Currnet photography Rig.Need new lens low f-stop en f2.8

[delko]

Hi All.

Im no expert lol actually a rookie.

I have a canon 60D body.

I got that normal lens canon 18- 55 f 3.5 - 5.6,aswell as the sigma 18-250 f 3.5-6.3 OS aswell as the sigma 50-500 F4-6.3 EX DG.

I have some interest in people photography,portraits with bokeh.

So i want to know about a new les i was looking at the following.


canon 50mm EF f1.8.
Sigma 17-50 f 2.8.
canon 17-55 f 2.8.

What difference in sharpness will I experience?

I know the canon the most expensive lol but im just looking for some advice comments critics .


Thank you

 

[Nubbs]

24-70 2.8 or 70-200 2.8 is what I would go with.

The 50 1.8 you are looking at is a good lens but it isnt great by any means

 

[cbrown222]

I'm not sure about the canon 50mm f/1.8 but the Nikon 50mm 1.8 is one of the nicest lenses I've used. Really sharp and pretty fast too

 

[delko]

Love the idea of canon 24-70 f 2.8.

Dont have nearly enough money for that now.

Lol well i guess quality comes at a price

 

[MReid]

Get the 50 shoot it at F2 with some separation from your backgrounds. If you want it Very sharp shoot it at 5.6 but you will not get the same amount of separation of your subject.

The 50 will be as sharp as those other more expensive lenses.....with portaits sharpness is not the be everything overriding criteria anyway.

 

[dakkon76]

I agree the 50mm will be the best for getting you your blurry backgrounds. I had the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and used it quite a bit. It feels really cheap, but it's a good lens to start out with. It doesn't cost much, and you can sell it for nearly what you pay for it. I've also got the Sigma 17-50mm. At first I considered sending it back because I was so used to shooting with my primes and not at a very wide angle. Now that I've given it a chance, it's become the lens that stays on the camera unless I need to really open up my aperture. It will be more versatile for you, for sure. It will give you some decent bokeh, but not quite as much as the Canon f/1.8. Initially I really wanted the 24-70... but realized that the 24mm end would be pretty useless as a "wide angle" once I put it on my crop body.

Given your budget, if you plan on the portraits being outdoors... you should also consider the Canon 85mm f/1.8. I've got 2 girls who are always running around and I try to get candids of them - in this case, I prefer to stand back with my 85mm all the way open and I get some nice shots of them. If headshots are your interest, and not full-body shots, then the 85mm will work great for those too.

 

[MLeeK]

How about the 50mm f/1.4 or the 28mm f/2.8 if the 50 isn't wide enough for you? The 50mm f/1.8 is amazing compared to the lenses you are shooting with, but compared to the 1.4 you also get what you pay for. The 1.8 is an amazing lens for it's price and well worth owning if you can't afford the 1.4.
On a crop sensor the 50mm sometimes is a bit tight if you are shooting a family or a full body shot and can't back up quite a way. The 28mm comes in rather handy.

The 17mm end of lenses tends to get you into the lens distortion trouble in portraits. Think the dog photos with the huge nose. Not QUITE that pronounced, but it does have the fisheye effect to some degree.
Sigma makes a 24-70 f/2.8 OS that is pretty well received. Tamron makes a 28-75 f/2.8 that is also well loved.