlly to me better from the FF. May be its like a placebo effect
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 10:06 PM   #10
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 10,964
Default

Yes it's hard to beat the 40mm for price...
-> You have to pay almost x5 that for the Sigma f/1.4, and even some more for the Canon with less benefits too!
__________________
photos (ϕοτοσ), light
graphos (γραϕος), painting
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
0
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:13 PM.




SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2