kja

Nailed them both! That didn't take long

I don't think the 20 and 30 are too close in range to have both. Although I may not be the best person to ask because if I want a lens, I buy it :D Can't wait to see you play with the 20! I have to be honest, it's a lens that I think about adding now and again even with everything I already have LOL

Great to see you positing, gap! On your camera, make sure you have your histogram turned on. That's the little graph on the lcd screen - that will give you a better idea of how your exposure is than looking at the photo on the screen will. If you can, turn on your blinkies so that the totally black and totally blown areas of a photo will blink to alert you - sometimes you WANT those areas, but sometimes you don't. Remember, there's no one proper exposure - whatever you like is correct

Woohoo, CC Hope you love it!

Why mess with what's working LOL? I think your diary of the day is great - who cares if a shot is technically correct or taken with a million dollar rig? It happened in your day, you're grateful for the moment and we're more than happy to do the voyeur thing to such a photogenic family and good eye for interesting ways of seeing. Just mho of course.

Love the variety of your shots, tlc And huga - last shot of Sid in the sun? OMG squeeee!

Go the siggy 20mm - it'll get you what you want and save you some dosh ;)

174/365 Mom's bed, Puppeh's bed...it's all the same. Canon 1DIII, Canon 24L 1.4 II, ISO400, 1/40, f1.4, shaded window light behind camera thanks, tlc! I'm probably not here daily but I'm trying when I can Love the kitteh!

Just for the hell of it - here's one with the 24L today Tilly sleeping on my bed 1/30, f2.8, ISO 640, window light

I'd say the Canon 24 will do that But it's stupidly expensive so I continue to suggest the Sigma 20 as an option. I wouldn't go longer than 24. Does it have to be a prime? I get the appeal (kind of) but opening up to something like the Sigma 17-70, Canon 17-55 2.8 or Sigma 17-50 2.8 will give you more room to experiment while giving you the desired effect, too. In the end, it always comes down to that point where you have to stop overthinking and just bite the bullet and do it

Always happy to help people spend money I don't think you'll be disappointed with this one.

sorry, no, not normal. I have several types of cards from three or four manufacturers that take routine abuse and use daily (or almost daily) and I've never broken one. Some of my cards are several years old. I do the same as you - into camera, out of camera, into card reader, out of card reader, into camera, repeat... The upside is that SD cards are dirt cheap now

"best" is subjective. If you want a lot of distortion head to a fisheye or as wide as possible and put your subjects on the edge. Any fast prime and some distance behind your subject will give you the blur in the background when you shoot close to wide open. Can you rent? Or borrow? Although I understand wanting new gear, if you aren't sure what you are trying to achieve, making the right choice is very hard and so far you're just a bit vague on the specifics. I'd still say head to the 20 Sigma for the most distortion possibilities or the 30 Sigma for the potential for some (you need to work at it a bit more with this focal length) but a very usable lens. None of the lenses in between really sound like they give you what you want and are also more expensive (I adore Canon's 24L but it's about three times your budget and after trying, I think the Siggy 20 is a good runner up).

Good to know - thought I'd missed something LOL And honestly, I wouldn't be applying experience from circa 2004 to today's lenses - sometimes the third party makers have offerings that no one else has (hello my wondrous Tokina 10-17 and my lovable Sigma 30 1.4!) and the quality in some cases is extremely high in lenses that are close to Canon/Nikon offerings (Sigma in particular seems to have some very strong offerings in both primes - 50 1.4 - and zooms - 120-300, 70-200 2.8, 17-50 2.8 etc). God, so many good choices - I'm glad that I bought the bulk of my kit before all these extra choices became available (and before all the price rises!) hehehe

D'oh I totally forgot one I use all the time - Sigma's 17-70 macro! It's fantastic and I have the old version. The new version is even better

Congrats!

17-35? Do you mean the 17-40L? Or the really old 17-35 that they don't make anymore? No relevance to this thread as we are talking primes, but just curious as I haven't seen anyone using the old 17-35 Canon in almost forever! Also, I don't know about the Sigma 16-35, but I think there was one years ago maybe - is this what you are talking about? Or have I missed something?

I adore BW but here it doesn't do anything for me. The first one looks like you shot it late afternoon/around sunset and is perfectly acceptable imho. Cloudy is almost the same feeling but as if shot when the light wasn't quite as radiant. My least favourite is daylight - not distinctive at all. Just another shot from any race, on any day. If none of them totally float your boat, head to the tint and temp sliders in LR for tiny tweaks of your favourite - sometimes a few degrees can make all the difference. I think it's great as is, though

Trying to recompose at 1.4 is going to be a biatch because your DOF is SOOOO tiny. A few mm can make a difference. You can get the eyelashes in focus but not the iris at 1.4 ;) I personally have never had any problems with focus on my 1.8 or my 1.4. I only moved to the 1.4 because sometimes I want that extra light. But shooting wide open takes practice, patience and acceptance coz you're going to miss :D IMHO 28mm isn't a great choice - if you're looking at that one, head for the Siggy 30mm.

Define "wide angle" - what range are you looking in? Sigma does a 20mm that is really great. I tried one out a while back and was very impressed - especially for the money. Sigma's 30mm 1.4 is a gem and I wouldn't be without it. SHARP and fast. Just great. And inexpensive, if I remember correctly. Wider than 20mm you're looking at more than $600 ;)

The 10-20 by Sigma and the 10-22 by Canon are both awesome lenses. If you want super wide AND excellent low light head to the Tokina 11-16 2.8 - sweet! I have both the Canon 10-22 and Tokina 11-16 and love them both. Sigma's 8-16 is meant to be a fantastic bit of glass, too, but definitely a specialty lens. If you shoot carefully you can go nice and wide with little distortion - just takes a little practice and getting the feel for things. I've noticed that none of my wide angles are terrible, even for straight horizons and it looks like CMs images illustrate that pretty well.

fwiw if you are looking for wide, 24mm+ isn't it on a crop - you'll hate not having the extra focal length on the wide end imho.

What fun! I haven't been out yet but they are happily swimming up the coast.

I love the one of him laughing!! Looks like he's having a ball

None at all. And I use extensively on the beach, in crazy high winds, climbing dunes, setting it down on my bag in the sand, in the rain, in the crazy humidity - it's fine. I wouldn't submerge it or be in the pouring rain for hours on end but in routine shooting no worries at all. And I had the Sigma 10-20 and adored it. I currently have long Sigma zoom 70-200 2.8 and it's great, too. My Sigma 30mm 1.4 is dreamy. Sigma does some nice lenses and personally I think if you go looking for bad press, you can find it on any lens/manufacturer. I would not have a problem at all buying another Sigma.