First prime- What should I go for?

Stevies

Stevies

Suspended / Banned
Messages
374
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi folks,

This has probably been asked a million times but I'm about to ask it again. I've took a notion of trying a prime lens but I'm not sure what to go for.

Firstly, the basics. I've a Canon 60D with the 18-55 IS II kit lens (never used now), a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 and a Sigma 70-200 f2.8. The two Sigma's get used a lot and I've been very pleased with them.

We have a baby in the house and I've thought off a prime to save on the amount of flash use that I end up doing (a 430EX ll) even though they come out well. I've looked at the Canon 50mm (both versions), Canon 35 f2.0 and the Sigma 30 f1.4 and I've also considered the Canon 60mm f2.8 Macro. I'm swaying towards the 50mm but wanted the opinion on whether there was much difference in image quality to justify the price difference between the f1.8 and f1.4. I'd ideally like to spend no more than the price of the 1.4. I'm kind of put off the 60mm Macro as it would only let in the same amount of light as my zoom although I expect the image quality would be a lot better. I don't want to buy a crop lens only as I'll hopefully change to a full frame at some stage.

Thanks

Stevie
 
I'd say get the 50mm 1.8 and see what you think.

They are cheap and if you decide to sell you will pretty much get your money back.
I have some really expensive lenses and some of my best shots have been taken with that little gem of a lens
Do not be fooled by the price
 
I'd say get the Canon 35mm F2

It represents a much nicer and more useful field of view on your 60D than a 50mm does. I never liked the 50mm on a crop sensor but now love it in full frame.
 
RichardtheSane said:
I'd say get the Canon 35mm F2

It represents a much nicer and more useful field of view on your 60D than a 50mm does. I never liked the 50mm on a crop sensor but now love it in full frame.
Click to expand...

I'd second this, especially if shooting indoors as you'll probably find 50mm a bit long/close. The 35mm f2 is a great little lens too, though the AF is rather 'audible'.
 
Canon or sigma 50mm f1.4. It's the choice I made and I would make the same choice again.
 
30mm, 35mm and 50mm they are all great prime lenses but it will be down to your type of shooting. I had the 35mm on a cropped sensor but sold it and got the 50mm instead as it suited my photography a lot more. As for image quality, I was happy with both
 
onform said:
Canon or sigma 50mm f1.4. It's the choice I made and I would make the same choice again.
Click to expand...

True, but you are using a full frame camera and the OP isnt :)
 
:):bonk::thumbs: so around the 35mm mark then...:lol:
 
Thanks for all the replies - a lot of food for thought.
Re the 85mm - a lovely lens but I think on my crop sensor (atm) it would just be to long.

I've been looking back through all my last portrait photographs to see what sort of ranges I use most. Unfortunately it's about a 50/50 split of 35-50mm ish and then 70mm. I haven't anything that falls between 50-70mm as the ones at 70mm were all head shots from events. The close range stuff is all of the children in the house. The 35 f2 looks like a good bet although it is very noisy!

Stevie
 
Avoid the 50 1.8 like the plague. It's disgracefully crappy lens that's 90 quid for a reason. Get yourself a 50 1.4. It's a way better lens, and on a crop, it's going to give you a good range for portraits, but also full length shots.
 
Interesting discussion. I would have thought the 85mm would have been preferable, o a crop sensor, for indoor portraits etc. So, as said already, it depends on what you are looking to achieve. The Canon 50 1.8 feels v flimsy, I have one and will upgrade to a 1.4.... I have a friend who initially had a Canon 50mm 1.4 BUT exchanged for a Sigma, he hated the build Q on the Canon.
Good luck with the new lens, whatever you choose
 
London Headshots said:
Avoid the 50 1.8 like the plague. It's disgracefully crappy lens that's 90 quid for a reason. Get yourself a 50 1.4. It's a way better lens, and on a crop, it's going to give you a good range for portraits, but also full length shots.
Click to expand...

The 50/1.8 is not as bad as you describe, but really not the one to go for unless budget is hard limited at £100 and not a penny more. It can take some OK shots at f/2.8 where pentagonal awful bokeh doesn't show through and provided AF hits the jackpot :cuckoo:
The 1.4 is a lot better, but it needs to have lens hood on 24/7 or the AF motor will eventually break, probably very soon

I will still maintain that 85mm is the one to get. Standing 1.5m away is definitely not too far - about right in fact (any less and you're TOO CLOSE). For FF it's the 135 and 200mm that give the some of the best portraits IMHO
 
RichardtheSane said:
I'd say get the Canon 35mm F2

It represents a much nicer and more useful field of view on your 60D than a 50mm does. I never liked the 50mm on a crop sensor but now love it in full frame.
Click to expand...

