Need help deciding on next affordable prime to get?

M500

After using my EF 50mm F1.8 II for about 2 weeks I found myself completely fallen in love with it. But at 50mm on 40D its a bit hard to shoot in my house as I don't have enough distant to do a full body shots. I have a Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF] but I found myself prefer the picture from my 50mm f1.8II. Here are the list of prime I'm researching on and from the reviews they all seem to be fairly good so I'm confused. Please let me decide which one to get and why, thank you.

EF 24mm f2.8
EF 28mm f1.8 USM
EF 28mm f2.8
EF 35mm f2
Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM
Tokina AT-X 17 AF PRO 17mm f/3.5

TaDa

Sigma 30mm 1.4.

One of the most incredible pieces of glass that I've gotten my paws on to. The thing is tack sharp, color and contrast are insane, and it's built really well with Sigma's version of USM, HSM, which allows it to focus very quickly.

As soon as I got it back from repair, I took around 200 shots. I sold my Canon 50mm 1.4 the next day. That's the one caveat about this lens. There are known issues with it being soft wide open and having the tendency to back-focus. I took it to the Sigma repair facility and they calibrated it for me in a half hour. Now the thing is AWESOME.

M500

TaDa,
Have you own EF 28mm f1.8 USM and how does it stack up against Sigma 30mm? Thank you.

TaDa wrote:

Sigma 30mm 1.4.

One of the most incredible pieces of glass that I've gotten my paws on to. The thing is tack sharp, color and contrast are insane, and it's built really well with Sigma's version of USM, HSM, which allows it to focus very quickly.

As soon as I got it back from repair, I took around 200 shots. I sold my Canon 50mm 1.4 the next day. That's the one caveat about this lens. There are known issues with it being soft wide open and having the tendency to back-focus. I took it to the Sigma repair facility and they calibrated it for me in a half hour. Now the thing is AWESOME.

Manfr3d

M500 wrote:

After using my EF 50mm F1.8 II for about 2 weeks I found myself completely fallen in love with it. But at 50mm on 40D its a bit hard to shoot in my house as I don't have enough distant to do a full body shots. I have a Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF] but I found myself prefer the picture from my 50mm f1.8II. Here are the list of prime I'm researching on and from the reviews they all seem to be fairly good so I'm confused. Please let me decide which one to get and why, thank you.

EF 24mm f2.8
EF 28mm f1.8 USM
EF 28mm f2.8
EF 35mm f2
Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM
Tokina AT-X 17 AF PRO 17mm f/3.5

I think the Canon 28mm/1.8 is the perfect match for the
50mm/1.8. The Sigma 30mm/1.4 is also very good but
a little bit longer and a tad more expensive. Since you
already have the Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 it doesn't make
much sense to buy a fixed focal 2.8 lens which won't
be better from an image quality standpoint than your
zoom.

TaDa

Manfr3d wrote:

I think the Canon 28mm/1.8 is the perfect match for the
50mm/1.8. The Sigma 30mm/1.4 is also very good but
a little bit longer and a tad more expensive. Since you
already have the Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 it doesn't make
much sense to buy a fixed focal 2.8 lens which won't
be better from an image quality standpoint than your
zoom.

Ive never owned the 28mm. Just the 50mm and then sold it for the Sigma 30mm.

BenA2

Sigma 30
Have you seen this thread?

I'm personally an outspoken proponent of the Sigma 30 f/1.4 as a low-light, indoor lens. But, I have the same experience as many others. I needed to send it into Sigma to get it to focus accurately, which they did for free.

swintonphoto

I would also consider the Sigma 24mm 1.8. I want one. See this review:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/325/superspeed-sigma-trio.html

Popphoto said this about it and the 20mm and 28mm:
"These three lenses provide superior picture-taking performance at their respective focal lengths. That this high level has been achieved at such extremely fast apertures is outstanding! We have no reservations in recommending any of them to pros or critical amateurs who need a really fast wide-angle lens."

ban25

Don't get the Sigma. I had the 30/1.4 and it was terrible -- very soft, poor focus, and poor operation on the camera. It generally didn't work in drive mode, and the focus confirmation dot did not work. I sold it a few months ago.

Stick to Canon glass and you'll be fine.

TaDa

ban25 wrote:

Don't get the Sigma. I had the 30/1.4 and it was terrible -- very soft, poor focus, and poor operation on the camera. It generally didn't work in drive mode, and the focus confirmation dot did not work. I sold it a few months ago.

Stick to Canon glass and you'll be fine.

You had a bad copy my friend. Can happen with Canon glass as well

rpcrowe

The 28mm f/1.8 is a great match...
I have a Sigma 28mm f/1.8 and that focal length and aperture is a great match for the 50mm f/1.8 (I have a Mark-I). What you will have is a moderately wide normal lens (44.4mm equivalent) and a short telephoto in the 50mm (80mm equivalent).

However, I have not used either since I bought my 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens. That lens is great for low light and is really a honey!

Pindy

I borrowed a 30mm for a few days and I quite liked it, but it didn't make me fall in love with it. After that I owned an EF 28mm f/1.8 USM for 2 days, but was totally unsatisfied with it; bad contrast wide open (wide open being the reason I bought it—not good) and the worst CA of any lens I'd ever used. Having said that, I've seen fine photos taken with both of these. I hear the 28mm f/2.8 is a better optic. the 35mm f/2 is well liked too.

Manfr3d

Pindy wrote:

I borrowed a 30mm for a few days and I quite liked it, but it didn't make me fall in love with it. After that I owned an EF 28mm f/1.8 USM for 2 days, but was totally unsatisfied with it; bad contrast wide open (wide open being the reason I bought it—not good) and the worst CA of any lens I'd ever used. Having said that, I've seen fine photos taken with both of these. I hear the 28mm f/2.8 is a better optic. the 35mm f/2 is well liked too.

The 28/1.8 has the well known weakness to perform badly at everything
but close focusing distances. Meaning at infinity its horrible but quite good
close up. Of course the 24mm/1.4 L is much better.