trading lenses... looking for suggestions

I have two lenses... both good copies and im looking to trade one and keep the other. I would like to get a wide prime (35mm or wider).

the lenses Im looking to trade are the 28-135 and the 24-105. I would be trading them for primes worth roughly the same as the zooms...

so for the 28-135 it would be something like the canon 35 f2, for the L it would be trading for something... like maybe the 35L if I could find a cheap deal on one...

 

Anyway, which way would you go, are there primes I haven't thought of that would be in the same range?

<p>What about the 40/2.8? It may be a half stop slower than the 35/2, but it is an outstanding performer and is very inexpensive.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>“Anyway, which way would you go,”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am assuming these lenses are to be used on a “FF” DLSR?<br>

Choosing ONLY between those two choices you originally posted - I would opt for keeping the 28 to 135 and buying a 35/1.4L.<br>

The rationale for my choice is basically, firstly I assume the zoom lens will be used in mostly good light – so – each of them has IS; is about the same FL range; is about the same aperture speed and when stopped down a tad the difference in Image Quality would about the same.<br>

OVERALL, therefore the DIFFERENCE in the zoom lenses will NOT be as significant as the difference I have seen when using the 35/1.4 against the 35/2 - for either Shallow DoF Portraiture or for Low light work, generally.<br>

I haven't used the 40/2.8 - that's another scenario which is very interesting and you may upon considering it and depending upon YOUR biases you might dismiss all I have written -<br>

Certainly my bias would be to have a fast high quality Prime in my kit, at the expense of the smaller difference that I perceive in those two zooms.</p>

<p>WW<br>

Typo Mark – the 40mm is one stop slower than the 35.</p>

 

<p>I'd keep the 24-105, assuming you're using it on a full frame camera, because it's such a good and versatile walk-around "normal" zoom. Your most commonly used lens should probably be your best lens.</p>

As Sarah says I would keep the 24-105. In terms of what you need it is hard to say but you think you need a faster 35 mm

lens. The suggestion of the 40 F2.8 is not a bad one as it is a reasonable performer and very cheap (I bought it). I am not

a big fan of the EF 35 F2 as I am a bit disappointed with mine. I was a big user of the FD35 F2 and on Leica my 35 F1.4

is probably my most used lens. My disappointment with the 35 F2 is mainly due to its poor performance wide open - my

is really pretty soft until f2.8. Thus I find that it has little to offer that my 24-70 f2.8 does not offer (beyond being cheaper

and smaller) so I tend not to use it. The 40 f2.8 does get used as it is very compact.

<p>Thank you guys for the responses. I will have to look into the 40 2.8 as well... since I don't think that I will notice enough FoV difference between that and a 35. I will continue to think the possibilities over, and let you guys know what I decide on... I suppose I will have to take the new Sigma into consideration as well.</p>