Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:29 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:11 am
Posts: 58
Location: Auckland, NZ
Hi all,

I am hoping I might be able to get your recommendations on a Prime Lens for my Canon EOS 60D body. I have had my DSLR for about 3 months and bought the 24-105 f4.0 L series for my general purpose Lens and I am currently very happy with this.

Now I'm looking for a Lens which is better in low light and good for close ups/potraits as these are the types of photos I enjoy taking.

I have spoken with a few people who have cropped bodies, and I hear that Canon 50mm f/1.8 can feel too close (given the zoom is equivalent to 1.6x on a full frame camera) and therefore was considering the following Lens:

Canon 35mm f/1.4

but at the same time would be open to these as well:

Canon 50mm f/1.8 '
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Sigma 50mm f/1.4

What's everyone's recommendations? I'm sure most of you will have a prime lens you use on a regular basis? even better if you have used more than one of the above and can let me know your preference and why :)

Thanks,
Rich

_________________
richie | auckland, NZ

photography by [ fresh ]
beach, travel & street photography
http://www.facebook.com/photographybyfresh


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1167
Location: bit east of Melbourne
Personally my fav prime lens and I frequently use it outdoors chasing kids ad portrait work is the 851.8, its a gem.
It can be too tight for indoors, but it depends on what you are after.
The 50 1.8 cannot keep up in the focus department and is almost impossible to focus manually, I would suggest the 1.4 usm.
For me 50 is an awkward distance, indoors its still too tight, yet not enough for some things.

The 35 1.4 would be nice, there is a 35f2 that is more in the budget range for me. I don`t personally want to spend too much on a prime that I may only use occasionally.

I would like for canon to update their prime lens line up and add USM and maybe IS to all of them..

Work out what focal length you want with your 24-105 and then start there.
Dare I suggest you have a look at the 17-50 Tamron non VC version, or the 17-55 IS USM if budget allows, that will give you wide angle and 1 stop more light.

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:11 am
Posts: 58
Location: Auckland, NZ
hi Max, thanks for your feedback. I hadn't considered the 35mm f2.0 previously, and that is definitely within my price range. I guess the trade off is the larger aperture vs lens length. Given I'm still relatively new to photography and have a lot to learn, I would probably find it hard to justify the f35mm f1.4.

I guess if you or any other posters have a choice between the
Canon 50mm f1.4 & Sigma 35mm f1.4 which would you choose, putting aside the obvious difference in Lens length?

PS. Not a bad suggestion on the Tamron 17-50, I guess if I had a choice I would rather a Prime Lens like I mentioned above and wider-angle lens specifically for ultra wide shots.

Thanks for feedback :)

_________________
richie | auckland, NZ

photography by [ fresh ]
beach, travel & street photography
http://www.facebook.com/photographybyfresh


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1167
Location: bit east of Melbourne
There is probable room for three primes in most people kits, a 85 a 50 and one around the 30-35. Then there is the longer length for portrait, macro and wildlife etc

I don`t think you would go to far wrong with the 50 1.4.

I have the 1.8 and the image quality is very good its the slower focus system and the build quality that is annoying at times. Its only an issue when I am trying to catch fast action shots of the kids. Knowing what I know now I should have bought the 1.4 and may well yet.

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 3:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 132
I have the 50 mm f 1,4
Remember the crop factor of 1,6, so it will be equal to a 80 mm prime and it is a totally different lens than on a full frame camera. So remember when you read reviews etc if it is FF or crop frame.
50 mm is pretty tight and I must admit I don't use it much, actually I never use mine. It's just too tight.
A 35 mm would probably be a good idea, because it makes the equalent to 50 mm on a FF.

It depends on what you intend to use it for. Set your 24-105 for 50 mm and see how you like it, take a lot of pictures at that distance and see if it bothers you. Or try zooming in and out till you find a distance that you thinks is great for you and read what it is at.

50 mm f 1,4 makes great pictures also at low light conditions. F 1/4 is great fun to play with, but I wouldn't buy a 50 mm again.

Then again others wouldn't live without it, it is all down to your style of photography and your taste.

Maybe you can borrow one from someone to try it out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 3:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 8:22 pm
Posts: 498
Location: 1 AU from the nearest star
While the 50mm can be tighter than you may want at first, the more I use mine, the more I want to use mine. It has a steeper learning curve than a zoom lens as you have to plan more how to get the shot you want.

However, I find the results worth it. It also forces me to move more to get the shot I want. The simple act of moving to take the picture lets me be more involved with the photograph. This also helps me not be lazy in taking the shot, which leads me to have more pictures that I really enjoy. The more pictures I enjoy, the more I want to use the 50mm lens.

_________________
Canon 5DIII, Rebel XTi/400D
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DO, 85mm f/1.8
Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX Macro

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
Canon 430EX II
Opteka 13mm, 21mm, and 31mm extension tubes
Vivitar 50mm f/1.8 for OM System


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 900
Location: SE Texas
Since a 35mm 1.4 was mentioned, I will say that I truly love my Canon 35mm 1.4L. Yes, it was a huge expense, that required sacrifice, but I have no buyer's remorse. The 35mm focal length is very, very useful on a 1.6-crop camera, and the ability to open the aperture, in low light, rather than crank the ISO into the higher ranges.

An EF 35mm f/2 would have been a viable second choice for me, and was considered. I am not sure how well this lens performs wide-open, at f/2, however, so the practical difference may be more than the mathematical difference between 1.4 and 2. Though my 1.4L is amazingly good wide-open, I usually leave it stopped down to f/2 as a default setting, opening or closing the aperture as indicated by the conditions.

As for the 50mm focal length, I spent a premium price to purchase a pre-Mark II 1.8. The seller had posted images on-line, attesting to this sample's image quality. 50mm sometimes means backing away from the subject more than I like, especially indoors, which makes a 35mm more useful to me than a 50mm on a cropped-frame camera. (On my Nikon film cameras, with, of course, no crop factor, 50mm is much more of an all-around lens, comparable to 35mm on cropped-frames.) Nevertheless, I do like 50mm some of the time on a cropped-frame.

If one has a zoom that covers the relevant zoom range, it is not difficult to determine if a certain focal length is desirable. Simply leave the zoom setting
at that focal length while testing the theory. Your zoom lens is certainly
nicer than the average kit zoom!

Do not forget the option of renting a desired lens for an extended test, rather than depend upon a short trial at a camera shop.

_________________
Canon 7D/5D/40D/1D2N; Nikon F6, D700, FM3A, & Coolpix A; Canon 40mm 2.8 STM, 135L, 50L, 35L, 50mm 1.8 I, 100mm 2.8L Macro, 10-22mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, 400mm 5.6L; Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AI-S, 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.8D, 16mm 2.8D Fisheye, 180mm 2.8D, 100-300mm 5.6 AI-S, 18mm 2.8D, Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 SL II


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group