Macro or 50mm?

[kelsbeth]

I am new to digital photography and just completed a basic course on manual shooting. It's become clear to me that I need a new lens to get the photos I want (I like shooting people as well as objects close up), because the stock 18-35mm lens isn't getting the shots I want. My question is, I really like getting shots of objects/mementos close up (like jewelry, shoes etc), but it's not like that's the bulk of my photography. Will the 50mm lens let me get these kind of shots (closer than my current lens at least), or will I need to purchase a macro as well?

[RichardTaylor]

A 50mm will get close, like peoples heads etc and would probably be ok for shoes (especially with a bit of cropping, but not super close, like filling the frame with a matchbox.
If you are shooting with the Canon 18-55 it is one of the closer focussing standard lenses around 0.34 maximum magnification.

A macro lens will. If you do get one the longer focal lengths like around 100mm give you more working distance to the subject, making lighting a lot easier.

[kelsbeth]

Thanks! I think I will start with the 50mm and see if that is sufficient. If not, I guess I'll have to start saving for a macro. This is certainly an expensive hobby, but a fun one!

[wulf]

What camera do you have? I'm trying to think what comes with an 18-35mm lens. I thought (and, to be honest, I'm not an avid reader of the latest specs, so I could well be wrong) that 18-55mm was the most common size for a kit lens.

If that is the case, you can already get 50mm within the range of your lens. A prime lens will have other benefits (eg. it is likely to allow wider apertures and composing shots without being able to zoom is a good discipline) but it won't get you closer (or very much closer, even if your lens does only zoom to 35mm).

Wulf

[Sloseph]

you could do what i have done and get the 50mm prime and some macro filters

you won't get the detail like you would with a dedicated macro lense but its definatly a cheap alternative

go on ebay and you can pick them up for around £10

[kelsbeth]

I have the canon rebel xs. I guess I was wrong and it DOES come with the 18-55. I still feel like it's not letting me get that close because every time I try, it makes funny sounds and won't let me take the shot...perhaps it's operator error?

[wulf]

It will have a minimum focusing distance and you are probably trying to drive beyond that.

I suspect you have a switch on your lens to allow you to use it in manual focus mode; if so, that might let you get a bit closer. However, if that isn't enough then spending a bit more money will be required (although not that much if you definitely want to go for the macro range).

It might help if you could share a shot that is as near to what you want as you can get with your current set up; more experienced heads might be able to suggest just what would put your intended aim within your reach.

Wulf

[kelsbeth]

Yea, I'm thinking I'm just going to have to buy a nicer lens. But I will upload a few shots this weekend and maybe someone will have some insight

[Michael_2010]

I love doing close-up stuff too, but have not made the commitment to macro lenses yet. I use a nifty fifty with extension tubes and it works pretty well. Hard to beat f/1.8 for that kind of money.

PS: With my setup I use a tripod and MF. The AF works too hard trying to focus. Plus, I like to have complete control of focus with close-up images.

[Danylu]

The 18-55 gets quite close, 0.34x life size, although dedicated macros go to 1x life size usually.

The 50mm will not get you closer, but it will let in more light, so it is more suited for low light situations