First Prime advice request

[ham]

Looking for my first prime lens for low-light use on my 60D.


As you may remember, I've got the 15-85mm IS USM for general purpose "walk-about" photography, but I'm looking for something to take photographs in low-light.


I'm beginning to wonder whether I the 17-55mm f/2.8 would have been a better option, but what's done is done.





The options I've considered so far are thus:


Canon EF 50mm f/1.8


Canon EF 50mm f/1.4


Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro


Canon EF 35mm f/2.0





It'll mostly be used for indoor low-light photography such as in the evenings before heading out on nights out, or even just when wanting a bit more OOF blur in portraits/still life.


I understand the 50mm's are the standard recommendations (that or the 85mm option, but that'll be too tight on my cropped sensor for indoor use - I'm even worried the 50mm will be, hence the inclusion of the 35mm). The EF-S Macro intrigues me, as I'd love to have the ability to get a nice magnification factor, but it's not essential.


The nifty fifty is intriguing me because of it's cheapness, but I don't
want to be fed up of the 5 pointed OOF highlights too quickly, in which case the 1.4 may be worth the extra expense.


Here's a question though, does x focal length on my EF-S lens provide the same framing as x focal length on an EF lens? So does 50mm on my 15-85mm provide the same framing as the 50mm EF primes, or will they be more like 80mm on my EF-S? The latter is how I assumed it worked, it's just that Brian's review of the EF-S 60mm says it will act like a 96mm on an EF-S camera. Is that a mistake on Brian's part or do I need a focal length / framing lesson? This is why I have included the 35mm, as if I'm correct, it will frame like a 50mm on a FF, but with more distortion/curved focus plane.

[thekingb]

There are many who swear by the Sigma 30 f/1.4. $400 and a great focal length on the 60d.

[Sean Setters]

I currently own the Canon 50mm f/1.4, Canon 85mm f/1.8, and Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Before the Sigma, I previously owned the Canon 35mm f/2. For me...

• The Canon 50mm and 85mm lenses are great, but as you suspected, too long to be used effectively indoors on a crop sensor camera.
• The Canon 35mm f/2's image quality wasn't as good as I wanted at its widest apertures.
• I almost purchased the Canon 24mm f/1.4, but instead opted for the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. I'm very glad I saved my money. The Sigma is just wide enough to be quite useful indoors, and the image quality is still pretty darn good at wider apertures. It is now my most used prime lens.

Some sample images using the Sigma:

[neuroanatomist]

Here's a question though, does x focal length on my EF-S lens provide the same framing as x focal length on an EF lens? So does 50mm on my 15-85mm provide the same framing as the 50mm EF primes, or will they be more like 80mm on my EF-S? The latter is how I assumed it worked, it's just that Brian's review of the EF-S 60mm says it will act like a 96mm on an EF-S camera. Is that a mistake on Brian's part or do I need a focal length / framing lesson?

You do seem to need a focal length lesson. .


Focal length is an intrinsic property of a lens. For an 85mm prime, the distance between the optical rear nodal point and the sensor/film plane is 85mm. For a 15-85mm lens, that rear nodal point varies from 15mm to 85mm from the sensor (it's an optical property, not necessarily a physical distance, in the sense that the rear nodal point can actually be outside the physical dimensions of the lens).


Bottom line - sensor size affects angle of view, not focal length. The EF-S 60mm gives an angle of view equivalent to a 96mm lens on FF (and the f/2.8 aperture is equivalent to f/4.5 on FF, too, in terms of depth of field). Canon doesn't 'correct' for the effect of sensor size on angle of view. It doesn't matter that EF-S lenses can't mount on FF bodies - focal length it focal length, so you have to multiply it by 1.6x for FF-equivalent angle of view. So, your 15-85mm lens gives the same angle of view as a hypothetical 24-136mm lens on FF.



<div>

This is why I have included the 35mm, as if I'm correct, it will frame like a 50mm on a FF, but with more distortion/curved focus plane.

35mm on your APS-C camera will frame like 50mm on a FF camera. But, you don't have a FF camera, right? On your APS-C camera, 35mm on the 35mm f/2 will frame exactly like 35mm on your 15-85mm. As I stated, focal length is focal length. On a FF camera, if you could manage to mount the 15-85mm, 35mm on that lens would frame the same as the 35mm f/2, also (although with a lot of loss to vignetting with the smaller image circle).


Hope that clarifies...


