Is the 50mm f/1.8 worth it??

xxbluejay21 · Sep 6, 2011

I have a Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 and am deciding whether I should get a 50mm f/1.8 lens. The thing is, I want to shoot pictures in lower light, but the reason I'm hesitant on getting a new lens is because:
1. I have a SLR-201 camera holster bag from Sigma. Only holds one camera/lens. I'd have to get a new bag
2. I'd have to get brand new filters for this lens as the 67mm ones on my sigma would not fit.
3. I'd have to buy sensor cleaning materials and worry about dust (No lens switching= no dust)

One thing to note is that people say that this lens is a lot sharper. I don't mind this at all. I'm not going to print my pictures and I'm not a professional photographer, so I don't think I need to worry out a tiny difference in sharpness.

The thing I am interested in (the reason I'm considering this lens in the first place) is the f/1.8 aperture. How much brighter is a f/1.8 aperture from a f/2.8? Does anyone have some picture/video comparisons they can find or upload real fast?

If I'm taking videos, could I just bump the iso up 200 and get the same results? Is it worth the 300 dollars (Lens: 100, filters: 120, sensor cleaning: 40, bag: 35) for a little more light?

table1349 · Sep 6, 2011

xxbluejay21 said:
I have a Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 and am deciding whether I should get a 50mm f/1.8 lens. The thing is, I want to shoot pictures in lower light, but the reason I'm hesitant on getting a new lens is because:
1. I have a SLR-201 camera holster bag from Sigma. Only holds one camera/lens. I'd have to get a new bag

If you thought when you got into this only one bag was all you would ever own, someone lied to you.

2. I'd have to get brand new filters for this lens as the 67mm ones on my sigma would not fit.

What filter would that be? I never use a filter with out a good reason and lens protection in my book is not a good reason. OEM Lens hoods always, filters only when absolutely necessary. Yes there are two schools of thought on this.

3. I'd have to buy sensor cleaning materials and worry about dust (No lens switching= no dust)

If you think that 1 the 28-70 is going to satisfy all your needs then your needs are very simple or again someone lied to you. You need to smack them. :mrgreen: Dust can enter overtime anyway. That lens to camera mount is not hermetically sealed. The whole purpose of an interchangeable lens system is to have the lenses you need to get the shot you want.

One thing to note is that people say that this lens is a lot sharper. I don't mind this at all. I'm not going to print my pictures and I'm not a professional photographer, so I don't think I need to worry out a tiny difference in sharpness.

The thing I am interested in (the reason I'm considering this lens in the first place) is the f/1.8 aperture. How much brighter is a f/1.8 aperture from a f/2.8? Does anyone have some picture/video comparisons they can find or upload real fast? If I'm taking videos, could I just bump the iso up 200 and get the same results? Is it worth the 300 dollars (Lens: 100, filters: 120, sensor cleaning: 40, bag: 35) for a little more light?

The difference between f1.8 and f2.8 is 1 and 1/3 stops of light. That is a big difference. F2.8 lets in half the light of f2.0, the next full stop faster. The f1.8 will let in more light than a f2.0

Only you can decide if it is worth it or not. Me, I own a whole slew of lenses so I can get the shots that I want, both primes and zooms along with several bags and tripods etc. Good Luck.

subscuck · Sep 6, 2011

I've never bought a bag that only fits a camera body + one lens. Always think about the future.

If you're worried about dust, hermetically seal it and never use it.

As far as filters:

B+W Step-Up Ring (Lens to Filter) 52mm - 67mm 65-069443 B&H

CrM45 · Sep 6, 2011

I have both the 50mm & 35mm Nikon f1.8's. I use both a lot and they are sharper and much better for low light shooting. I think everyone with a camera that you can change a lens on should have a good prime lens. I agree with gryphonslair99 all the way. You will not regret getting it!

djacobox372 · Sep 6, 2011

The f1.8 will allow you to more then double your shutter speed in a low light situation, making hand held shots that would be impossible possible.Youll also be able to acheive a more narrow dof (blurrier background).

BuS_RiDeR · Sep 6, 2011

I have the Canon50mm f1.8 and love it. Best $120 I've spent for my camera yet...

Stradawhovious · Sep 6, 2011

Yes.

Yes it is.

kundalini · Sep 6, 2011

My plastic 50 rarely sees the light of day anymore. Bang for the buck, it's okay. Only get a lens if you need THAT lens.

timlair · Sep 6, 2011

I also bought a 50mm 1.8. It has been my lens of choice for so many shots. As for filters, I have yet to use any. A lens hood went on the day I got it and has never come off. As for low light stuff, I shoot a lot of high school and college sports and I have yet to use it for much since its a fixed length. But you might feel differently.

manaheim · Sep 6, 2011

I have a Nikkor 24-70 2.8 that is pretty much bolted to my camera, but I swear my 50mm 1.8 is a sharper lens. That said, the additional flexibility of the 24-70 usually winds up trumping it unless I have nothing but time... which is rare.

Can't say how your 24-70 would compare... but if you have $100 to blow, a 50mm is the best bang/buck lens purchase you can make... bar none.

dakkon76 · Sep 7, 2011

I had fun with it. Paid $120 for it new, sold it for $95 new about a year later to upgrade to the Sigma f/1.4 ... hard to go wrong, when it retains its value so well.