Best way to fill 35mm - 100mm gap?

P

Phal

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,297
Name
Etienne
Edit My Images
Yes
I love my 18-35mm Sigma lens but despite the fact it's on a crop sensor, I don't quite get the reach I want or need at times. My next lens is my 100mm F2.8L which is also a favourite of mine but that does leave a gap.

The reason this gap is there is because it's not a massively used focal range for me but it would be nice to have something there. I've also got a gap between 100mm and 200mm but again this isn't used much (even less than 35-100mm).

I want something with good IQ but I also don't see the point in spending too much since it's not used all that much. How would people fill that gap? A few primes? Is there a good zoom I'm not remembering that's cheap (24-105 never struck me as great)?
 
Unfortunately cheap and good image quality doesn't usually come together with lenses, especially in the range you are looking at. I suspect a good 70-200 would suit your needs, Tamron seems to offer a good version in different fittings that is considerably cheaper than the maker's own versions.
HTH.
 
How about a 50mm 1.8? Quite cheap, longer than 35mm and will provide a stop-gap, and you can crop for something you would want to shoot between 50mm and 100mm. Not really worth spending a lot if you don't really use that focal lengtt range.
 
50 1.8 and 85 1.8 look like the best options, or get a 70-200 f4/2.8
 
Unlike <35mm, the field of view doesn't change as much when you go above 50mm. The perspective between 50mm to 100mm doesn't change as much as 18mm to 35mm. (perspective as in stuff you get in the background given the same subject framing)

As mentioned, 50mm f1.8 is great gap filler for you. Personally full frame equivalent of 35mm and 85mm is all I need, along with UWA (I use 10-24mm and 60mm on my Fuji crop mirrorless). So in your case on crop sensor, I'd say 50mm f1.8 fits in well which is cheap and wonderful.

Don't look at it from a numbers perspective. This isn't maths. You can move forward or backwards to get the framing you want. The only reason why you might want different focal length is due to perspective. Wide angles produce different feel to images compare to telephoto, it's nice having both. But just wanting to fill a gap for number's sake is pointless.
 
I think I should have mentioned, I intend on getting a 70-200mm F2.8mk2 in the future but I'm busy paying off my last lot of purchases currently so this is why I'm trying to source some kind of stopgap.

DG Phototraining said:
Cheap?

Walk forwards with the 35mm end, walk back from the 100mm end, or crop - you've probably got more pixels than you need anyway - HTH :)

Dave
Click to expand...

Walking? Who knew :P

Using my 18-35mm as much as I do, I definitely have to move around but that's not always possible.

wuyanxu said:
Unlike <35mm, the field of view doesn't change as much when you go above 50mm. The perspective between 50mm to 100mm doesn't change as much as 18mm to 35mm. (perspective as in stuff you get in the background given the same subject framing)

As mentioned, 50mm f1.8 is great gap filler for you. Personally full frame equivalent of 35mm and 85mm is all I need, along with UWA (I use 10-24mm and 60mm on my Fuji crop mirrorless). So in your case on crop sensor, I'd say 50mm f1.8 fits in well which is cheap and wonderful.

Don't look at it from a numbers perspective. This isn't maths. You can move forward or backwards to get the framing you want. The only reason why you might want different focal length is due to perspective. Wide angles produce different feel to images compare to telephoto, it's nice having both. But just wanting to fill a gap for number's sake is pointless.
Click to expand...

Now you've said it, I guess this is the kind of thing I wanted to hear. A 50mm prime wouldn't be too expensive and would provide a decent enough change in FOV from 35mm. It's also a fairly small lens which never hurts.

GreenNinja67 said:
35-70 f2.8 like the lens I use.

Very useful range
Click to expand...

I read this and wondered whether you were FF...

GreenNinja67 said:
Ah, I missed the bit about you using crop sensor.

My mistake.
Click to expand...

Then I read this hehe :)
 
Just went to check 50mm F1.8 STM prices and saw the 55-250mm STM beforehand... I might go check scores to see how the IQ compares but that would be a fairly flexible lens too.

The slower aperture wouldn't usually be a problem for what I want it for but I could probably make use of that F1.8 aperture... Hmmm decisions decisions!

*edit* Think the 50mm seems better for me. It's cheaper/sharper and I don't think I'll need much else focal length wise.
 
Last edited:
Phal said:
This would be nice but they're not that cheap.
Click to expand...

Tamron do a 28-75mm f2.8 a fair bit cheaper than most 24-70's, i had one during my brief foray into FF, it's comparable to the Tamron 17-55mm f2.8 IMO
 
Last edited:
Yup a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is a good shout. Well under £200 second hand and on crop you won't notice the vignetting being so heavy like you would on FF. I bought one when I went FF but a week later got a deal on the Canon L, so I've not really used it in anger but more than happy with the quality in that week.
 
NIkkor 18-70 kit lens.

However, that would require a complete change of system so probably not the easiest solution!
 
Nod said:
NIkkor 18-70 kit lens.

However, that would require a complete change of system so probably not the easiest solution!
Click to expand...

Tbh I'm not sure a kit lens would cut it for the IQ I want :( Nor would switching to Nikon lol

Tamron 60mm macro is interesting

*edit* looked at the sharpness scores and the 50mm STM seems better than the 60mm.
 
Last edited:
It was a slightly tongue in cheek suggestion, although the Nikkor 18-70 kit lens is way better than the other offerings of a similar range and price point. The obvious answer to fill that sort of gap would be a 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom which would cover most of the gap and deliver plenty of IQ. Not cheap but great quality rarely is.
 
If you don't use the focal length 35-100 much, then a simple and cheap 50mm prime would seem like way forward. If you used the focal length a lot then an expensive 50mm prime (like the new sigma ART) would seem sensible.
 
dandeakin said:
If you don't use the focal length 35-100 much, then a simple and cheap 50mm prime would seem like way forward. If you used the focal length a lot then an expensive 50mm prime (like the new sigma ART) would seem sensible.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the choice. I've checked to see how the sharpness scores compare on DxO and the 50mm STM seems to hold up very well. For the money it seems a no - brainer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top