Focal Length help ..

D

Danny133

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,530
Name
Daniel
Edit My Images
Yes
The one and only lens i have is a 50 1.4 .. great lens but too long for most of my shots! :(

What realistically could i trade it for as i have no cash to part with?

Would i be able to get myself something around the F4 range as i dont want to loose all that lighting capability :(
 
Depends exactly what focal range you want or need.

Your 50mm is worth maybe £220.

The 28-135mm IS can be had for £160ish.

A 28mm f2.8 can be had for £100, sometime less.

Tamron 17-55mm is an option but I think you'd have to add some money to your 50mm for it.
 
Danny
What sort of space are you shooting in? If you want to take images of people do not go wider much because wider lenses distort features. Portraits are better with longer lenses. Better to save and buy something else because the lens you have is very capable.
 
so i could buy a 50 1.8 and a 28-135 IS?

Jim .. its a bedroom and its too close .. when walking round my house im ALWAYS too close to get pics as i live in a small terrace
 
Yes I appreciate that - You have a cracking lens - Much sharper than the 28-135 but if needs must then the 50f1.8 is pretty decent especially for the money.
 
Danny133 said:
The one and only lens i have is a 50 1.4 .. great lens but too long for most of my shots! :(

What realistically could i trade it for as i have no cash to part with?

Would i be able to get myself something around the F4 range as i dont want to loose all that lighting capability :(
Click to expand...

Wow 1.4 to 4 is a big hit to have to take as the f/4 lens will only transmit 12.5% of the light that your trusty 1.4 gives. I'd hold out for 2.8 if at all possible.
 
your right .. the 1.4 is like a torch .. i need a 24-70 lol
 
Yes in low light f4 is too slow (without flash)
 
Yes Sigma do I think
 
Sigma do a 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 which is sharp and a well liked lens. I had one as my 1st lens and it was great! You can pick these up very cheap and you could afford one of these plus a used 50mm f1.8.

They also now do a version with image stabilising (OS) F/2.8-4. My dad has this lens and he really likes it but it is more expensive.

Sigma 17-70mm NON OS!sample at about 70% crop


another from 17-70:
 
Last edited:
And what letters should I be looking for? It's confusing. I never had a sigma lens so not sure which letters mean whch
 
EX EXPERT RANGE Better build quality and optical design for the more discerning user.

CONV CONVERTER USABLE The lens is recommended for use with one of Sigma's optional teleconverters.

APO APOCHROMATIC GLASS Apochromatic glass is used in the lens to minimise chromatic aberration.

ASP ASPHERICAL GLASS Aspherical type elements are used in the construction of the lens.

DC DIGITAL CROP ONLY The lens can only be used on cropped sensors of APS-C size.

RF REAR FOCUS - The lens focuses with a rear group of elements and a rear focus ring. The lens does not change length when focusing.

DG FULL FRAME AND CROP DIGITAL Used to denote lenses that have been designed to work on full-frame / 35mm sensors as well as cropped sensors

OS OPTICAL STABILIZER Sigma's own advanced stabilisation system to help reduce camera or user shake when shooting at slow shutter speeds.

HSM HYPERSONIC MOTOR Sigma's version of a sonic drive motor for the autofocus system. Quicker and quieter than traditional rotary motors.

IF INTERNAL FOCUS Internal focusing means that the lens does not change size during the focus operation.
 
Thanks mate so which 17-70 should I be looking at? If any..
 
If you get the IS one that will help.

I'd still look at the 17-50 range. A constant f2.8 helps when shooting wide open. With the 17-70 f2.8-4, as you zoom out the aperture changes from 2.8 at the wide end through to f4 at the long end.
 
No idea. Have a look around. (Google is your friend or look here at the second hand ones.
 
I'm banned from classifieds lol! I like the sound of 17-50 though! Although is it worth loosing 1.4 for it?
 
That depends what you value more.. Light or zoom.

I think you need to really think about what you want to photograph, and how you want to do it.
You've many posts about buying a studio setup with speedlights and backgrounds and all sorts.. In that case a 1.4 lens is pointless, but now you are saying you dont want to give up the 1.4.

What do you want to do? Studio portraits or low light portraits. . You can do both if you have the money, you just need to decide.
 
If you are struggling for light f2.8 might push you into higher ISO settings, but a wider aperture has little DoF so you pay your money and make your choice.

Sigma do a nice 30mm f1.4 which is APS-C only and they also do 20, 24 and 28mm f1.8's which are ff compatible. I have the 30 and 20mm's and love them both.

I personally don't think that a non macro prime of f2.8 or slower is worth getting unless it's very cheap or you have some other very valid reason to buy one as you might as well get a f2.8 zoom.

Ref the Siggy 17-70mm... I'm sure it's a very nice lens but the f2.8 disappears the instant you move the zoom ring away from 17mm.
 
Right I don't need 1.4 but thought it's useful .. As you say I have speedlights so 2.8 is fine.

I'm looking at 24-70 macro 2.8 sigma and 17-50 2.8 macro sigma .. I like the idea of 24-70 more so is that a suitable portrait lens?
 
Tamron do a reasonably priced 28-75mm f2.8 that seems to have a loyal following. Might be worth looking into?
 
I could wait a month and try put some other cash towards it tho but 350 is as much a I'll spend. It looked like a nice lens and the extra reach of 70mm is nice if I want heads***s
 
from what i gather with research the 24-70 is the competitor to the canon 24-70 L which is my dream lens but cannot afford so perhaps at £349 i should grab it!
 
Not really a low light lens but at high iso is capable.... The 50 f1.8 would help.
 
As I said, there are various versions of the Sigma. The HSM version is considered the best, with the macro behind it and the non macro behind that.
You get what you pay for, if you want nearer to the L glass, you need to spend £500 on the HSM. Otherwise you'll have to make do with that version. In a studio is should be fine, as you'll be shooting at f/8 and higher usually.
 
Has anyone tried the kit lens for portraits? The reason I mention it is that you are going to shoot around f5.6. It can be had for £100 or so with IS. The build quality is poor, so that might be something to consider.

If anyone thinks that is suitable for portraits I would maybe be tempted by that and just keep the 50 f1.4 for the lowlight. Maybe spend some cash on manual triggers for your flashes.

Here is comparison of the kit lens and sigma (I think this is the lens in question)
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

review
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/404-canon_1855_3556is_50d?start=1


One of the benefits of an SLR is having the choice of the correct lens for the job, rather than a one size fits all :thumbs:


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