Lens Advice: 50mm and 50-200mm

Campbell · Oct 21, 2007

Hey everyone. I have some extra money on my hands and am looking to invest it into my camera. That said, I'm really wanting to get a couple new lenses so I can get into portrait and macro shooting. I also want a telephoto one with a long zoom so I can do effective wildlife photography. With that in mind, I've been doing alot of research and have come up with these two lenses:

Olympus 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/301931-REG/Olympus_261002_50_200mm_f_2_8_3_5_ED_Zuiko.html

Olympus 50mm f/2.0
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/301932-REG/Olympus_261003_50mm_f_2_0_Macro_ED.html

I know the 50mm will be good for macro shooting, but will it also be suiteable for portrait shots? I haven't worked with a lens with a fixed focal length before so I'm clueless. Do you think the 50-200mm give me the reach I'm looking for to get close-ups of wildlfe?

Lastly, do you think it is worth it to have 2 different lenses dedicated to these different types of shooting? I would think so since I don't think the 50-200 would be great for macro, but then again if I knew the answer I wouldn't be posting here

Thank you for the time!

RyanLilly · Oct 22, 2007

The 50-200 will have pretty good reach for wildlife on a 2x crop sensor, but I think that the 50mm may be a bit long for portraits.
On second thought the 50mm could be fine for portraits, many people do shoot longer lenses than that, you just need a little room to move around in.

fightheheathens · Oct 22, 2007

i think the 50mm would be fine for portraits.
i think traditionally photogs used 85-105mm lenses for portraits. which on a 2x sensor would be 40mm-50mm or so.

Campbell · Oct 23, 2007

Thanks for the replies so far.

Can someone explain what a "2x sensor" is/does?

sabbath999 · Oct 23, 2007

2x means that the camera has twice the effective focal length of a 35mm camera.

For example, a 50mm lens on a 2x camera gives you the same magnification as a 100mm lens on a standard 35mm camera.

With a standard 35mm, the 50mm lens is considered a "normal" lens (approximately the same field of view as the eye) whereas on a 2x camera it is a telephoto lens. It takes a 24mm lens to be a "normal" lens on a 2x camera.

AUZambo · Oct 24, 2007

Yeah...what Sabbath said. The sensor on a DSLR is smaller than a single frame of 35mm film...so it effectively zooms in just a little bit by a factor of anything from 1.5x to 2x. My DSLR has a 1.5 crop factor, so my 18-200 mm lens is is the same as having a 27-300mm lens on a film camera.

This works out nice if your shooting at sporting events or other things far away, but can be a little bit of a problem if you're wanting a wide-angle.

Campbell · Oct 24, 2007

Gotcha, thanks for the explanation.

Any more comments about the lenses would be appreciated :thumbup:

EOS_JD · Oct 25, 2007

50 is perfect for portraits but you might need some room to move in because in a small room the 50mm might be slightly too long.

The 50-200 would be fine for wildlife. Long reach and reasonably fast.

Campbell · Oct 25, 2007

Worst comes to worst I can use the 14-45mm I have now for small spaces, but it would be nice to know I can double the macro one for portraits since it is a higher grade lens. I think I'm pretty much sold on both of these, but please keep the comments coming!

Campbell · Nov 5, 2007

Bump.

Groupcaptainbonzo · Nov 5, 2007

Macro....

Ideally you want a macro lens. A standard 50mm will not have the close focus ability you need. you can get "Close up filters/lenses". these are pieces of glass that fit into a holder which screws onto the front of the lens and allow you to focus closer. they are of limited value but at least they are quite cheap. a lens reversing ring is also cheap. This is a ring which screws into the filter thread of the lens, and allows you to turn the lens around and use it backwards. As daft as this sounds it is quite an effective way of getting closer. But you loose all auto functions with the lens and have to use it in fully manual mode. Extention rings are less cheap but a lot better. you can get dedicated rings which allow you to keep all the auto functions, and because there is no glass in the extention rings there is no extra distortion either. But a MACRO lens will be the best option. Although it is the most expensive . it is designed from the outset to do exactly that job.

TamiyaGuy · Nov 8, 2007

A 50mm lens sould be fine for portraits, unless you're really stuck for space.

And just my opinion, but I'd choose a slightly longer lens for wildlife; my attempts in the UK make me think that 200mm isn't quite long enough. I was thinking maybe something like this instead? (I'm not sure whether it would fit your camera, but I would think so)