:agree:

Totally agree.
 
For traditional portraits of the baby I'd go with the 85 as daugirdas suggested. The 35 and 50 aren't particularly flattering to the face IMO.
 
If the lens if 100% for baby and portraits then 50 or 85, if you wanted to also use it as a walkabout prime then 35 as with a 50 or 85 you may struggle to get everything in teh shot that you want.
 
I'm surprised the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is not working for you...I know it's .8 of a stop more than the 35mm but would this be enough to render flash out or the equation..

Dan.
 
I use the Canon 50mm 1.4 on a crop body and I always feel I'm far too close to my subject..
 
Danzaroonie said:
I'm surprised the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is not working for you...I know it's .8 of a stop more than the 35mm but would this be enough to render flash out or the equation..

Dan.
Click to expand...

Thanks again for all the replies. You're right - the f2.0 probably wouldn't make a lot of difference but would stopping down to f1.8? Hard to tell without trying it I suppose. To be honest I really love both my Sigma's and I've been very pleased with both at f2.8 although the I always think that the 24-70 is a tiny bit soft compared to shooting at f5.6 or something with a bounced flash. I'm hoping that a dedicated prime would let me use wide open and still be sharp. Like us all I can't help buying more kit as well but don't tell the missus!!

I've put the 70-200 f2.8 on today and took a few shots around the house with it. At 85mm the amount of separation from the background is definitely a lot more than at 50mm or less unless my imagination is playing tricks on me! It means I'm a bit further away than I've got used to but it's looking like the lens I'll go for. Can always sell if I decide it is to long. I've just missed one for sale on her..

This was a quick snap of the 3 month old in the bouncer. The other guy was 6 so harder to get in the one place for long! I've a very bad back so on two crutches learning to walk again so wasn't up to chasing after him.


Stevie
 
Last edited:
daugirdas said:
The 1.4 is a lot better, but it needs to have lens hood on 24/7 or the AF motor will eventually break, probably very soon
Click to expand...

Hey? How does the lens hood affect the AF motor? I've had my 50/1.4 for years and often use it without the hood with no problems!

Still, I agree with the vote for the 85/1.8 which is an extremely nice lens at a very good price.
 
May be you make up your mind already, but bear in mind that canon 35mm F/2 is quite flexible lens for almost everything.

I used it on my old Canon 20D, and now on Canon 6D - very good results and it is suitable for many situations too.

85mm 1.8 is very good lens too, I ordered mine two days ago, but on crop factor camera it will be quite portrait dedicated.


Hey? How does the lens hood affect the AF motor? I've had my 50/1.4 for years and often use it without the hood with no problems!
Click to expand...

He means that (not tested by me) that when the lens are in AF mode, if you try to move the focus ring it could broke the AF motor ( I guess so).


Good luck with your choice,
K.
 
So, are you going for the 85? I remember when I added the 85 to my collection (after getting a 50mm 1.8) and the first thing that came to mind was... ah, now I see what they mean by butter creamy images. (i might have added the butter there myself. hahaha)
 
I've got the Sigma 50mm 2.8 1:1 Macro lens, I bought it for the macro, but it get's a fair bit of use as a general 50mm prime when im wandering the streets. This thread has now got me thinking about a 50mm 1.4/1.8, something for those late evenings when i'd normally be heading home wishing i'd packed the tripod..... Something more fit to purpose.
 
purplbutrfly said:
So, are you going for the 85? I remember when I added the 85 to my collection (after getting a 50mm 1.8) and the first thing that came to mind was... ah, now I see what they mean by butter creamy images. (i might have added the butter there myself. hahaha)
Click to expand...

To be honest I'm still not 100% sure - if an 85 came up at the right price I'd take a chance though. Still thinking about the 50mm 1.4. Knowing what I'm like I'll probably end up buying both!! How did you find the 85 1.8 compared to the 50 1.8 on the crop or were you FF by then?

