Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Another lens question  (Read 2670 times)
bradf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


« on: December 12, 2009, 11:29:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for all your good advice folks.
I'm interested in buying an everyday walk-around prime lens that would be inexpensive, light and unobtrusive (on my Canon 500D) and might be good enough to be used on the elusive 'next' camera.
(I have the 18-200mm zoom which is good but its neither light nor unobtrusive).
My thoughts are Canon 35mm f2 vs 50mm f1.4 vs ?
I know the 50mm 1.8 is super light and cheap but I'm prepared to go a step up from that.
Thanks again - i really appreciate the time and effort in answering.
Cheers,
bradf
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #1 on: December 12, 2009, 11:48:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bradf
Thanks for all your good advice folks.
I'm interested in buying an everyday walk-around prime lens that would be inexpensive, light and unobtrusive (on my Canon 500D) and might be good enough to be used on the elusive 'next' camera.
(I have the 18-200mm zoom which is good but its neither light nor unobtrusive).
My thoughts are Canon 35mm f2 vs 50mm f1.4 vs ?
I know the 50mm 1.8 is super light and cheap but I'm prepared to go a step up from that.
Thanks again - i really appreciate the time and effort in answering.
Cheers,
bradf

On a crop camera?  35f2.  Other than portraits when is an 80mm equivalent lens all that useful?  35 is a better focal length for me on FF but old Henri did pretty well with a 50 so I'd say that's a push.  Quality is a push.  Build is a push.  So which focal length you want to use on your 500D?
Logged
k bennett
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1436


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2009, 09:49:14 AM »
ReplyReply

For my work, the 50/1.4 is just too long for a single carry-around lens on a crop camera. It's a good short tele or portrait lens. The 35/2 is still a little long for my taste; I would take my 28 or my 24 instead. (The 24 covers approximately the same field of view as a 40mm lens on full frame, which I like.) The Canon 28/1.8 is a nice little lens, even at f/2.
Logged

Equipment: a camera and some lenses.
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2009, 03:30:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bradf
My thoughts are Canon 35mm f2 vs 50mm f1.4 vs ?

The key thing is to figure out the focal length YOU will use the most. A 50mm lens is neither better nor worse than a 35mm lens, any more than a 10mm wrench is intrinsically superior to a 13mm wrench. The "best" wrench to use is the one that fits the bolt you're trying to turn, period. The same applies to lenses--get the one that best "fits" what YOU shoot most.
Logged

Ed Blagden
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 491



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2009, 02:45:06 AM »
ReplyReply

It all depends on your shooting style and interests.  I find the 50mm f/1.4 a little long on my full frame EOS 5D and find the 35mm f/2 much more usable for candids.  I would guess on a crop frame body such as yours you might want to look at a 28 or a 24mm alternative.

The 50mm has much better image quality than the 35mm, in terms of sharpness, contrast and bokeh.  Not that the 35mm is bad, but the 50mm is awesomely good.  Also the extra stop of light capture on the 50mm makes a big difference in low light situations.  But despite that, the 35mm spends more time on my body than the 50mm.

Ed
Logged

Visit my Flickr page
philber
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2010, 02:08:22 AM »
ReplyReply

35mm f:2.0 is a lovely little lens. Light, small, delivering very nice IQ, not overly expensive. 35mm on crop is equivalent to 50mm on full frame, and is the "classic" focal length so many great photographers used. It is the focal length I use most for walkabout. Have fun!
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad