Canon 50mm EF 1.8 lens!

asfixiate · Apr 2, 2008

Just got it today and was messing around for like 15 minutes. Super Fast!! Excellent lens for the money.

Would the 18-55mm and 70-300mm kit lens that came with my camera get me a decent telephoto lens?

I don't mind the lenses I have but if I can get somethign as fast as this 50mm I'd be happy.

sabbath999 · Apr 2, 2008

1.8 telephoto lenses would be both gigantic and EXTREMELY expensive. Better to start looking at 2.8's if that is what you want to do.

31M0 · Apr 2, 2008

I've been trying to get that lens for ages but nowhere near me seems to have it.

Congratulations though. Have fun.:mrgreen:

Big Mike · Apr 2, 2008

Would the 18-55mm and 70-300mm kit lens that came with my camera get me a decent telephoto lens?

If you mean as trade value...then no.

A fast telephoto is going to be expensive. In order to keep a low F number, a lens must bet bigger as it gets longer. Have a look at a 300mm F2.8 or even a 400mm F2.8...they are huge....then look at the price :shock:

If you want a good quality telephoto zoom...I'd look at the 70-200mm lenses. There are four to choose from (from Canon anyway).
The first is the 70-200 F4 L; great price for an 'L' quality lens and it's super sharp. Probably a lot better than your 50mm F1.8
Next is the 70-200 F4 L IS; same lens but with Image Stabilization.
There we have the 70-200 F2.8 L; the larger aperture of F2.8 is a nice benefit but it adds size, weight and cost.
Lastly is the best one; 70-200 F2.8 L IS...it's expensive though.

If you want something a little closer to the budget of your 50mm. Have a look at the 85mm F1.8. It's actually built much better thant the 50mm F1.8 and it's a great lens for the price.

asfixiate · Apr 2, 2008

If you could only have 2 lenses and one was the 50mm what would be the second?

I have the 18-55mm and 70-300mm kit lenses in addition to the 50mm.

Big Mike · Apr 2, 2008

If you could only have 2 lenses and one was the 50mm what would be the second?

What's your budget?

If I could only have two lenses...one of them wouldn't be the 50mm F1.8. The 50mm F1.4 maybe...but the F1.8 version is just too cheap.

asfixiate · Apr 2, 2008

My budget included the 50mm 1.8. I have no problem keeping the 18 and 300mm but was wondering if I sold them and got like 200 bucks how close could that get me to a second good lens.

I'm cool for now with the the glass I have as I think I can get accomplished what I need to accomplish. If I can get it so whenever I go on my photo adventures and only need 2 lenses what the second would be.

Right now the adventures will be the 50mm and the 70-300mm

Current Equipment is Rebel XT with 50mm, 18-55mm, and 70-300mm, with 8 gig CF, (insert affordable flash here )

Village Idiot · Apr 2, 2008

Canon 70-200 f/4L = $400-$500 used
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 = $600-$700
Canon 70-200 f/4L IS = $800ish (iirc)
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L = $1000ish
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS = $1350-$1700 low used-high new

Canon 1.4x TC = $279

If you want to look at 300mm + f/2.8's, then you're going to start looking at a lot higher prices.

Better photography through learning about light and photography and not worrying about gear = priceless

In photography there's some things money can buy, for everything else, there's The Strobist Blog.

Brought to you by the cult members of The Strobist Blog.

asfixiate · Apr 2, 2008

Thanks Village and everyone. Always helpful. I think i'm going to hold off on any new glass for now. Next mission is flash though.

What is difference between onboard flash and speedlite 220? Will i only start noticing differences with the 480?

Mystwalker · Apr 2, 2008

Play around with the kit lens first.

Besides wildlife, 18-55 and 70-300 covers pretty much everything. Besides pigeons and zoo animals, I'm not having any luck @ 280mm (200mm x 1.4).

For 2nd lens, I was going to recommend 70-200L, but you already have that covered. Yours is not "L", but you may not notice or even care about difference.

Big Mike · Apr 2, 2008

I think that you have a decent 3 lens kit. The 18-55mm covers the 'normal' range, the 70-300mm gives you some telephoto reach and the 50mm gives you a wide aperture. On a rather tight budget, those are probably the three lenses I would recommend.

As for flash...the 220EX will be better than the pop up...because it's a bit taller and it's more powerful...but that's about it. I would recommend saving up for the 430EX. The ability to tilt & swivel (for bounce) is a HUGE advantage.

I would even recommend something like the Sunpak 383 over the 220EX...but a flash like that would mean that you would have to adjust the settings more often, because it doesn't work with the camera's metering.

asfixiate · Apr 2, 2008

Once again I'm blown away with how helpful this forum is. Luckily I'm a boss cause honestly I'd probably get yelled at for how often I'm on this.

what would be the main reason why someone would go from the 220 to 430? Can you explain a scenario?

Village Idiot · Apr 2, 2008

asfixiate said:
Once again I'm blown away with how helpful this forum is. Luckily I'm a boss cause honestly I'd probably get yelled at for how often I'm on this.

what would be the main reason why someone would go from the 220 to 430? Can you explain a scenario?

Envision this: You're using a speed light...

Good enough scenario?

asfixiate · Apr 2, 2008

Village. Wow I didn't look at it that way....I do love television.

Dao · Apr 2, 2008

I saw a review from Amazon and the reviewer said he/she called Canon and confirmed that the pop-up flash from the Rebel XT is more powerful than the 220EX.

Besides, I think that flash cannot bounce the flash off the ceiling or back wall etc.

I think the only advantage for the 220 over the pop-up flash is the position if you use a long lens. Am I right? (I am still new to DSLR) Please correct me if I am wrong. :blushing: