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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 19, 2008, 8:32 AM   #11
TG
Senior Member
 
TG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 615
Default

I would not use the 50 f1.8 for shooting sports, AF is just too slow.

Cheap & very sharp,It's much better on my MKII N then my 20D when shooting wide open, focuses dead on due to the moreaccurate AF.
TG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2008, 11:39 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
k1par's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 608
Default

xiggy wrote:
Quote:
k1par wrote:
Quote:
I would not be without it. I use it a lot of indoor sports and general shots.
yes i was wondering how good this would be for shooting say highschool basketball?

and yes it looks great im definately getting it
For the last four years I have used it for basketball shots (available light only) from peewees to college level games. This year I switched to a Sigma 28-70 F2.8 zoom (for the zoom capability) BUT I have three gyms that are lit so badly that the only lens I can use is the 50mm f1.8. I have used the lens a lot and have not had one problem with it. it has been used on a Drebel, an XT and now on a 30D.
k1par is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2008, 12:47 PM   #13
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

xiggy wrote:
Quote:
yes i was wondering how good this would be for shooting say highschool basketball?

and yes it looks great im definately getting it
Xiggy,

if your goal is indoor sports like basketball, the 50mm is an inexpensive start but it's VERY limiting. 50mm is really only good for up to 10-15 feet and that's it. And as TG mentioned it doesn't focus very fast. It's a nice starter lens for basketball or volleyball but if you're going to do a lot of that type of thing I strongly recommend saving up for the 85mm 1.8. It's a much better indoor sports lens. It will reach out to around 20 feet and it's extremely fast focusing and sharp.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2008, 12:54 PM   #14
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

On Peripatetic's post:

A great example of the various 50mm lenses. IMO though, comparing a $70 lens to a $1300 lens is a bit of an apples / oranges thing. Not unlike comparing the 75-300 $200 lens to the 300mm 2.8 $4000 lens. Just meant for different audiences.

No doubt the 1.2 is a fantastic lens (although of the shots you posted I like #2 the best even if the bokeh isn't as nice as the 1.2) but I don't think too many people are going to be weighing one against the other.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2008, 2:22 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
k1par's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 608
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
xiggy wrote:
Quote:
yes i was wondering how good this would be for shooting say highschool basketball?

and yes it looks great im definately getting it
Xiggy,

if your goal is indoor sports like basketball, the 50mm is an inexpensive start but it's VERY limiting. 50mm is really only good for up to 10-15 feet and that's it. And as TG mentioned it doesn't focus very fast. It's a nice starter lens for basketball or volleyball but if you're going to do a lot of that type of thing I strongly recommend saving up for the 85mm 1.8. It's a much better indoor sports lens. It will reach out to around 20 feet and it's extremely fast focusing and sharp.
I think the one question left out is how much do you want to (or can) spend? There is quite a difference between the 50mm f1.8 $74.95 and the 85mm f1.8 $339.



k1par is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2008, 10:36 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
xiggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 129
Default

yeh well i just turned sixteen but i will be getting a job soon so how much im going to spend is according to how long im willing to spend, the only other thing i will be spending money on is gas but i get great gas mileage sothat doesnt matter that much.

now just to let you know,i am up in warrensburg (2 1/2 hours away from Joplin, MO) and i noticed during the car trip (using an 18-55 to shoot scenery) that i really need a telephoto lens as my next priority! a lot of shots i wanted me of my targt and even at the 55mm 5.6 aperture i was still getting motion stopping shots at ISO 200 so the aperture is fast enough in daylight and i use a tripod at night so its not a big deal

i have my eyes set almost for sure on the sigma 70-300mm apo dg macro lens, its $200 and has good optics between 70-200 mostly and said to have good optics if manual focused at 300mm, also even though macro is 1:2 people said its still semi decent, i think this will just expand my horizons!

now back to talkign about the 85mm 1.8, i think i should be saving up for somthign like this seeing as it will be over 100mm will the 1.6x crop, and i will probably be able to fill my camera with more of the player! also are the optics known to be better then the 50mm 1.8?
xiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2008, 8:03 AM   #17
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Xiggy,

I think the sigma is a great choice for a budget telephoto.

Back to 50mm vs. 85mm zooms: There is no debate that the 85mm is a better performer than the 50 - anyone who has both will confirm that (and yes I have both). As to filling more of the frame with a player - that is certainly true, BUT here's the real challenge:

contrary to misconception, the fact that your camera body has a smaller than film sensor and thus a 1.6 crop factor it doesn't allow you to focus farther with accuracy. Whether you use an 85mm on a 1.6 crop body, 1.3 crop body or full frame body you'll still get about the same REACH. Which is about 20 feet in an action situation. Now, what this means is at 20 feet a 6 foot tall kid will fill a large portion of the frame when you're using that body. Within 10 feet you won't be able to get the whole body in the frame. So the result is a large number of shots with the 85mm end up cutting off body parts. Or, you end up trying to shoot action too far away and the results end up being soft focused.

But, k1par brings up a good point - are you going to get the return on investment with purchasing an 85mm lens? That's a big hunk of change to spend. How much are you going to be doing basketball/volleyball shooting? Or portrait shots (what the lens was really designed for)? Beyond those uses, the 85mm isn't well suited for other things. So it's a very specialized lens. Often times this hobby is about compromise. As a sports shooter I would love to be using a 400mm 2.8 lens for football and soccer. But I don't have $7,000 to spend on it. So compromises have to be made.

I definitely would suggest buying the Sigma FIRST as you'll get a lot more use out of a 70-300 than you would just an 85mm prime.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2008, 8:42 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
xiggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 129
Default

yeh see thats whyi still like the 50mm 1.8 because i want to start doing portraits! but we will see what happens after i get the sigma telephoto, im almost wanting to save up and get the canon 70-200m F4 L but idk i think ill stick with a beginner telephoto for a while and then i will ge a good prime, and then maybe a better wide angle lens (better quality then the kit 18-55mm, like a 17-40)

and basketball will only be every once in a while that why im iffy on the 85mm!
xiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2008, 5:45 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
k1par's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 608
Default

You will like the Sigma zoom. I had one and wore it out when I bought a replacement I made a BIG mistake and bought a Tamron 70-300mm because the stats said it was a little better, really wished I had stayed with the Sigma. Now I hope to buy the Sigma 100-300 F4 this spring, if my budget allows.

If I was doing portraits the 85mm would be a must, the 50mm would be ok to start but if you get into it seriously then you, at some point, will want the 85mm.

16 is a great age to start in photography. I started at 15 and over three decades later it is still a passion for me. Have fun taking them!


k1par is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2008, 5:46 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
k1par's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 608
Default

Don't you love it when computers hiccup! Got a double post out of thelast one. Sorry.


k1par 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 8:57 PM.