Photography
Related: About this forumThe Nifty Fifty
I've been seeing a lot of recommendations for the 50mm f1.8 prime lens. Does anyone use it and what do you think?
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)It's great for portraits and low-light situations. It's light-weight and inexpensive.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)people say it's the lens they use the most. Would you agree?
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)Last edited Thu Jan 9, 2014, 12:20 PM - Edit history (1)
for the versatility, but I've had the 50 out quite a bit lately. I think the lens I use most is the 24-70 f/2.8, but the 50 is just a fraction of the cost.
jmowreader
(50,554 posts)On my 35 I never use a 50mm lens. I have a 50mm prime that never comes out of the drawer, and a zoom that never gets set to 50mm.
On my Mamiya 645 medium-format camera, the equivalent lens is 80mm and I don't even have one.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)Lots of people using it on cameras with a DX format where the normal lens focus length is 28 mm.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)A normal lens for 35mm is actually closer to 43mm and for APS-C it's ~28-30mm depending on which camera you have as there is some variance. With medium format it depends on what film you are using.
However, what is considered the 'normal' lens for a given format generally follows standard lenses. With 35mm you have the 50mm lens and with APS-C most camera manufactures make a 35mm lens which they consider normal. Both the 35mm lens with the APS-C and the 50mm with a 35mm are actually short telephotos, but they are pretty close.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)I have a 50/1.8, a 50/1.4, and a 55/2.8 (macro).
I also have two zooms which cover that range which are the Tamron 17-50/2.8 and a Nikon 18-55/3.5-5.6.
50mm is actually the normal lens for a 35mm camera. For APS-C format (most digital SLRs), the normal lens is 35mm, but 50mm is pretty close.
I think a 50/1.8 is a great lens to have, particularly if the only other lenses you have are f3.5-5.6. For one thing, it's cheap. You can generally pick up a good one on the used market for about $50 or so. They are also small and light, so they don't take up much room in the camera bag or if you wear a photography vest it fits nicely in a pocket and you don't even realize it's there. Compared to the 18-55/3.5-5.6, the 50/1.8 is about 3 stops faster which makes for a much better lens in low light situations. Slower lenses autofocus slower, if at all in low light situations, require more flash power, and don't incorporate ambient light as well.
A fast lens in the 50mm range also makes for a pretty decent portrait lens. A normal lens also renders perspective naturally for landscape shots.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)I have the Canon, 50mm 1.8. Bought it a few years ago when trying to add to my lens assortment and not wanting to spend a whole lot of cash. Think I caught it on sale for around $100.00. I don't use it everyday, but glad I have it and it's the fastest lens I have, for low light situations.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)18-300/f3.5 nicely.
Got rid of several others because these 2 are more than adequate.
Stevenmarc
(4,483 posts)On your shooting style. If you do a lot of street shooting or low light it's a great lens to have.
groundloop
(11,518 posts)I also have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8, which pretty much lives on one of my bodies. The Tamron produces nice crisp images and I just don't really have much need to go beyond f2.8 that often, and I like the versatility of a zoom.
However, now that it's been brought up I'll probably go find some photos to take tonight with my nifty fifty.
BuddhaGirl
(3,602 posts)It's fast and light and it's usually my go-to lens.
I highly recommend it!
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)The great things about the 50mm is the wide aperture and its cheap price for the IQ you get.
They are great lenses on full frame DSLRs. On the crop sensors, the 50mm is rather an odd-ball length. For them, the 35mm is usually a better option. Unfortunately, no one seems to make a cheap 35mm for Canons.
I got my 50mm back when I was shooting a cropped-sensor body and the 35mm was not available. It did not get much use. Now that I am shooting a full-frame body, the 50mm sees more use.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)on DPS about the 50mm on the cropped-sensor body, which I have, and there was a lot of differing opinions on 35mm vs 50mm. The 50mm still one - probably because of price.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Assuming you compare the 35/1.8G with the 50/1.8G, however the 50/1.8G is a FX lens while the 35/1.8G is not. Why Canon doesn't make a relatively cheap 50/1.8, I have no idea.
Using the 50mm on a APS-C format camera, the field of view you get is equivalent to a 76mm on a 35mm. The closest lens this would equate to is the 85mm which was (and still is) quite popular for 35mm format (and to some extent APS-C). I think a 50mm on a crop sensor camera makes for an excellent indoor portrait lens. I have the Nikon 50/1.8D version of the lens and mine is extremely sharp, even wide open. Although it's not my favorite portrait lens, I almost always have it in my camera bag because you never know when someone is going to want a portrait, and because the lens is so small and light, there's really no penalty for carrying it around.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)indoor portrait lens on a cropped sensor body.
rdking647
(5,113 posts)its great for taking shots indoors w/o a flash. i use it on a full frame camera (nikon d600). its also good on an overcast day outdoors. i love the small depth of field.
i also have a 35 1.8 that i use on my crop sensor camera
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)is taking product photos. I think I would use the 50mm more than the 35.
alfredo
(60,071 posts)The 50mm would be a small telephoto, good enough for portraits too. A 35mm would get you close to a 50mm. What it comes down to is what you are used to, and what you do with your camera.
I have a 30mm on a sensor with a 2X crop factor. That roughly translates to 60mm. It's close enough to 50mm for my uses. I even do landscapes with that lens. It works OK for portraits too.
If you like the lens, it doesn't matter the focal length. You work with the strengths and limitations.
Look at the 28mm lenses too. It should give you something around a 45mm lens.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)with a 1.5 crop factor.
alfredo
(60,071 posts)could buy both lenses for around $300 total.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)$200 to $225 apiece.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)This is the version I have and optically it's excellent. The newer version is optically different and adds features common to AF-S like autofocus override. I don't have one so I don't know if it's better or worse, but I can't imagine it being much, if any better optically. The AF-D version has been around for a while and is readily available on the used market.
alfredo
(60,071 posts)Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Or new non-OEM lenses?
alfredo
(60,071 posts)I'm very happy with my Sigma lenses on my Oly.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Part of this is due to modern manufacturing improvements and part is due to aspherical lens elements which make lenses easier and cheaper to produce. I think my Tokina 12-24/4 is every bit as good optically as the Nikon equivalent and costs considerably less which is why I bought it. For some lenses, Nikon still holds the upper hand.
alfredo
(60,071 posts)Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)All make some lenses that are quite nice and some that aren't.
alfredo
(60,071 posts)ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)In the case of the 50mm, Sigma seems to have one of the best. I don't recall which model though.
alfredo
(60,071 posts)sir pball
(4,741 posts)Than shooting with a (near) normal prime *will* make you a better photographer. You either have to think about composing with what you see, or physically moving around. No turning a ring to change the scene. Once you get the hang of it it's also amazing for candid/street/sly shooting - you know exactly what you're going to see through the lens so you just aim and fire, I can shoot mine without even looking through the viewfinder.
No point going third-party here, I got mine for <$200 out the door and the quality is far better than anything offbrand. Well, except the Zeiss F-mounts.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)and love the 50mm on my crop sensor camera as a great portrait lens. I'm considering going full-frame in the future and sadly, I won't be able to use these lenses 'cause they're DX, not FX.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)If I decide to go full-frame and stick with Nikon, I'll have one lens I can use.
yourmovemonkey
(266 posts)I'm using it on a Canon T4i, and I'm really digging it for indoor shots and portraits. I wanted something for low light conditions because I abhor flash, and I wanted something fast for children. Also, I do a lot of band photos in dark bars. Haven't tried it with bands yet though.
I'm not a big camera techie, so it's going to take a little while to get used to a different approach than a zoom lens. I expect it's going to give me a lot of great shots though.