p.1 #8 · would you rather have a 35l and 50 1.4 or
I have a Sigma 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.4 and would like to add the 35 f/1.4 (are you listening Sigma) but worry one of the 35 or 50 might not get as much use then. BTW the Siggies work really well with 5D III and spot AF, dead-on target nearly 100%.
p.1 #10 · would you rather have a 35l and 50 1.4 or
The Rokinon 35 is better than the Rokinon 85 in every way, IMO.
Smoother focusing ring, better color performance. Only downside: more than twice the
price.
p.1 #11 · would you rather have a 35l and 50 1.4 or
Canon 35mm f1.4L and a Canon 85mm f1.8. I really don't use the 50mm focal length much. The 35L is worth the coin, and the 85mm f1.8 is probably the best deal in a lens around. A far better deal than the "nifty fifty" and the 50mm f/1.4 in my opinion.
p.1 #13 · would you rather have a 35l and 50 1.4 or
Michaelparris wrote:
50 1.2 and the 35 f2....
Just curious
I asked myself that a while back and chose the 35mm 1.4L and the 50mm f1.4. The thing is yes, the 50 1.2L is slightly better than the 50 1.4 but the 35mm 1.4L is better than ALL of them
p.1 #14 · would you rather have a 35l and 50 1.4 or
35L and 50/1.4 for me. I've been using both for years without issues, and while the 50/1.4 seemingly has a bad rep, I'll bet the actual failure rate is quite small compared to the countless lenses they've sold all these years.
p.1 #16 · would you rather have a 35l and 50 1.4 or
dcains wrote:
35L and 50/1.4 for me. I've been using both for years without issues, and while the 50/1.4 seemingly has a bad rep, I'll bet the actual failure rate is quite small compared to the countless lenses they've sold all these years.
Same for me. I've been completely happy with the 50mm f/1.4. If I had to pick one lens, that'd be it. I've had the 35L but honestly, could take it or leave it. I just never really found a use for wide angle *and* very shallow depth of field. I have the Nikon version right now but if I switch back to Canon, probably won't both replacing it.
