Best 45mm Lens for Canon EOS 5D Mark II Full Frame DSLR Camera

[jaydean]

Hey yall, just curious what is a great 35mm prime lense for a 5D Mark II Full Frame Camera

Thanks,

Jay Dean

[jaydean]

Whoops typed 45mm when I meant 35mm

[Waddizzle]

I suppose that would depend upon you definition of best.  Are you looking for best image quality?  Bang for the buck?  Lowest mean time between failures?  Easiest to use?  Weight?

I can tell what seems to be popular, though.  The Canon 35mm f/1.4L USM, the Canon 35mm f/1.4L II USM, the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lenses seem to be the favorites for image quality.

I think Canon has a hole in their lens lineup.  They offer a very thrifty, "nifty fifty" 50mm lens, but no equivalent at 35mm.

[jaydean]

Thanks for the reply! Those are good suggestioins, I checked them out, basically looking for the best image quality and figured high end glass would cost, but not that much..hopefully get what I pay for whichever I decide on.

Thanks again

[jrhoffman75]

Check out the Canon 35mm f/2 IS. If you don't need f/1.4 this lens gets good reviews. 

[jaydean]

---

@jrhoffman75 wrote:

Check out the Canon 35mm f/2 IS. If you don't need f/1.4 this lens gets good reviews. 

---

I went with this lens you suggested and LOVE it, It is perfect for what I am looking for and in a great price range, thank you!

[ebiggs1]

I personally have and use the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art but since Canon has recently updated their 35mm f1.4L, I would probably go with it if I was in the market for one.  Always go Canon if possible.

A 35 is sorta an odd duck.  Its real value comes to folks that have crop sensor cameras.  It acts more like a 'normal' lens on them.  On a FF, or 5D Mk II, it isn't really normal nor WA in that tweener area.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

I personally have and use the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art but since Canon has recently updated their 35mm f1.4L, I would probably go with it if I was in the market for one.  Always go Canon if possible.

A 35 is sorta an odd duck.  Its real value comes to folks that have crop sensor cameras.  It acts more like a 'normal' lens on them.  On a FF, or 5D Mk II, it isn't really normal nor WA in that tweener area.

---

Back in the film days, before zoom lenses wre very common or very good, if one wanted reasonable coverage from WA to telephoto, one tried to accumulate some or all of the following five prime lenses: 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 105 mm, and 135mm. (I couldn't afford them all, so I had the 28, the 50, and the 135.) If you wanted to go whole hog, you added an 85 or 90mm "portrait" lens. The 35 was considered a moderate WA; the 50 was "normal". Of course all of that was on a camera with a 24 x 36mm frame size, the very definition of "full frame".

[Waddizzle]

I used to have a Konica 35mm f/2.8 Hexanon on my old Konica 35mm film camera.  Still do, actually.  But, I used to love the way the pictures turned out.  They always reminded me of postcard photos.  It is what got me started on landscapes and cityscapes, snapping pictures of all the sites I would see during my travels.  Tourist mode, I guess..

[ebiggs1]

FD 7.5mm, 20mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 105 mm, and 135mm, 200mm, 300mm, 500mm, 600mm, 800mm.

Yes I had/have them all.  They collect dust or are curious paper weigths now.  They do a good job!  Nothing blows away.

"I couldn't afford them all ..."

Neither could I but it didn't stop me from getting them.