Kind of a poll

[NakedAnt]

I guess it is more or less a poll. I'm in the market for a 50mm prime. I've narrowed it down to the Canon 50mm f/1.4 or the 50mm f/2.5 macro. Which would you guys (and gals) recommend for a beginner who really doesn't know where his new interest will take him?

 

[danalec99]

50mm 1.4

 

[Chase]

I second the 50mm 1.4 idea.

 

[Alison]

I third the 50mm 1.4

 

[Corry]

I think the 50mm 1.4 is pretty damn popular around here.

 

[qweasdzyc]

Newb question: How is a 50mm considered macro? Does it just focus at very close distances?

 

[Fullpower]

heck yes, by all means, obtain the f/1.4

 

[PrimaryCanary]

Yep, the 50mm macro has special optics in it that allow it to produce almost life size images on a 35mm negative. I do belive, though, that the 50mm macro from canon can only produce 1/2 life size images, it needs the Life Size Converter EF to make true 1:1 lifesize shots. http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=155&modelid=7323

Now to answer the main question, I suggest you donate your money to me, or optionally, go for the 50mm 1.4, it's an extremely versatile lens worthy of praise and song.

 

[NakedAnt]

Now to answer the main question, I suggest you donate your money to me.

Okay, I guess we can do this throught Paypal... :shock: Wait a minute...!
Back on track...it seems that even in with a few replies the f/1.4 is the clear victor (worthy of epic poems-or something to that effect). Dare I now ask why? After some hefty research it would seem that other than the lack of speed (the debate in my cranium is over whether I'll ever have the need for speed...like Tom Cruise) and the macro function the glass is pretty much the same between them. With the added bonus(?) of macro in the less expensive one. Not trying to be a nudge, I just want to make completely sure I'll be happy with something carrying that kind of price tag on a pizza delivery/student budget. Thanks. Great so far Pee-Wee, action packed :thumbsup:

 

[Big Mike]

If cost is an issue, why not just go with the 50mm F1.8? It's 1/4 the price of the F1.4 and is still a very sharp lens.

 

[NakedAnt]

If cost is an issue, why not just go with the 50mm F1.8? It's 1/4 the price of the F1.4 and is still a very sharp lens.

I've read enough "this thing fell apart on me in a year" type complaints in reviews to scare me away. Any personal experience?

 

[PrimaryCanary]

the 1.4 lens is nice because you can use it in just about any situation or lighting. Even in a dimly lit room, the camera should focus and have reasonably "fast" shutter speeds. You could turn this lens into a macro lens down the line by using extension tubes, or optionally, and less optically perfect, close-up filters.

Just so you know, as of December 27, I started charging $50 a post. Please forward checks to:

Accounts Receivable
The Canary Cage
Attn: Primary Canary


A reasonable fee of $.25 will be added to any check not received within 24 hours of post.

Edit: Yeah, I love spelling, or the lack there of....because it's GREAT!