35mm vs/and 50mm for travel

<p>Good morning<br>

soon i will be travelling to europe and middle est and i was wondering should i get a 50 f1.4 or a 35mm f2<br>

both are canon... or should i get 50 f1.8 and the 35 f2 ... whats ur advise i want to be light and versatile.... is there a huge diffrence in focal lenght that justifies taking both? <br>

thanks in advance<br>

(i have 24-105L and a 5d mk2 i dont want to take a zoom)</p>

 

<p>You can aways crop the 35mm...</p>

<p>I travel with a Fuji X100 with a 35mm equivalent lens and would highly recommend the 35mm F2 with your 5D. There is something about the perspective and angle of view that seems classic. And given the resolution of the 5D you can crop to your heart's content.<br>

I have used the 50 F1.4 on my 5D and sometimes find it restrictive. Excellent sharpness and contrast though at F4+.</p>

<p>Omar</p>

<p>Personally if I could only take one it would be a 35, but I'd be loath to only take one, the 50 is so cheap if you are going to get mugged throw it at them :-).</p>

<p>If you can take both. I find, although there is only 15mm difference, I use both focal lengths very differently. I really like the 35 for environmental portrait and scenery, I really like the 50 for closer portraits.</p>

<p>thank u guys for ur advises... now the dilemma is if i take the 35mm only i can focus better on the composition... but... the 50 is so cheap and can be fun to play with different focal lengths ... should i go only 35mm or should i get a 50 1.8</p>

<p>the reviews of the 35 f2... they do not recommend the lens for full frame:S has anyone used the lens?</p>

<p><a href="http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/canon-switch-update-all-is-well/">This guy </a>is an amazing pro who happily uses the 35 f2 on 5D MkII's.</p>

<p>Zack shoots 35mm prime but he just does people photos<br>

multiples of 2 is a good setup, 24mm with 50mm, 35mm with 85mm.... or 24mm with 85mm<br>

for variety<br>

35mm and 50mm are quite close in perspective, it's not as dramatic as 24mm and 85mm would be -- that's what I would like for lens choices if i wanted a 2 prime setup. then it would depend on the specific lenses. 85mm f/1.8 is good..... 24mm f/2.8 maybe<br>

24mm vs 35mm is noticeable.. but 35mm with 85mm would be good too</p>

<p>Which focal length do you feel most comfortable using? Which one produces the higher proportion of images that you're really happy with? That's the one you should take.</p>

<p>I travel a lot in European cities and usually keep the 35mm on my Canon 5D. Most of my pics are taken with this combo. The nifty-fifty is an excellent lens and cheap so I usually have that somewhere. More recently, like Vincent, I am using the X100 which has such excellent low light capabilities and is lighter than the SLR. My poor wife usually ends up carrying the heavy stuff!</p>

It depends on what you shoot and how close you like to get. For me, when shooting street photography

and street portraiture on my 5DII, it's a 35mm. Not long ago, I blogged about <a href=

"http://allcitysf.com/2011/07/35mm-lens/">the reasons why here</a>.

<p>I tend to find that whether I'm travelling or not, I'm still interested in the same themes and subjects. Probably the best indicator of what lens you should take is the photos you are taking now. Yes, Europe offers some great photo ops, but are you just heading there to get some holiday snaps? In that case the versatility of a zoom might come in handy. If you have specific types of shots you want to get, street portraits, famous buildings, etc. that should help you decide.</p>

<p>It depends on how you see. If the 24-105 is working for you now, that is what I would advise. The 35mm would be my pick for a single non-zoom lens, but yes, I would also take a 50.</p>

<p>You are over reacting, take the zoom that you have. I suspect that you bought the 5D II to make photographs, not take pictures, and the 24-105 will be far more useful than one prime. You will come home with many more successful, and memorable photographs with the zoom.</p>

<p>I recommend a book called "Overcoming Indecisiveness". I think it was published in the 70's, maybe early 80s.</p>

<p>The question arises why one would own a lens like the 24-105L if it's left at home when going on a trip that will offer some unique photo opportunities...</p>

<p>Also, on a trip like that, I would want to take the gear I am most familiar with, because that gives me the best chance of getting the images I want. If you have to ask if the is enough difference between a 35 and 50 to warrant using both, you are obviously not familiar with prime lenses of those focal length. Just saying.</p>

<p>I second Frank's failure to understand not taking only the 24-10L if only one lens is to be taken.<br>

If it's too heavy, get a Rebel and the kit lens.</p>

<p>Later, I think you would look back and wonder why you let a concept of "purity," if that's what it is, make you miss so many opportunities.</p>

<p>I also think it's better to travel with a lens that you are familiar with, especially when it comes to prime lenses. On the other hand, only one prime lens is a bit too constraining. Two or three prime lenses to cover the range of focal lengths you like, might be a better idea. But again, if you are not familiar with them, it is not a good idea. I travelled to Nepal and India for 5 weeks only having 3 prime lenses, and I didn't felt the lack of a zoom lens at all. But if I had left one of these focal lengths at home, I would have definitely missed it (as I'm quite aware of what I like to shoot).</p>

<p>I have all three of the lenses you mention and the same camera. I would be very hesitant to go with only a single prime focal length for travel for a bunch of reasons. First, any image quality improvements are likely to be meaningless since you'll likely be shooting handheld. Second, the larger apertures will not be worth much in low light since you could accomplish the same thing in many, though perhaps not quite all, situations by using IS. Third, the much greater flexibility of the zoom will trump any possible advantages of the prime in the vast majority of travel situations where you must often respond quickly to changing and unexpected circumstances.</p>

<p>I sometimes do street photograph with those two primes, but I virtually always travel with the very zoom that you already own.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>The 35 f2 is reviewed at photozone.de on the Canon full-frame page. The lens actually acquits itself rather well, outperforming or equalling 35mm performance of that focal length on most zooms. My most used lens has been, for years, a 35. I would consider the 50 as well, or the 50mm macro, distortion-free and VERY sharp (and cheap). Depending on your shooting style, you might want the 50mm f 1.4 for blurring out your background, although the 50 mac can do this also, though not at f 1.4. When I go with only two lenses, however, it's the 35 (or 28) and an 85 f1.8. It's my 50 that gets left behind.</p>

<p>You will be much better served taking the 24-105. Taking the either the 35 or 50 you'll regret it for the whole trip. Take them all: the 2 primes have their advantages, but...</p>