Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 or 35mm f1.2

[colonel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, I know, completely different lenses, but hear me out !

I shoot street, travel, architecture, interior spaces and occasionally landscape.

I am amateur and enjoy taking pictures.

At the moment I only have one L lens for my S1, the Sigma 45mm

Currently I have a budget of around £1k, just for one more lens effectively

The way I see the difference is:

24-70mm:

1. Flexibility for different situations

2. Travel

3. Practical

4. Speaks to the head

35mm:

1. Something special, especially wide open

2. 35mm is my favorite and most used FL

3. Great for night/low light shooting which I do alot of

4. Speaks to the heart

So the choice is between something special or something practical.

I will buy another lens but not for a 6 months or so

What do you guys think, espcially if you have both

rgds

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[iiiNelson]

1 hour ago, colonel said:

Yes, I know, completely different lenses, but hear me out !

I shoot street, travel, architecture, interior spaces and occasionally landscape.

I am amateur and enjoy taking pictures.

At the moment I only have one L lens for my S1, the Sigma 45mm

Currently I have a budget of around £1k, just for one more lens effectively

The way I see the difference is:

24-70mm:

1. Flexibility for different situations

2. Travel

3. Practical

4. Speaks to the head

35mm:

1. Something special, especially wide open

2. 35mm is my favorite and most used FL

3. Great for night/low light shooting which I do alot of

4. Speaks to the heart

So the choice is between something special or something practical.

I will buy another lens but not for a 6 months or so

What do you guys think, espcially if you have both

rgds

Personally I’d actually choose to go a completely different way and get the Panasonic 24-105/4. It’s such a versatile lens and covers a very useful range. As a bonus you can focus really close without really needing to own a separate macro lens as it give 1:2 reproduction. I haven’t found the constant f/4 aperture to be an issue either with the lowlight capability of these cameras. Another lens I’d look at is the Sigma DG DN 14-24/2.8. It’s an excellent lens and provides a different focal length from what you own already. Additionally if shooting video in super 35mm then it can act as a “21-36mm” lens. With the 24-70/2.8 you’re obviously gaining a stop of light but losing the additional 35mm on the long end or the UWA on the short end if you chose the 14-24. With the 35/1.2, it’s pretty close in focal length to the 45mm lens that you already own so it’s the last choice I’d make unless I was planning on selling the 45mm lens. All are excellent lenses and you really can’t go wrong with either. If you are set on a Sigma though I’d probably go with the 24-70/2.8 but your duplicating the aperture of your 45mm lens.

[Ingo]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb colonel:

... enjoy taking pictures ....

... 35mm is my favorite and most used FL ...

.... Speaks to the heart ....

 

Isn't that the answer?

[Mick H]

On 5/20/2020 at 7:34 AM, colonel said:

Yes, I know, completely different lenses, but hear me out !

I shoot street, travel, architecture, interior spaces and occasionally landscape.

I am amateur and enjoy taking pictures.

At the moment I only have one L lens for my S1, the Sigma 45mm

Currently I have a budget of around £1k, just for one more lens effectively

The way I see the difference is:

24-70mm:

1. Flexibility for different situations

2. Travel

3. Practical

4. Speaks to the head

35mm:

1. Something special, especially wide open

2. 35mm is my favorite and most used FL

3. Great for night/low light shooting which I do alot of

4. Speaks to the heart

So the choice is between something special or something practical.

I will buy another lens but not for a 6 months or so

What do you guys think, espcially if you have both

rgds

Hi, I understand your dilemma.  I have found that my favorite FL range is 35-40mm so I acquired the 35mm f/1.2 Art.  It's a fabulous lens and offers relatively close focus as well.  Wide open is other-worldly good.  I have the SL 24-90 that I got with my SL and it is versatile with stellar IQ.  If possible, I would get both the 24-70 2.8 and 35 1.2.  Consider selling the 45 if necessary to speed up the acquisition of the second lens.

I have 105 1.4 Art for longer portrait work.  The 35 1.2 produces sharp environmental portraits wide open and works great with HSS flash.  Shooting at f/1.2 is fun and I get useable results.  Maybe consider getting the 35 1.2 first and have fun.  Add the 24-70 later.  

Edited May 22, 2020 by Mick H