Confused on the prime 50.

[divided]

So i see ALOT of people recommend the canon 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 i believe. Can someone post some sample photos using the above mentioned lens. Since there is no zoom, they require being closer to an object, do they have mf or auto only?

 

[Don Simon]

Hi. It's not strictly the case that a fixed length of 50mm requires that you be closer to the subject... it requires that you be closer than if you were using a longer lens (above 50mm). And by the same token it requires that you be further away than if you were using a wider lens (below 50mm). Basically it means you have to do more walking around than if using a zoom. Try taking a zoom (kit lens?), and leaving it at 50mm to get an idea of the focal length.

The 50mm can be used with either auto or manual focus just like any other lens.

You can find lots of images taken with the Canon fifties here.

 

[SpeedTrap]

I have the Nikon 1.4 I belive it is the same, you can control it with MF or AF, but yes if you want to get closer, w you will have to move closer to the subject.

 

[jstuedle]

With a prime lens (a non-zoom lens) we zoom with our feet. On a full frame SLR the 50 approximates crudely the field of view of our eye. Most "standard" 50mm lenses are extremely sharp and inexpensive. One of the best values in photography. Many of the worlds most famous photographs were taken with nothing more than the old reliable 50mm lens.

 

[kaiy]

Where prime lenses shine are in natural light and low light situations. The extra speed of the lens will make all the difference in the world. If you find that you do not shoot much in these situations, maybe a zoom will work fine for you.

Prime lenses should produce sharper images , but qualitatively, I'm not sure if you'd be able to pick out photos from a line-up of mixed zoom/prime definitively every time.

 

[divided]

You can find lots of images taken with the Canon fifties here.

Thanks!!! That link is amazing and exactly what i was looking for. :thumbup:

 

[JerryPH]

Take a look on flickr.com and do a search for pics associated with the Canon lenses of your choice... you will likely find hundreds if not thousands of examples.

 

[Alex_B]

Since there is no zoom, they require being closer to an object

my 300 mm prime lens has no zoom either ... still I have to be closer to an object with my 24-105mm zoom lens.

zoom has nothing to do with magnification, only with the ability to vary the focal length of a lens.

 

[[JR]]

I've been told zoom is more a matter of perspective than one of magnification. That being said, I think 50mm is the right lens for a natural perspective... and the larger aperture.

 

[Alex_B]

I've been told zoom is more a matter of perspective than one of magnification.

the word zoom only refers to the ability to change/vary the focal length of a lens, nothing else. therefore it is not a matter of anything else.

the focal length defines how close you have to be to your object ("perspective") to make it fill your frame. "magnification" of course is a term used in a sloppy way here. Compared to say a 50mm lens, a 300mm lens gives a "magnified" image.

That being said, I think 50mm is the right lens for a natural perspective... and the larger aperture.

that is true-ish on 35mm film or a full frame sensor.

 

[[JR]]

Ah alright. What I meant is that, if you take two lens of different focal length, say, 28mm and 50mm and you move so that your foreground is of the same size, your background is not the same. Therefore the perspective is altered.

 

[pinacate2008]

This article has a review of the three Canon 50mm lenses available. Check the galleries at the end of the article to compare them.
http://www.photoaficionado.com/lenstalk/50mm.html