Hey guys,
I'd like to know what are your thoughts about this combination. By that I mean - if that's the ONE and ONLY lens you could have with either the 40D or 50D, could you manage to work with this lens as a general purpose lens?
Printable View
Hey guys,
I'd like to know what are your thoughts about this combination. By that I mean - if that's the ONE and ONLY lens you could have with either the 40D or 50D, could you manage to work with this lens as a general purpose lens?
I would highly doubtthat the 85/1.8 on a 1.6x cropped body would become a general purpose lens. Personally I have the 85/1.8 and a XTi body; both of them are great especially the lens. However, I found myself use the 85/1.8 almost only for portraiture shots. To get a full body portraiture I'll need to back up quite significantly a bit. So I will pretty much be stuck if this is my only lens on a x0D body since this combo will heavily limit my usage.
After many hours of running around w/ my 24-105 f/4 I'd have to say that it'd be my choice if I could only have one lens on my 40D. The 17-55 f/2.8 would be a very close second. Of course, both of those cost considerably more than the 85mm 1.8. In that price range I would probably go with Sigma 30mm f/1.4.
He might want to consider the 50mm f/1.4 for a good general purpose lens on a crop sensor. It's a little soft wide open, however, looks pretty darn good from f/2 and onward. I personally like a zoom for my general purpose lens, however, my next choice (the 17-40 f/4) is about twice as expensive as the 50mm f/1.4.
If you can live with a prime and enjoy using wide apertures, it's a really decent choice, in my opinion.
If I could only have one lens, it'd have to be a zoom. 24-105 f/4would be my first choice. If I was married to a crop camera, I'd look into the 17-55 f/2.8 IS, though I've never bought an EF-S lens for myself because I've always lusted after full frame. I actually bought a Rebel film SLR to let me take some full frame shots before I acquired my now obsolete 5D. Heck, I'd still opt for the discontinued 5D over anything short of a 5D mkII, assuming I could only have one camera.
Oh sorry, I forgot to say that this one lens should be a prime. Otherwise I'd probably grab a 17-55 f2.8, but I'm looking for something cheaper without compromising on anything - not the IQ nor the build quality and this I can only get from a prime. That's why I'm asking whether it is possible to work with one good PRIME (yet non-L, again... budget) lens or not? If so, what lens would you suggest?
I really want either a 40D or 50D rather than a good zoom like the 17-55 f2.8 with a XXXD body. I gave it some thought and if it is possible to work with one prime lens then I'd get a XXD body + [good fast prime lens which is bellow $500] and once I can afford it I'd get a 17-55 f2.8, 17-40 f4 L, 24-70 f2.8 L or even maybe a 24-105 f4 L (I prefer at least f2.8). Also, it would save me a lot of headaches as it's very confusing to choose ONE zoom lens from the above list as the only lens to have. My first plan was to get one of these zooms and as I read more I only get more confused than I was at the beginning, plus I don't think I can afford now a XXD body + one of these zooms + the insurance for both. As I said, I don't want a XXXD body cause I'm pretty sure that later on I'd upgrade it to a XXD body and I'd lost some $$$ in the process.
P.S I said no more than $500, but maybe I should mention that I don't want a $200 lens either since a $200 lens can't be: fast + high IQ + solidly built IMO and I doubt anyone can prove that to be wrong (I bet someone is going to try here... LOL)
Thanks again for the help, I really appreciate it
It will be hard to think of a very good build quality prime lens which is good for general purpose and is within $500. I have never used the 28/1.8 but from lots of people this lens is quite good. Generally I will choose something between 28~50mm on the 1.6x cropped body if I have to stick to only one prime lens for general purpose usage. My very personal choice will be the 35/1.4L since it has top of the line IQ and it's just about 50mm on a cropped body.
Well, if it has to be prime, i think I'd go with the 50 f/1.4...
I might look into a little wider, depending on what you like to do, but even cropped, it does some wonderful things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin
Hmmm, yes that had been my first thought but then I read Bryan's review on the 85mm f/1.8 which according to Bryan is much better built.
Anyhow, my question more generally is, is it possible to work with just one focal length without becoming [8o|]
You can do an interesting test if you'd like to: can you shoot for 1 week with only one focal length?
I don't want to go for a whole week at one focal length!
if I did, I think I'd go 35mm or 50mm on a full frame body. Telefoto is good for getting in on interesting things, but from a creative standpoint, I like the variability of perspective provided by a wider angle lens and positioning objects in foreground and background. Then again, telefoto lets you get into things that sometimes you just can't get close to...
My opinion is the best zoom is a primeand a good pair of legs. I have a 100 f2.0 and love it. Similar quality to the 85 you mentioned. On my XTi it was a bit long but I mostly shoot portraits. I think the 50 or the 28 would be great choices just depending on what you are planning to shoot. With anything longer than the 28 you will find some times it is just too long.
Happy shooting [;)]
One question: What do you want to do with it?
If I had to pick just one focal length, I would probably go 85 or 100. I prefer portraits and candid photos. I like to take all kinds of photos, but the reason I have the camera is to take photos of my kids(ok lame, I know) The best ones I get are at longer focal lengths. With a 28 you need to be right in there face to get a tight portrait, and then its distorted. I also love Bokeh, which is harder with wides.The 50 1.4 is a great lens, and it would be a good choice also.
Here is one with the 50. 1.4
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3108/...56132b1e7c.jpg
I wouldn't look down on a 28-135, I have been pretty impressed with mine, and as a kit it is very reasonable, and its well built. What about a decent consumer zoom and the 50 1.8 when you need it?
Good luck,
Tom
A good photographer will have great results no matter what equipment is used, whether it is a pin-hole, a polaroid, a LOMO LCA, a point and shoot digital to a 5D with an EF85 f/1.2; so I think to define "general purpose" depends really on "your purpose" .i.e. You can be anything with any equipment.
Run around with an EF 50mm f/1.8 for a bit.
What am I going to do with it? Well lately I've been taking lots of indoor photos of my 1 year old cousin (without flash if possible - not easy at all with a 1 year old and a non-SLR camera). I love tight shots mostly, but I also want to be able to take a group shots for say 3-7 people at least. As I said, I want the lens to be a general purpose lens if possible so I won't be limited to tight portraits and 3-7 people group shots only... is it possible? If so, what lens do you suggest (PRIME)?
Tom, I don't want the 50 f1.8 lens, I'd rather get the 50 f1.4 instead, but as I said I prefer an even better lens and according to Bryan that would be the 85 f1.8.
If not too hard, can someone here take a shot of a kid using a 85mm focal length from say 5m (~17 feet) and show me what it looks like?
Thanks again everybody,
Cheers!
Oren-
I bought the 85mm f/1.8 based on Bryan's review soon after purchasing my XTi. Bryan was right in the fact that it was a great lens. However, on a crop sensor camera, it's just too long for indoor portraiture and group shots (especially indoors). After getting it, I sold the lens and got the 17-55 f/2.8 IS. Later on I got the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS. However, the 17-55mm lens stays on my camera about 90% of the time. If you had a full-frame sensor, I think the 85mm f/1.8 would be a decent choice for a general purpose lens--but I think it'll be a little long on a 40D or 50D.
If you buy a wider lens and then find out it's just not long enough, then you can always get the 85mm lens later as it's not terribly expensive.
Thanks Sean. How is the 17-55 by the way?
Also, when do you switch to the 70-200?
And last one, do you ever find the 70-200 too short? ...and when?
Keep in mind I shoot mainly outdoor portraits and weddings on occasion.
I absolutely love the 17-55 f/2.8 IS. If I could only have one lens on a crop-sensor camera, that would be it. I have never regretted purchasing it, even if it has a hefty price tag.
I use the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS whenever I need the reach to photograph the bride and groom during a ceremony from the back of the auditorium without using a flash. I usually use it with a monopod. I also use the 70-200 whenever I want to blur the background as much as possible when shooting an outdoor portrait. I usually put an ND filter on the lens, open it up wide, and shoot. This is a recent shoot I did where I used this approach. You can see our location is not ideal, but being able to blur the background significantly and framing the shot selectively can help.
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.21.08/_5F00_MG_5F00_3073-copy-small.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.21.08/_5F00_MG_5F00_3081-small.JPG[/img]
Rarely do I ever think the 70-200 isn't long enough on my 50D. Typically, I just don't shoot in situations where I need more reach.
Oren, For indoor portraiture and group shots the 85/1.8 is far from the
best choice when speaking of using it on a crop body. It will work, but it is much too limiting IMO. If a fast prime
is what you're after look into the Sigma 30/1.4, Canon 50/1.4, or a Sigma 50/1.4. All of these lenses perform great on crop bodies when indoors. If an f/2.8 zoom is an option look into the EF-S 17-55 or the Tamron 17-50. Those are, hands down, your best bets.
-Matt
I would use focal length and speed as a factor. I own both the 50 f/1.4 and th 85 f/1.8 and they're similar enough in terms of build quality. The 50mm is more hand-holdable, obviously, and I actually think it is a pretty good fl for portraits on a 1.6x crop body.
This is a very personal decision, though. I think the 85 would be a good choice, too, if you plan to have working distance or want to take tight portraits. And you get better background blur with a given dof (ie, more focal blur at a given f/number).
Thanks again guys [H]