Lens Buying quandry

offertonhatter · 03-15-2009, 06:45 AM

I have a bit of money for a new lens, but which one to get.

My choices are either the 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited or the 70mm F2.4 Limited.
I can't afford both, so which should I get?

I do a lot of Portraits, and landscapes, with the occasional Macro.

Currently I use the 50-135 for portaits, so would having a fix lens such as the 70 be a good addition (plus it is small so would be great for travel, unlike the 50-135)
However the 50-135 is too long, focal wise, for group images.

This is where the 35mm comes in, would it be good for group portraits, I have heard that is not just good for macro, but as a general lens too.

One advantage with the 35mm, is the macro too, but is it better than my old manual Tamron 90mm? you can get closer of course, but is it too short for macro?

Of course both should be good for Landscape, albeit differing perspectives, but would the 35mm be better than my 16-45 for landscapes at 35mm?

Advices please.

Parallax · 03-15-2009, 08:44 AM

Since you already have the 50-135, I think you would benefit more from the 35. The 70 would be smaller and lighter than the 50-135 but other than that offers nothing over and above. (the extra 1/2 stop is a non-issue). I find that with respect to what I shoot at relatively close distances (read: anything other than landscape/scenery) I generally opt for the shorter focal lengths because I can almost always get closer to the subject when I need to, but sometimes getting far enough away to us a longer lens is not possible. You can always crop a picture in PP that was taken with a shorter than ideal lens, but you can't expand one that was taken with a too long lens that didn't capture everything you wanted.