TSGallantPhotography Loc: SW Florida

I'm getting ready to either replace my beloved Canon 24-70mm L (financial situation forced sale) OR buy the Sigma 50mm 1.4 ART lens (object is prep for an upcoming wedding shoot).

I do remember LOVING my 24-70L...BUT, I have heard nothing but amazing things and seen amazing results from the Sigma. I don't have the money for both. Does anyone have personal experience with the two to give some informed direction as to one over the other?

BTW, in case it makes a difference, I am NOT a pro anymore (closed my studio 4 years ago) and my camera body is the 1D Mark II (don't judge me...I don't have the money to upgrade that, either, at the moment, lol).

revhen Loc: By the beautiful Hudson

Used 24-70L and new Sigma 50 ART seem to go for about same price on eBay, approx. $800. If you loved the former and it has advantage of zoom, what's the question?

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

You have a really nice camera. It works so why replace it. Have you looked at the Canon 28-80? It's a nice little lens. I had one that was stolen and have not replaced it yet. I rarely shoot people situations, but when I did, I'd use the 28-80. It didn't have a perspective shift, as I recall.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

It sort of depends on what other lenses you have, but zoom would be more versatile. There are lots of choices around 24-70mm:

Canon 24-70/2.8 original version... $900-1250 used.

Canon 24-70/4 IS USM... $1000 new.

Canon 24-70/2.8 USM II... $1900 new.

Sigma 24-70/2.8 DG HSM... $800 new, $500 used.

Tokina 24-70/2.8 FX... $900 new (may not be avail. yet).

Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC Di USD... $1300 new, used $950.

Any 50mm is sort of specialized. The Sigma ART is certainly nice, but far from your only choice:

Canon 50mm f1.4 USM... $350 new, $274 used.

Sigma 50mm f1.4 HSM (original)... $350 used.

Canon 50/1.2L USM... $1450 new, $1250 used.

Sigma 50/1.4 HSM ART... $950 new.

With some careful shopping, you might be able to get both.

But if you only need one or the other for a particular wedding shoot, maybe renting makes sense?

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

TS, just my two cents.
If you are not shooting wedding for a living(you say you gave that up), I would get the 24-105 and spend the extra money on a 600 flash.
At 2.8 you can't get two people in focus at the same time anyway!!
Personaly, I have not used one but I would not waste my money on the ART lens. Get the Canon 1.4. If you have real bad GAS, get the Canon 1.2 over the 1.4
I have used the 2.8, 1.4, 1.2 and the 24-105. At weddings the 2.8 is not worth the extra stop for me. When I have used it, I can rent the 24-70 mkl for $39.
The 24-105 is my workhorse set to f8 with the 600rt.

If you gotta have the ART lens, you should get a higher mp FF instead, like a used 5dmkll for $1000 instead. That will more than up your IQ way beyond the ART lens and your old camera!!!
As I said, just my 2cents!! ;-)
SS

TSGallantPhotography Loc: SW Florida

Thanks, everybody. I've looked for the past 4 months and narrowed it down to those two choices. This is for MY wedding that I'm buying it for and wanted a lens that I could also use for my other photography and those two seemed the best match. I am letting a friend who seems to have a good eye for photography use my gear to shoot my wedding for me in lieu of hiring a "wedding photographer" (most of whose work I don't like, here locally) and spending upwards of $2500.