the canon 50mm f/1.8
canon 50mm f/1.8,considering this lens as it has amazing reviews,I'm looking from my first proper lens for my new canon 40d with 35-80 kit lens,but as I'm new to this not sure what subjects it would be suited too,would it be suited to landscapes? I'm thinking not? I live near a beach so would like a lens for sunset shots over the sea and also semi close sand shots, stuff like that,so should I be looking at another lens?I like to buy quality stuff first time round but only have about £200/£250 for this first lens,cheers
|
Are you looking for an upgrade or to extend the range.
Lets first look at the 50mm f1.8 Pro Scores 8 out of 10 for optical performance - which is pretty good for a cheap lens. Con Poor build quality - easy to break Noisy focus motor. minimum focus distance of 0.5 metre Poor out of focus quality (bokeh) I have owned this lens and found I could not make much use of it and sold it on. The lens you were sold with the 40D was not the original kit lens (which would of been something like 18 - 55mm). The 35 -80mm would of been a kit lens for a 35mm film camera. The 40D has a sensor which is smaller than 35mm film. Because of this a crop factor of 1.6 is referred to when talking about lens. What this means is that you multiply the focal length by 1.6 to give you the equivalent Field of View (FOV) of a 35mm camera on the 40D. So your 35-80 on a film camera will give you a field of view equivalent to 56-128mm on the 40D. In other words Normal lens (50mm) to a short Telephoto lens. As you have said the 35-80 already pretty well covers what the 50mm can do. The trouble with the 1.6 crop factor is that what was wide for 35mm film is normal on the 40D. The Canon 24 - 85mm f3.5 USM is a nice lens and can be picked up second hand for your price range which will give you a bit extra range. Otherwise you can pick up the original 40D kit lens second hand cheap as many folk upgrade. Plenty of Sigma and Tamron lens in the 18 - 50mm range also. |
thanks for the detailed reply,was just what I needed,well spotted about the lens,it was from an old canon 100 I had years ago and still in great shape,I'm just thinking that the 24-85 wouldn't really increase my range much? or would it,would a better buy be a 24 or 28 prime?
|
I have owned a Canon 28mm f2.8 prime and found it suffered from colour fringing on the edge of the frame. My 28 - 105 f3.5 zoom performed better at 28mm which was rather disappointing as you would expect the prime to be superior. The equivalent FOV is 45mm on the 40D still a normal lens. Needless to say another lens I sold on. Reviews of the 28mm f1.8 also mention colour fringing.
The 24mm F2.8 review look much better but your be lucky to find this second hand. FOV 39mm on the 40D still not what you would call wide. New is outside your price range. The original 40D kit lens would give you and equivalent FOV of 28-88mm. If you could dig really deep into your pocket I would suggest the 17-40mm F4 L. You see plenty second hand. |
thanks again,the canon 17-40mm sounds just the job!I think that would cover the subjects I mentioned above well ,just need to find a deal on one now.cheers
|
just did some hunting for a deal on the canon 17-40f4,I keep seeing the tamron 17-50 f/2.8 getting mentioned,it's about £200 cheaper,is the canon worth the extra? not sure if I would need the faster tamron?
|
I have no experience of the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di-II LD ASP IF but the reviews look promising. With lens build quality is a factor affecting price.
If the Tamron fits your budget then go for it. Sigma and Tokina seem to be very hit and miss. I think Duncan said his wife debbi (Mrs Yelvertoft) uses this lens and loves it. |
went to buy the canon 17-40 from Jessops today,none in stock:mad:
|
warehouseexpress.com £50 Cashback £479.00
I ordered a 400mm a few months back got it in the post the next day :) |
thanks for the link Fixer,I've taken a look but it seems the £50 cash back is with a camera purchase but it's still the cheapest I've seen the lens go for,cheers
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
cheers for that info,as yet I have not bought a len as each time I'm about too I see another that people say is better etc but this canon 18-200 seems to fit the bill just right,for a first lens,I have just checked and can get it for £360 which seems a steal for what it is,cheers again. |
A General word of warning about super zoom lens (x10). They are intended to be a one lens solution to get the subject in the frame. Often referred to as a travel lens. It will get you an image of that once in a life time experience. If your enlargements are postcard sized your be happy enough with the results.
If you intend to enlarge to A4 or A3 sized prints the poor image quality will show and your find few suitable for the wall. Most zoom lens have a zoom range of x3 and that is to minimize the design compromises at either end of the zoom range. Photozone don't give too many prizes for the ef-s 18-200 lens http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/40...n_18200_3556is Poor image quality and colour fringing on the edges of the frame especially at the wide end. Also the barrel distortion is very heavy at 18mm which can be very annoying when photographing buildings. So if you only used the centre part of the frame for your images the results will look great. £360 for a lens that only scores 2/5 may not be such a bargain if you doing large prints. |
glad it's the weekend or I would have bought it by now lol,so just to recap would the best lens for me,for the subjusts I mention be the 17-40 and maybe another len for closer up subjects, rather than trying to cover it all in the one lens? love the thought of the 17-40 but I feel I would be craving a len for closeup stuff too,any thoughts?
|
Quote:
For a lens that can be bought new for £75 delivered this is IMO an ESSENTIAL bit of kit in any camera bag. The image quality is way way better than 'pretty good' it's amazing for the price. Super sharp. to get the same kind of IQ from another lens you would have to spend a lot lot more. At least 10x better than the 18-55mm kit lens! The depth of field you can achieve with a fast prime like this can also not be over looked you won't get near that with any zoom without spending serious amounts of cash. All that said the original poster was asking for a landscape lens which this isn't that much is true. I would however still add this to your kit bag at some point I'd be amazed if you were disappointed. I use mine all the time with great results |
Quote:
The only good things I would say from my experience is it's light and does not take up much space in the kit bag. I would give it a 85-90% for sharpness. I found the focus motor noise caught by standers attention. In fact a head turner. I have sharper lens than the 50mm f1.8 I was hoping the f1.8 would give a good bokeh but the lens only has 5 blades so the results did disappoint. For my subject matter I often need to focus closer that 0.5m. Only used the lens a few times mainly for testing and after a year of sitting in the kit bag it was time to move it on. If it suits your style of photography then sure it's a bargain and a little gem. |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You must have some seriously expensive glass in your bag :D |
Spectacular optics (better than most Canon lenses of any price), ultra light weight and ultra low price. Perfect as a normal lens for full-frame digital and film, and a short tele for 1.6x cameras. Excellent for use in low light; I prefer it to the faster 50mm f/1.4 because this f/1.8 lens gives me more accurate autofocus.
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:07. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.