Re: Best value EF lenses for Canon. Are premium primes worth it?
Sayer wrote:
I like the versatility of a 24-70 2.8 especially something that has VR built in like the Tamron, but curious and would like to ask any of you who have the tried or owned the 50mm 1.2 prime and zoom on whether its really worth the cost if I don't care about 1.2 bokeh. Most of the time with decent lighting indoors I have found 2.8 to be enough and prefer it for focusing, otherwise I'm shooting with flash. In some cases indoors with limited light I may shoot at 1.8 but but for that I would think a regular nifty fifty or the typical budget 1.8 primes would be sufficient.
Given that you "don't care about f/1.2 bokeh" and you "have found 2.8 to be enough and prefer it for focusing," the value of the super-large aperture lenses for you is extremely doubtful.
The main value that such lenses provide are the two things that you say you don't need or won't use.
There is sometimes a presumption that because a lens costs way more than alternatives and/or that because it has a larger maximum aperture that it must be "the best lens" it its class. It is not that simple, and "the best" for your photography is usually a balance of factors including cost, size, performance, etc.
I'll be honest with you. Unless you are doing something very specific with your photography that you believe requires the unusual features of unusual lenses, you'll almost always be just as well of with non-exotic lenses.
Dan
Dec 19, 2020 at 10:43 AM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #15438948 « Best value EF lenses for Canon. Are premium primes worth it? »
