Prime Lens. 50mm?

[ArmySoldier777]

Hello everybody,

Once again, I could hugely benefit from some advice of the great DPS forum users.

Well, I'm slowly starting to gather some decent gear for my camera. I have the 18-55mm lens that comes with my Canon Rebel Xsi, a 55-250mm lens i bought a couple weeks ago, which has proved very useful for a lot of my needs. I just recently bought an extension tube, which has turned out some pretty good macro-like photographs, as well as a ring flash which has been amazing.

Now I'm starting to look into prime lenses. When I first bought my camera, I didn't know the use in having a prime lens when I could have one that zooms. But now that I've learned more about photography, I've found that a prime lens would be a great asset to my primary camera gear. I'm trying to look at spending less than $200. I know that good, quality lenses don't come everyday at prices that low, but I'm just a hobby photographer on a tight budget. Are there any lenses that you would recommend? If it's not a 50mm, why is it that you believe it would be a better option?

Here's the lens that I'm currently thinking about purchasing: Canon EF 50mm F/1.8 II Lens USA rebel xsi t1i 50d | eBay


Thanks in advance to everybody who takes the time to give me advice, I really appreciate it,
David

[Rentham]

I have the 50mm 1.4 and find it to be clunky. I sort of wish I would have gone with the 35mm 2.0 or 85mm 1.8. If I had to get a 50 again, I'd probably opt for the 1.8 version and put the extra money into something else. For your budget range, the nifty fifty is your only option new. You might be able to find the 35 or 85 used for somewhere in that range if you're lucky.

[inkista]

Wouldn't blow $125 on eBay for it, since that's the retail price you can get it for new from any reputable seller with a return policy (B&H, Adorama, Amazon, etc.).

That's the one I regularly recommend as the third in the "training wheels triple": the 18-55 IS, the 55-250 IS, and the 50/1.8 II. The combination of the low price and good optical quality make it one of the most-recommended lenses for a newbie.

There are going to be people who tell you it's got a plastic mount and is cheaply made, and that there are better lenses out there. That it has no USM or distance scale, that the manual focus ring is a PITA. And this is all true. But for $100, you're simply not going to find a better lens in the EOS mount. Bang-for-the-buck, it's pretty amazing.

The one thing to keep in mind, if you're experienced with film SLR lenses, is that 50mm is no longer going to be "normal" on a crop-body dSLR, and that this will be acting more like an 85mm lens would on a film camera. This is still a great portrait length, though.

But if you plan on using the lens inside in smaller spaces or for full-length portraits or as a "normal" lens, you may want to hunt up something wider. Remember, this is going to be very close to what your 18-55 looks like zoomed all the way in. You may want to check the images you've taken with the kit lens and see where you "sit" focal-length wise, and then decide if you want to get the 50, or save up for something a little wider, like the EF 35mm f/2 or Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM.

[ArmySoldier777]

Inkista,

Thanks for the advice about comparing it to the 18-55mm zoomed all the way in. It seems pretty obvious now, I just didn't really think about it while reading all the posts about people recommending to get one. I always see potential shots in enclosed areas, I just don't really attempt them much anymore due to the low light limitations of the kit lens. With a lens like the Sigma 30mm, I'd definitely get back into those shots though.

I really like the Sigma 30mm. I'm just not too fond of the price lol. I was able to find some used ones in good condition for about half the price though. I know that when you're able to, it's always better to buy new because then you know what you're getting. But sometimes when you're on a budget, you have to make due with what you can. I'll just keep an eye out and see what I can find. When shopping on ebay, even if it's a used item, I never buy from anybody with a rating below 98%. And the more sales the better. So if I up my price range a little, I may be able to find one.

Rentham,

Thank you for taking the time to write about your own experience with the 50mm, it's definitely helped in my decision.



If there are any other ideas out there, I'd be glad to hear them!
Thanks for the 2 replies I've already received though, I appreciate them greatly!
David

["Matthew"]

+1 for the sigma.

First it is a great lens. Fast AF, good IQ, good bulid, and of course, f/1.4. All in all I would recommend it to you and you sound like you have done your research.

However, don't get it used. This lens has AF issues, it will ether back, or front-focus. You camera body does not have AF microajust in it. That means that you will be stuck with the AF properties of the lens you get. You are better of getting it from b&h, amazon, etc. That way you can send it back and get another copy if the lens does not like your body, you also get the warranty that way. So you can send it to sigma to get recalibrated free of charge.
Remember that lenses are an investment. Body's will go, good lenses will stay.

That's my $0.02

Ps. Feel free to PM my with questions about the lens.

[ArmySoldier777]

Matthew,

Thanks for the advice. None of the reviews I read mentioned anything about the AF issues. Maybe I just hadn't read enough of them, but it's definitely good to know. I'll hold off and wait to buy it new so I can receive those benefits. Maybe by then there will be a newer version of it out and the price will drop. That's what happened when I bought my 55-250mm, The price was over $300 for awhile until Canon released a new telephoto near that range, now the price in a lot of places is around $170. I should've held off for just a little longer, because I got mine for $220, but still not bad lol. So I'll see what happens with this Sigma 35mm.

I appreciate you taking the time out to give me some advice on the issue, and thanks for the friend request.
David

["Matthew"]

NP

First did not know if it was a typo but the sigma is 30mm not 35mm. I believe that Sigma is the only one to make a 30mm prime. Canon on the other hand makes three lenses in that area. The 35mm f/2.0. The 35mm F/1.4L, and the 28mm F/1.8. The 35 2.0 is an ok lens. The 35 1.4L is a great lens, however as its a L Is way out of your budget. The 28 1.8 is also an ok lens. Not that great on the sharpness though.

I dont think sigma will release a new version soon, however they might fix some of there QC issues.

[ArmySoldier777]

Yeah it was a typo. I was thinking about all those 55's that I'd mentioned, so the 5 stuck in my head lol.

I guess we'll just have to see then. If they don't, then I don't mind paying the money for a good lens when I actually have it.


David

[tlake55]

I highly recommend the 50mm 1.8 II..it is like $120 new, it is sharp and it is fast...LOVE it! A most excellent buy for the money

[ArmySoldier777]

tlake55,

Thank you for the recommendation. It's always good to hear from people that actually own a lens and see what they think of it.

Lately, I've found myself doing a lot of baby photography for a close friend, that's why I've really been looking into prime lenses. So much better quality in low-light conditions, as well as in general. But as I was saying, this usually means that a lot of the shots I do are at pretty close distances. As inkista pointed out, if I'm shooting in tighter spots I might want to consider a smaller mm lens. So right now I'm really torn between saving up for the Sigma 35mm or getting the 50mm. At only $120 though, it's kind of hard to pass up. Even if it's just to have it in my arsenal. I guess I'll just have to see where things go money-wise. Maybe I'll end up with both eventually lol. I'd love to have a prime 200mm as well, but I definitely don't have $800 to spend on a lens right now lol.

Thanks for your personal experience with the 50mm. I appreciate you taking the time to reply.
David