Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 25, 2005, 2:40 PM   #1
Member
 
HeidiandHans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 57
Default

Want to buy a new lens for 20 d. I have the 18-55 kit lens (for now) I also have the 50mm f/2.5 compact macro:-) for spiders and bugs. Want new lens for portrait and nature-wild life. I'm looking at the 50mm f/1.4 $331 ( don't like plastic (f1.88) $70) VS the 85mm f/1.8 usm $329 -$15 rebate Stalling for now for a good walk around to replace the kit 18-55 thinking about the 17-40 f/4L or maybe the 17-85IS usm Price close on these two
HeidiandHans is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 25, 2005, 5:53 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Mr_Saginaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 552
Default

I just picked up the 50mm 1.4. So far so good! I had the 50mm 1.8 and it was a good starter/bargin lens but this 1.4 is fantastic...
Attached Images
 
Mr_Saginaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2005, 8:14 PM   #3
Member
 
HeidiandHans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 57
Default

Thanks Mr_ S I must be on the right track picture looks great,,,,I've alsoheard great things on the ef 85mm f/1.8 usm I want to pick the better of the two:idea: Does the extra 1/2 stop on the 50mm make it better than the 85mm:roll:
HeidiandHans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2005, 8:14 PM   #4
Member
 
HeidiandHans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 57
Default

Remember I already have a 50mm compact macro f/2.5:roll:
HeidiandHans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2005, 8:40 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 192
Default

OK, assuming your question is -- should I get a 50 1.4 when I already have a (very sharp) 50 2.5, or get a 85 1.8? Hint: This is too easy.

Second hint: Exactly how often do you see yourself switching out the 2.5 for the 1.4? And how often do you see yourself switching out a 50 for an 85?

Third and final hint: You're doing the shooting. All of these lenses, including the 50 1.8, are optically very good.
Madwand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2005, 9:40 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 39
Default

I bought the 50mm 1.4 to do sports close-ups and it does well(low lighting situations) as for doing Ports(AWESOME). And i only have a digital rebel. Saving for a 20D soon.....
macatack71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2005, 10:16 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 132
Default

Of the 3 choices that you mention, the 85 is clearly the best choice. That is a beautiful lens with wonderful bokeh. I paid nealy 5 times that amount for the 85 f1.2, and the 1.8 comes very close to the quality of the 1.2, and, it focuses much more quickly than the 1.2, so it would be better for the moving targets - sports, birds, etc.
Ward Larson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2005, 9:30 AM   #8
Member
 
HeidiandHans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 57
Default

I thought the 85mm 1.8would be the better choice, Thanks I'm new to SLR, and just learning from this new camera and a book. I wasn't sure if having the 50mm compactmacro 2.5 ruled out the 50mm 1.4 or not. I'm guessing that the macro lense can also be used for portraits as well as macro pics.:idea:I should ask, what all can my 50mm compact macro f/2.5 be used for? Thanks
HeidiandHans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2005, 4:01 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 192
Default

The 50 2.5 macro is:

1. A fairly fast lens that lets you shoot some low-light material and to blur the background (compared to non-prime lenses).

2. A lens with a field of view equivalent to 80mm in full-frame. This is around a popular focal length for some portraits.

3. A very sharp lens.

4. A lens that can shoot high quality close ups (macro).

What you use it to do is up to your imagination, technique, and subject matter, etc. There are nosolid rulesas to which lenses must be used for which purpose. You can take a portrait with a 10mm lens if you want, with a 300mm lens if you want. You can take a landscape with a 100mm if you want (and several people do, sometimes at least, professionally), and certainly with a 50mm, 80mm equivalent too.

What can't you do with a 50 2.5 macro (on a cropped DSLR)?

1. Capture small places, groups of people from close up, etc. -- it doesn't have the field of view of a wide angle lens. I.e. it's not a wide-angle lens.

2. Focus on details of far objects -- it doesn't have the field of view of a large telephoto lens, and will image more detail from the surroundings than might be optimal in this application. I.e. it's not a (large) telephoto lens. You can always crop and zoom an image, but there will be a lack of detail it that's done much -- better to use a true telephoto at some point,.


Madwand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2005, 9:06 PM   #10
Member
 
HeidiandHans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 57
Default

Thanks for all the info Madwand, I thought a macro lens was just for macro, lot's to learn. I wasn't sure what bokeh was so I looked it up and tried it with my macro lens. pretty neat The wire angle is in the middle of the other two angles.
Attached Images
 
HeidiandHans is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:31 PM.