18-55mm vs 50mm

[Felix0890]

Hey! My 450D comes with the typical 18-55mm kit lens. I also just purchased a 50mm 1.8 for it. I know the "nifty fifty" is way better for a lot of things. What I'm wondering is for which types of shots should I be using the 18-55 over the 50. I'm brand new to photography and lenses are one of the things I have yet to learn about.

As a side note, I'm reading Understanding Exposure. Does this book explain anything about lense differences (I'm only 1/3 through)? If not, what sites do you recommend for this?

Felix

 

[Josh66]

What I'm wondering is for which types of shots should I be using the 18-55 over the 50.

Well, obviously, you'll need the 18-55 any time you want to go wider than 50mm...

50mm isn't really that wide on a crop body, so you might find that you'll need the 18-55 a lot indoors (where the faster 50mm would come in handy...lol).

 

[robdavis305]

The 50mm is more of a portrait lens. Iwould say that the 18-55mm is the most versatile of the both lens.

 

[syphlix]

The 50mm is more of a portrait lens.

that's a pretty narrow view of a versatile lens...

 

[Hobbes]

This may be a little bit off topic here but I recently saw an article on dpreview about those 50mm lenses and this is what the author said about them:

But really, why 50mm? On an APS-C imager, that's equivalent to around 75mm-80mm in full frame terms. Problem is that this is a strange focal length, too long to be considered ‘normal’ yet just a bit too short for portraits (few manufacturers ever made a 75mm prime for film). The portrait range has classically been considered as being between 85mm and 135mm for comfortable 'head and shoulders' shots; personally in my book, 100mm counts as 'about right'. So it seems to me that manufacturers may be misinterpreting the appeal of those 50mm lenses; they’re popular just because they are fast and cheap, not particularly because of their focal length.

Where are the portrait lenses?: dpreview.com Editorial blog: Digital Photography Review

and about the Canon 50mm f/1.8II lens. I really really hated how it felt in my hand. I had one for awhile and took some test shots but two things really annoyed me first of all it's so tiny and I usually had to hold my camera as if it's a p&s, it's especially annoying when I used it on my 40D and I think my hands are on the small side and then of course the reach... it's a prime so the only way to zoom in and out is with my legs lol which could be very hard sometimes. I think one of those 17-50something f/2.8 lenses are way better than a combination of those two and it doesn't cost whole a lot more either at least not the Sigma and Tamron ones.