Stevie
 
Steve,

Looks like you have spent some time now setting your required focal length and done a few tests...I would also understand due to the unfortunate back issues the 50 or 85mm would seem a more logical choice. thou if you’re planning to spend £200 plus on the a lens stick to that budget and opt for the 50mm 1.4 second hand or 85mm

I have the 35mm f2 (not the new USM model :() and the 85mm 1.8 both are brilliant and I use the 35mm a lot indoors and the 85mm for a sneek and peek kind of shot indoors or more outside.

good luck and keep us posted with what you go for.

Dan.
 
Thanks Dan,

My back problems go from serious (able to walk a short distance and sit an hour max without needing to lie down) to, for me anyway, very serious (walking with a zimmer frame or crutches if at all) and either way I'm on 20 tablets a day to do that. I love my 2.8 zooms but find them, especially with the flash on, heavy so looking to lighten things but not compromise on quality and if anything improve it. I got into photography seriously to keep me sane as well as rc model flying. Unfortunately that's out the window when I'm bad. That all said it could be worse, I'm still here.

Thanks and yes I'll update when I find the right lens.

Stevie
 
In this order.......50mm F1.8, then 35mm F1.8G (DX) then 85mm F1.8.
All three are great glass for resonable money
 
magicolor1 said:
Hey? How does the lens hood affect the AF motor? I've had my 50/1.4 for years and often use it without the hood with no problems!
Click to expand...

photosample said:
He means that (not tested by me) that when the lens are in AF mode, if you try to move the focus ring it could broke the AF motor ( I guess so).


.
Click to expand...

When the lens is in AF mode, the AF ring moves fine as the lens has full time manual focusing.

No, the problem is the lens design. The entire inner barrel extends when focusing, and the design is fairly weak. So if the inner barrel is extended and it takes a knock - it doesn't always fare too well. Less so that other lenses.

A hood protects the lens barrel from this damage quite effectively
 
1 morevote here for the 35mm f2 on a crop body, I'm looking at getting my first FF body soon so may end up buying a 50mm back again!
 
RichardtheSane said:
When the lens is in AF mode, the AF ring moves fine as the lens has full time manual focusing.

No, the problem is the lens design. The entire inner barrel extends when focusing, and the design is fairly weak. So if the inner barrel is extended and it takes a knock - it doesn't always fare too well. Less so that other lenses.

A hood protects the lens barrel from this damage quite effectively
Click to expand...

Thanks about the info.

About the lens that OP still searching, I got my canon 85mm 1.8 yesterday
and love it.
But bear in mind that it is completely different purpose (in my opinion)
Love the bokeh, but on the other side 35mm F/2 is much more flexible for street photography. And lighter.

Regards,
K.
 
I couldnt see me getting rid of the 50mm for anything. Love the lens. So light and Image quality is awesome.
 
35mm or 50mm for first prime looks to be everyone advice, but how about something in the middle for price, build quality and focal length

EF 40 f2.8 STM

The only downside is it's F2.8
 
For portraits get a 50mm or even an 85mm. For just a general walking around lens get a 35mm.
 
Well after changing my mind every day this week I actually bit the bullet and went down the middle. I've been using my tele at 85mm and f2.8 but finding it quite long in the house with the crop so I've ordered a 50mm 1.4 this morning. I can still see me buying either a 35 f2 or 85 f1.8 as well but we'll see how I get on in the middle first. At the end of the day I can sell the 50mm and buy the other two without losing any money if I did decide to go for two lenses instead of one(or at least very little - the only good time when there is no depreciation!).

Will let you know how I get on but it will probably be the end of the week before I get it - birthday coming up!!

Thanks

Stevie
 
Well it was my birthday today and I got my hands on the 50mm 1.4. So far so good, like it. Suppose to be expected 1.4 is softer than I'd have like but I suppose it will take a few more days of photographing different things in different lights to tell for sure.

These are a few photographs that I took earlier:

This was at f1.6:

Jenson's Medication by Exif Data | Stephen Scott, on Flickr

This is our babies morning medication at f2

Jenson's Medication by Exif Data | Stephen Scott, on Flickr

Not a great test for f1.4. My wee indoor heli

Blade mCPX by Exif Data | Stephen Scott, on Flickr

And with a bit of help from the Speedlite 430EX ll, my wife's tulips. This was at 1/100 and f7.1.

Flowers by Exif Data | Stephen Scott, on Flickr

Thanks

Stevie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top