--John
</div>

[Dr Croubie]

To summarise neuro:


Take your 15-85 on your 60D, turn the zoom ring until the mark lines up with the number "35", that's exactly what you'll see if you take that lens off and put the 35/2 on your 60D. Line the mark up with "50" and that's exactly what you'll see with the niftyfifty on the same camera..


Take a 35mm on your 60D, you'll get nearly the same framing as a 50mm on a 5D. Put a 50mm on your 60D, you'll get roughly the same framing as an 85mm on a 5D.


.


As for suggestions, I got the niftyfifty on a whim, a few days before a Salsa party at my dance school. Full-body portraits (on my 7D) were possible standing a few metres away, but that wasn't always easy with dancers going everywhere. I've had more luck at gigs, with the freedom to move around the audience.


have a sample why not:


50 f/1.8 @ f/1.8, 7D, iso1600, 1/20s (way too long for this kind of thing, i got lucky with this shot)


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/700x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/8103.IMG_5F00_4019jcs700x450.JPG[/img]


.


Now, i've just gotten my Samyang 35 f/1.4, and i'm going to write a detailed experience report with it later.


Firstly, it's nearly as big as the 15-85 (as long, nearly as wide, not as heavy). Manual focus only (which may or may not be your thing). And the manual aperture only goes f/1.4 straight to f/2, then every half-stop to f/16 and f/22. The guy i bought it from second-hand ditched it in favour of a 'clickless' version for video, I can see why, I might take a screwdriver to mine and do the same thing.


Another problem is with the focus ring, but i'm blaming 2nd hand, not samyang.


And i've never had a lens this fast, test images yesterday in not even full sun, iso100, were at 1/4000s. Think i'm going to need to invest in some ND filters...


My first impression that I got with it is that it's damn sharp. Beats my 15-85 (if you can really tell, such a slight difference).


But the bokeh is, frankly, not so good, have a sample:


iso400, 1/100s, so f/ is probably around f/8-f/11 (ignore that the leaf isn't perfectly sharp, it was windy, look at the OOF drops):


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/900x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/2068.IMG_5F00_8965s900x600.JPG[/img]


.


Apart from that, I haven't had much experience with the others on your list. I was about to just give up and get the 35/2 when this Samyang came up on ebay. Bokeh aside, I think it's a damn good lens for the price, whether you can put up with the MF is a personal choice...


.


Also, depending on how long you're willing to wait, there's always rumours/hope that canon will (finally) cave to competition from everyone else and make their own EF-s 30-35ish f/1.4-2ish to compete with the sigma and nikon variants. Probably won't happen this year, may or may not happen the next. They're also apparently going to update a 'popular prime' within a year, most people take that to be the 50/1.4 (if it is i'm buying one), but that could also mean the 35/2 to an ef-s version. But as with all rumours, if you need it now, just buy what's available, you probably won't see it in glass form until this time next year...

[Jayson]

Sean,


Are those at 1.4?


Sorry to hijack the thread. I am thinking of scrapping the 35mm f.2 and purchasing the sigma for a wedding coming up. 35mm is a little long and thinking the 1.4 would be cool to have...just was unsure about the IQ wide open. I agree with your sentiments about the 35mm f2, it works on my XSi, but not pretty on my 7d.


Thanks,


Jayson

[Sean Setters]

Sean,


Are those at 1.4?


Thanks,


Jayson

No, I don't believe any of them were shot at f/1.4. If you click on one of the pics you'll be taken to Flickr and you can view the EXIF info there (Actions---&gt;View EXIF Info). I took this one last night at f/1.8, though, using the Sigma.

[Daniel Browning]

I

[Fast Glass]

My most used prime is the FD 35mm f/2.0. Second to that my MD 24mm f/2.8 (f/1.4 would really nice though) and MD 50mm f/1.7 (could be faster but not to bad). If you could live without AF the Samyang should be a great value and extra speed is very nice to have indoors. The Sigma if the AF is good enough would also be a great choice but the Canon would be my last, but it

[ham]

To quash one thing straight away, I don't think MF would suit me too well at this point, I'm going for a fast lens because of the number of shots I'm losing in low-light, adding another factor that could cause me to lose shots (however good it might be for my photography in the future) probably isn't a great idea


Thanks for the lesson neuro, intrinsically I knew that was the case, but it was getting late and my head wouldn't let me think it.


So I think I need a 35mm (ish) focal length with f/2 or wider, (good) AF, and not too expensive.


My GF's having a do for her birthday tonight so I was considering just popping out and getting the 50mm f/1.8 as an impulse decision, but I think that's too long even for indoor portaits (the kind girls seem to like: "Show my dress!") in my small flat especially.