Need some lens help...

[mannyarboledajr]

hey guys and gals...
i am new to photography (not going to college for it, not thinking of going pro or starting a business) and im interested in getting a prime lens to practice with and wanted to know everyones thoughts on the Canon 50mm 1.8

like i said, i just want to start practicing with a prime lens and this seems like a decent lens for the price (im using a t3i)

thanks for any help in advanced

 

[Overread19 7]

It has good optical quality and a very affordable price. In general terms its build quality is very lacking though, its not the toughest of lenses and is actually quite weak - this is partly as a result of its very cheap production. For its cost you won't get better optically speaking.

It's a well suggested lens for beginners - however it can be limited in use. It is 50mm at the end of the day and thus whilst the lens itself has good points for it, the photographer using it also needs a reason to want 50mm in focal length. You likely have a kit lens with your camera so if you find 50mm on that good for what you shoot then the 50mm f1.8 is a good choice. If, however, you find its always too short or that its just not suited to the kind of photography and situations you shoot in then the 50mm f1.8 might see less use with you (of course there is always the argument that using a new lens will encourage you to seek out new subjects, but I err on the side of choosing gear that you already know you will want to use rather than chancing it) .

 

[cgipson1]

I don't shoot CANON... so cant help. But check these reviews out. FM Reviews - Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Miranda users are usually typical shooters... so these should be good reviews. Too many Amazon and Canon (and Nikon or Pentax, etc..) website reviews are from beginners who often lack the knowledge and skills to do a decent review (as in "This is my first lens I have bought.. except the kit lens that came with my camera" types). That is only an opinion, of course....

I would research it well before you buy it. I recommend that for all gear!

 

[Overread19 7]

I don't shoot Nikon...

Gasp - your signature has been telling lies for all these years then!

 

[cgipson1]

I don't shoot Nikon...

Gasp - your signature has been telling lies for all these years then!

OOPS! Serious braindead TYPO! lol! Thanks for the heads up!

 

[mannyarboledajr]

should i just get the 1.4 instead? i can save up for like a extra week or two if its worth it

 

[Overread19 7]

Buying new lenses always has to go against your budget; I would say if the saving time is only one or two weeks long then it would be beneficial to save for a better build lens yes. That said the Sigma 50mm f1.4 is a much newer design than canons and pretty much beats it in most tests and reviews.

The question then swings back to ensuring that 50mm is what you want - the higher your budget goes the more options become available to you to choose

 

[mannyarboledajr]

a buddy of mine has a sigma 1.4 and its pretty cool... the low light performance is really impressive
but damn, $500+ is a whooooooole lotta money...

 

[Overread19 7]

Good glass sadly is a lot of money - however kept right and treated well it should last you years and years of good use.

 

[mannyarboledajr]

that is true in almost all cases sir...

thank you so much for all your help. i am either going to get the canon 1.4 or the sigma 1.4. maybe i'll get the canon and borrow my friends sigma from time to time

 

[TheBiles]

Make sure you read up on the quality-control issues with the Sigma 50 1.4 if you are thinking about going that road. Totally unacceptable for a $500 lens, IMO. You'd love the Canon version.

 

[Overread19 7]

Make sure you read up on the quality-control issues with the Sigma 50 1.4 if you are thinking about going that road. Totally unacceptable for a $500 lens, IMO. You'd love the Canon version.

You've clearly not read about the quality control problems on the 100-400mm L by canon then

All lenses have problems and the majority of the 50mm f1.4 from sigma were not really life and death problems, but mostly a simple part of manufacture tolerances being incompatible between the lens and some camera bodies. Any lens can suffer from this and its normally something fixed fairly simply with a warranty (which for sigma is normally around 3 years)

 

[KmH]

Make sure you read up on the quality-control issues with the Sigma 50 1.4 if you are thinking about going that road. Totally unacceptable for a $500 lens, IMO. You'd love the Canon version.

Many people buy 3rd party lenses because they cost less than camera maker's lenses, with considering how it is the 3rd party lenses can cost less.

 

[Overread19 7]

But but the sigma 50mm f1.4 costs MORE than the canon 50mm f1.4
(UK side the difference is nearly £100 between the two)

 

[TheBiles]

Make sure you read up on the quality-control issues with the Sigma 50 1.4 if you are thinking about going that road. Totally unacceptable for a $500 lens, IMO. You'd love the Canon version.

You've clearly not read about the quality control problems on the 100-400mm L by canon then

All lenses have problems and the majority of the 50mm f1.4 from sigma were not really life and death problems, but mostly a simple part of manufacture tolerances being incompatible between the lens and some camera bodies. Any lens can suffer from this and its normally something fixed fairly simply with a warranty (which for sigma is normally around 3 years)

What does the 100-400 have to do with the lenses we were comparing? I was just pointing out that the Sigma 50 1.4 has a terrible history of focus issues that require it to be sent to the factory to be re-calibrated while the cheaper Canon version works great with auto focus (and actually has much sharper corners). Personally, I chose not to gamble on an already more expensive Sigma lens that could require me to send off the lens and my camera body for calibration.