Canon 5dmkII or 50D?

[usayit]

I would. Of the glowing reviews I've seen given them by people, most have never touched the 1.4 version.

I guess I'm just the exception.... I sell the 50mm f1.8 as a stop gap for young amateurs looking for an inexpensive way to a fast prime optic. I give it glowing reviews knowing full well of its limitations... and I wouldn't say I am "inexperienced".

The last time I checked the $300 1.4 isn't "top of the line". The 1.2 is top of the line and costs upwards of $1,500.

For some $300 is a lot of money... especially when they have never shot with anything but a kit lens. It is all relative man... I shoot with two different 50's. One costs approx $1200 and the other is $5000 on the used market. As good as it is.... the $1200 is considered "cheap" by many shooters of the same system. Certainly not "cheap" or inexpensive by my standards!

The "top of the line" comment was directed at your equipment list specifically.

 

[inTempus]

The "top of the line" comment was directed at your equipment list specifically.

I figured it was.

An unnecessary snark IMHO as my equipment has nothing to do with the discussion.

 

[usayit]

The "top of the line" comment was directed at your equipment list specifically.

I figured it was.

An unnecessary snark IMHO as my equipment has nothing to do with the discussion.

wasn't a snark at you... more like trying to bring a little reality to the $$$ of items.

 

[inTempus]

The "top of the line" comment was directed at your equipment list specifically.

I figured it was.

An unnecessary snark IMHO as my equipment has nothing to do with the discussion.

wasn't a snark at you... more like trying to bring a little reality to the $$$ of items.

Since I wasn't discussing the 1.2L, I fail to see what my gear list has to do with the discussion. Apparently my opinion is lessened when discussing non-L gear because I have more money than sense, at least that's the implication.

If someone is buying a $2,400 body another $200 for quality glass probably isn't going to be a deal breaker. That's a couple more weeks of not drinking Starbucks to buy a high quality lens vs. a low quality lens. I'm sorry, but having a 5D2 and mounting a 1.8 on it would be a travesty.

If I were saying "go buy the 1.2 because the 1.8 is cheap", then my gear list and your snark might have some baring as I would clearly be off my rocker.

 

[inTempus]

Here's one of the shots from yesterday where I used my 85L.

 

[usayit]

Apparently my opinion is lessened when discussing non-L gear because I have more money than sense, at least that's the implication.

Coming from someone who just said that those that recommend or use the 50mm f/1.8 are inexperienced?

Who is judging who?

 

[usayit]

btw.. nice photo...

is there anything one can do to avoid the large square reflection in the model's eyes?

 

[inTempus]

Apparently my opinion is lessened when discussing non-L gear because I have more money than sense, at least that's the implication.

Coming from someone who just said that those that recommend or use the 50mm f/1.8 are inexperienced?

Who is judging who?

First, I didn't single you out or even mention your name. You singled me out for your snark. Secondly, I didn't say "all", I said "usually". I also didn't say "recommend" I said people that "praise" the 1.8 in reference to comments the OP has read elsewhere on the net talking the 1.8 up. I stand by my assessment as it's not only accurate but fair. If someone with experience has good reason to like the lens, my comment doesn't insult them in the slightest.

If you feel the need to "get even" for something I've said, why don't you PM me and let me know your feelings were hurt by something I said (inadvertently) and I'll make amends. But firing off snarky, not to mention unrelated, comments does nothing but destroy threads.

 

[inTempus]

btw.. nice photo...

is there anything one can do to avoid the large square reflection in the model's eyes?

The image was shot with two large softboxes positioned on either side of her face with about 8" between them for me to get my shot. I don't think there's much I can do to avoid it, but I could try to photoshop it out. I'm not sure I have the skills to make such an edit look totally seamless.

I have taken a shine to this particular style of photography. Here's one from a couple months ago.

This time (the girl) I lowered the light to the left to get more shadows on one side of her face... experimenting with the technique. I didn't fire the stobes, I used high ISO and only the modeling lights. I shot this most recent one with the 1D4 and ISO 1600.

 

[usayit]

I wonder if a shoot through umbrella would give you the similar results but with more rounded eye reflections rather than square/rectangle.. More light will spill outward but that shouldn't impact such tight portraits.

 

[zipperfoot]

Thanks a lot for the suggestions, guys! It actually really helps.
The 85mm F/1.8 and the 50mm F/1.4 are at the top of my list as of now, due to what you guys have said and also due to the recommendations of many other portrait and fashion photographers, and also given the limitations of the space I do have. It would be a dream if I could get both of them at once, but we'll see if it's in the budget.

(So to summarize, I'm leaning towards the 5DII as a body and the 85mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.4 for starting glass. Anyone have any strong oppositions they'd like to voice?)

 

[usayit]

As time progressed, I sold off many Canon glass that saw little use over the years. The 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 along with the 135mm f/2L and 24 f/1.4L were a few of the "survivors" ... a testament to how much I liked them.

[EDIT]
Regardless of different opinions, I see nothing wrong with 50mm f/1.8 on a 5DMII... They are relatively cheap and the benefit of experimenting between two focal lengths; 50 and 85 can be valuable. At some point in time, you can upgrade to the f/1.4 and sell the 50mm f/1.8... they are easy to sell with little loss of investment.

 

[zipperfoot]

As time progressed, I sold off many Canon glass that saw little use over the years. The 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 along with the 135mm f/2L and 24 f/1.4L were a few of the "survivors" ... a testament to how much I liked them.

That's a comforting sentiment to hear. Getting as many testaments to glass (and bodies for that matter) as I can is a major plus.
EDIT: Although I have read some things about the 85mm that say (and show) it has bad CA.

 

[MrLogic]

I agree that the 85mm has a great perspective for portrait work. I like to shoot my 85 when I can, but unfortunately it's a bit long for many people with limited space. My studio is pretty small and my 85 won't allow me to get much more than a waist up shot. I find myself using my 24-70 and 50mm prime mostly in my studio given my limitations on space.

You're right, an 85mm isn't as versatile when you have limited space. I forgot to mention that. :blushing:

I don't know what zipperfoot has to work with, but "even" a 50mm often doesn't cut it when you have very limited space, so a 24-70 might make more sense (?) So yeah... it depends.

 

[zipperfoot]

I agree that the 85mm has a great perspective for portrait work. I like to shoot my 85 when I can, but unfortunately it's a bit long for many people with limited space. My studio is pretty small and my 85 won't allow me to get much more than a waist up shot. I find myself using my 24-70 and 50mm prime mostly in my studio given my limitations on space.

You're right, an 85mm isn't as versatile when you have limited space. I forgot to mention that. :blushing:

I don't know what zipperfoot has to work with, but "even" a 50mm often doesn't cut it when you have very limited space, so a 24-70 might make more sense (?) So yeah... it depends.

Unfortunately, I can't afford the 24-70 right now. However, because of my situation, it is highly likely that I will have a great deal more space to work with in the very near future. c:

EDIT: I have heard a great many complains about the 85mm having bad CA... any insight?