I'm buying this as a body only, as I would like to purchase a 70-200mm f/4L IS USM lens and a portrait prime lens.
I'm torn between the 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM and the 50mm f/1.4 USM, both by Canon. Which would you recommend?
Do the extra two f-stops of the 50mm make a huge difference, or could a flash eliminate any real advantage? I don't plan on using the macro function often, but I may use it occasionally. I'm more interested in portrait photography. It annoys me that the USM in the f/1.4 isn't ring type. Is the 60mm too sharp to be used for a portrait lens? When does the f/1.4 stop being soft, and sharpen up (i.e. f/1.8?)?
As you can see, I'm very divided and have lots of questions, an answer to any would be appreciated.
I have the f1.4. I really like it - way better than the f1.8 and not £1000+ like the f1.2 L I also use the 100mm macro for portraits but a soft focus filter might be nice as it can be brutally sharp and my lady wife didn't like every little blemish being on show