# 35mm 1.4 vs. 50mm 1.2: aps-c upgrade



## SJTstudios (Nov 21, 2012)

If I were to upgrade to a 7d or the future 7d replacement what should I upgrade to for my standard lens.
I currently have a 50mm 1.8 and a 28mm 1.8. And I want to upgrade to some l glass. I will give my 50mm 1.8 to my brother who is beginning with his rebel. The question is, should I keep the 28mm and get the 50mm 1.2, making a 40mm and 80mm equivalent. Or should I sell the 28 and get the 35mm 1.4, which will make a 55mm equivalent. These are my options for portraits. I have a wide angle, and a telephoto already, so these are portrait specific.
Or, could this be an easy sacrifice of $500 by selling the 28, and getting the canon 50mm 1.2 along with the new sigma 35mm 1.4


----------



## Random Orbits (Nov 22, 2012)

If you have your heart set on the 50 1.2, then get it with the Sigma 35 f/1.4. According to LensRentals preliminary tests, the Sigma 35 f/1.4 performs better than the 35L. When Canon comes out with a better 35L II, it probably would be better than Sigma's, but it will also cost a lot more.


----------



## Julie G. (Nov 22, 2012)

I agree. If you really want the 50 F1.2 and not the 50 F1.4, sell the 28mm and get the Sigma 35mm F1.4 along with the 50L. You can also get a used 35L if you get a good deal.The Canon 35L is a great lens, I love it. 

In MY case: I got mine for 5000 nok/875$. Compared to the new sigma at 6999 nok/1200$, it felt like a good deal. And it is a great, sharp lens so for my part it was a no-brainer


----------



## Eugene (Nov 22, 2012)

Julie G. said:


> Compared to the new sigma at 6999 nok/1200$, it felt like a good deal.



The new sigma is $899! 
I'd recommend the 35L, tried on a 60D and it was brilliant. 50L works great for parties, portraits and such.
I'd wait until the sigma gets more reviews.


----------



## Julie G. (Nov 22, 2012)

Eugene said:


> Julie G. said:
> 
> 
> > Compared to the new sigma at 6999 nok/1200$, it felt like a good deal.
> ...



Yeah, but I live in norway, so the price is higher. Just tried to write down how I decided.


----------



## sandymandy (Nov 22, 2012)

Julie G. said:


> Yeah, but I live in norway, so the price is higher. Just tried to write down how I decided.



But u also have higher income in Norway than most european countries, so its the same 

Id also say get a 35mm. Im using one on my DSLR and its kinda like a 50mm on FF and nearly always stays on.


----------



## Kristofgss (Nov 22, 2012)

I know it's not L glass, but the EF 40 F2.8 is very cheap (less than 250 euro) and sharp. That one is on my 7D most of the time because it's sharp, fast and compact (My second favourite is the 50 F1.4) It might also help you get a feel for the focus by wire which the 50 F1.2 has. The 50mm really is what you see is what you get on it, going below 40 for portraits will introduce deformations when you get close to the person whose portrait you take.


----------



## Random Orbits (Nov 22, 2012)

Kristofgss said:


> I know it's not L glass, but the EF 40 F2.8 is very cheap (less than 250 euro) and sharp. That one is on my 7D most of the time because it's sharp, fast and compact (My second favourite is the 50 F1.4) It might also help you get a feel for the focus by wire which the 50 F1.2 has. The 50mm really is what you see is what you get on it, going below 40 for portraits will introduce deformations when you get close to the person whose portrait you take.



The 50 f/1.2 is not focus-by-wire.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Nov 22, 2012)

You might rethink the whole deal with a crop body. Consider the 24mm f1.4 in combo with the 
50mm f1.4. Not a whole lot of money difference than the 35/50 1.2 combo, but much more
flexibility. Later on add the 85mm f1.2 and you have "everything" you might ever need.


----------



## Kristofgss (Nov 22, 2012)

Random Orbits said:


> The 50 f/1.2 is not focus-by-wire.



Whoops, learned something new today, it's apparently only the 85L which has that.


----------

