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.