What primes to get on a budget?

<p>Hi, I would like to know what you think about which primes i should get if I have a 40D now (1.6x crop) and possibly upgrading to 5D II or 7D. At first, once my 17-85 was broken, i bought a 85mm 1.8 thinking, from then on, i would just have a prime kit. I realised this is not practical for my style of photography, and what would be best for me would be some decent zooms, paired with a couple good primes for when i have the opportunity to do some artistic shooting. <br>

I dont want to blow big bucks on primes, but i dont want something with poor build quality. Build quality is almost more important for me now over IQ because my 17-85 was in my lowepro backpack and i fell on black ice. My lens broke in the bag even though it was well protected... I know i shouldent be falling with camera equipment but it was well protected so i dont think it should have broken. That said, i dont want to experience this, but i dont really want to just have L glass. <br>

Please let me know what primes you think i should get keeping in mind that i will have zooms and that i allready have the 85, which is pretty much a 135... AND that these primes would be at good focal lenghts on cropped and FF. Thank you!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>What do you consider big bucks? 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 are 2 of the best non L primes but I am not sure either would survive a fall onto black ice. What zooms do you have?</p>

<p>On a budget hmmmm - Canon 50mm f1.4<br>

then you could go with a Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM</p>

<p>Best</p>

<p>First, a decent zoom will likely cost you no more than a set of non-L primes, and will generally provide greater versatility and utility along with excellent image quality. There are a number of such lenses that could be excellent solutions on your cropped sensor camera including a bunch of EFS lenses: 18-55, 15-85, 17-55, your 17-85, etc.</p>

<p>Unless you can articulate a very clear and compelling reason to go with primes instead of zooms, I urge you to consider a zoom first.</p>

<p>Covering this range with primes on crop isn't an easy thing, especially when it comes to the widest focal lengths. Even covering 24mm with inexpensive primes has its challenges, and in the end you probably won't get improved image quality from available primes at that FL. At wider than 24mm, things are even more complicated. </p>

<p>Your 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent lens. The 50mm f/1.4 could be a good lens, and the f/1.8 could work if you want to conserve funds. The EF 35mm f/2 is also a fine lens. But with that set, and even with the addition of the 24mm f/2.8, you are not saving much if any money, you are giving up a great deal of flexibility, and the image quality improvement compared to, say, investing it all in the EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS is questionable.</p>

<p>Lots to think about...</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>Oops forgot to mention - "BUY USED!" - save a buck</p>

<p>If you're going to upgrade to a FF camera like the 5d II then you should be looking at Canon EF lenses as they will work on both FF and APS-C cameras. The EF-S lenses will not work on FF cameras. The EF 50mm f/1.4 is a very good lens and the 50mm f/1.8 ( much cheaper) isn't bad either.</p>

<p>Considering this AND your previous post:<br>

EF35/2 & EF50/1.4, would be a good start.<br>

As you mention specifically the BUILD and also falling on ice - you likely will get comments about the cam in the 50/1.4 and how it will break / misalign, if you drop the lens. <br>

Impact injuries are a bit of luck - good or bad - the lens (or the arm) just hits at the wrong / right spot, has a force of weight above it at the wrong/right angle . . . and those factors decide between a bruise . . . or a break.<br>

I think you are expecting too much: <em>"it was well protected so i dont think it should have broken"</em></p>

<p>WW</p>

Ice is a lot like concrete...

 

Anyway, concerning primes:

 

Focal length should be the first consideration in my opinion.

 

Try to decide in how many steps you'd like to get from zero to 85.

 

If the answer is one I'd say you should look for a lens somewhere around 28mm.

 

If it's two I'd say 24 and 50.

 

Note: crop wide angle primes hardly exist. (most are full frame ultra wides)

 

I really like an EF 28/2.8 on my crop bodies. It's small, cheap, has a nice field of view and very decent image quality.

 

I had a 24/2.8 which is also a fine lens but more expensive and a little more chunky.

 

My 50's (1.8 and 1.4) perform pretty well on a crop body. (I wouldn't drop them on ice though.)

 

I haven't used the 30 and 50 Sigma's nor the EF 35/2 but those are all reputedly fine as well.

 

I hope this helps,

 

Matthijs.

<p>Keep your 85/1.8 and get a 35/2. After that, buy whatever zoom you want, but only once you know what you're missing. You might want an ultra-wide (10-22) or an all-inclusive (15-85, 18-200) or a solid standard (17-40, Tamron 17-50/2.8). Proceed slowly and save bucks.</p>

<p>Nick, I'm with G Dan on this. You really need to look at your intended uses here. There are folks in the prime only camp, and the generally wider aperture approach has merit, especially when shooting in low light. I believe the hardcore, prime only line of thinking has roots in the days of film when most zoom lenses didn't deliver as promised, with a notable exception here and there.<br /><br />Then there are those of us that see a lens as a means to an end, a tool. Whether it's a good zoom or prime doesn't really matter, as long as it will get the job done. The newer Canon zooms (all I'm really familiar with) can deliver images difficult to tell from those taken with primes. (unless we're talking the ultra expensive L primes and their exceptional light gathering capabilities and resultant bokeh) These should not be overlooked and most definitely should be first on the list of anyone on a tighter budget as they offer range, ease of use and deliver.<br>

<br />I'm thinking you should take a hard look at the 24-70 2.8. It's a little pricey as a single lens goes, but it's not all that expensive if you consider what it replaces. (24, 35, 50 on FF and 35ish, 50, 85, 90, 100 giving consideration for the 1.6 crop factor of your 40/7D). I have the 24-105 for similar reasons, but having read your prior thread- I believe the 2.8 24-70 will suit you better as a first choice and compliments your 85 1.8 well.</p>

<p>Two ways to think about it.</p>

<p>1. You buy decent glass with a warranty, if it breaks, you get a free replacement. I've dropped a 135 f2L, hard. It survived. You get what you pay for.</p>

<p>2. You buy something super cheap on ebay, a prime in M42 mount, plus the $20 adapter. You buy more than one copy. When it breaks (if it does, as many are made of metal and tend to survive), you chuck it and pull another from the bag. You lose auto-focus, but if you only care about decent glass cheap...</p>

>>> Please let me know what primes you think i should get...

 

Huh?

 

How can a recommendation be made without having any idea what you like to shoot?

<p>24 f2.8<br />50 f1.8<br />85f1.8 </p>