Which lens is appropriate for bokeh and city?

[mcandar]

Hi all. Firstly, I must say that I'm speaking English as a foreign language, thus my articles are lack of grammar.

Here is my question:

I have canon eos 550d and an 18-55mm lens on it. I'm interested in bokeh, and city photography especially at nights, when colors and lights are everywhere etc.

To do that, which lens should I choose?

I thought a lens between 20 and 150 mm is enough zoom for my shots. However, what about the aperture? Do it have to be low like F/1,8 or 1,4 for bokeh?

Greetings to all, waiting for your precious answers!

 

[batmura]

I have canon eos 550d and an 18-55mm lens on it. I'm interested in bokeh, and city photography especially at nights, when colors and lights are everywhere etc.

By bokeh, are you talking about blurred backgrounds and your subject in focus? If so, I don't understand why you'd want to do that for night photography.

I thought a lens between 20 and 150 mm is enough zoom for my shots. However, what about the aperture? Do it have to be low like F/1,8 or 1,4 for bokeh?

I'm not quite sure what you want to achieve, but if you want the blurry background and sharp subject, you might want to consider a 50mm prime lens, either 1.8 or 1.4 depending on your budget.

 

[Derrel]

Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Canon 50mm f/1.4 EF, Canon 85mm f/1.8 EF, Canon 135mm f/2-L. All four of these have nifty bokeh at night on city lights. All four of these produce "nice" images. Larger apertures, like f/1.8, f/2, f/2.2, f/2.5, f/2.8, and f/3.2 produced the larger, out-of-focus "bokeh circles" on night-time city lights.

 

[07Vios]

Are you doing cityscape or specific things within the city? For cityscape, I don't think you'd want to have an out of focused (bokeh) parts, and would probably be best off with a 10-2x mm lens. There are some f2.8 lenses available in that focal range, but you're not going to get crazy bokeh, I think, because of that short focal range. If shooting particular objects within the city, I'd say go with the Sigma 30mm f1.4. I like mine, and if I have enough distance between my subject and the background, it'll have nice bokeh.

 

[o hey tyler]

I would go with the 85/1.8 if you're going to be mostly outside. Nice long focal length that gives you distance between you and your subject, and a wide aperture to accentuate the OOF areas.

 

[jake337]

If you want round out of focus highlights at apertures smaller than wide open then look for lenses with 9 aperture blades or more. 9 rounded aperture blades would be even better.

 

[mcandar]

Thank you all for comments I've checked them all, they're nice, but i wonder if there are any zoom lenses capable of shooting bokeh photos.

 

[o hey tyler]

Thank you all for comments I've checked them all, they're nice, but i wonder if there are any zoom lenses capable of shooting bokeh photos.

They're not "bokeh photos." They're photos with a shallow depth of field.

Almost any zoom lens is capable of creating a shallow DoF at the end of its zoom range, the question is how much do you want to spend and what do you want to shoot (and please don't say "bokeh").

 

[Jacobwilson]

24-70 2.8 would do nicely.

 

[mcandar]

Thank you all for comments I've checked them all, they're nice, but i wonder if there are any zoom lenses capable of shooting bokeh photos.

They're not "bokeh photos." They're photos with a shallow depth of field.

Almost any zoom lens is capable of creating a shallow DoF at the end of its zoom range, the question is how much do you want to spend and what do you want to shoot (and please don't say "bokeh").

Pardon me, I won't call it bokeh anymore. My budget is less than 800$ and I'm interested in city photography but not landscapes, just a bit like street photography.

24-70 2.8 would do nicely.

Sounds good!

In addition: I found 18-135mm F/3.5-5.6 EF-S IS, is it fine?

Finally, Does 55-250 f/4-5.6 EF-S goes with 18-55 lens? Is it a good idea?

 

[o hey tyler]

Thank you all for comments I've checked them all, they're nice, but i wonder if there are any zoom lenses capable of shooting bokeh photos.

They're not "bokeh photos." They're photos with a shallow depth of field.

Almost any zoom lens is capable of creating a shallow DoF at the end of its zoom range, the question is how much do you want to spend and what do you want to shoot (and please don't say "bokeh").

Pardon me, I won't call it bokeh anymore. My budget is less than 800$ and I'm interested in city photography but not landscapes, just a bit like street photography.

I wasn't trying to call you out, but the term "bokeh" is misused quite a bit. So I figured I'd fill you in early on. Bokeh is the term used to describe the quality of the out of focus areas.

The 85/1.8 would probably suit you fine. That, or the 50/1.4. I prefer to be a bit farther away from people when shooting candids... So I wouldn't opt for the 30mm 1.4 just out of my personal preference.

 

[TheKenTurner]

The 85/1.8 would probably suit you fine. That, or the 50/1.4. I prefer to be a bit farther away from people when shooting candids... So I wouldn't opt for the 30mm 1.4 just out of my personal preference.

I think the tamron 17-50 2.8 would do him nicely, but you're not a big fan of zoom lenses :/

-Ken Turner

 

[mcandar]

They're not "bokeh photos." They're photos with a shallow depth of field.

Almost any zoom lens is capable of creating a shallow DoF at the end of its zoom range, the question is how much do you want to spend and what do you want to shoot (and please don't say "bokeh").

Pardon me, I won't call it bokeh anymore. My budget is less than 800$ and I'm interested in city photography but not landscapes, just a bit like street photography.

I wasn't trying to call you out, but the term "bokeh" is misused quite a bit. So I figured I'd fill you in early on. Bokeh is the term used to describe the quality of the out of focus areas.

The 85/1.8 would probably suit you fine. That, or the 50/1.4. I prefer to be a bit farther away from people when shooting candids... So I wouldn't opt for the 30mm 1.4 just out of my personal preference.

I understand your point, these are good advices. Thank you.

The 85/1.8 would probably suit you fine. That, or the 50/1.4. I prefer to be a bit farther away from people when shooting candids... So I wouldn't opt for the 30mm 1.4 just out of my personal preference.

I think the tamron 17-50 2.8 would do him nicely, but you're not a big fan of zoom lenses :/

-Ken Turner

However, like Ken said, shouldn't I choose a zoom lens? I'm pretty sure I will need to zoom in or out when I shoot a photo because I want to shoot not only bokeh but also city photography. I don't know if I made a mistake. I feel like I'm limited in framing by normal lens when I shoot a photograph with it.

 

[o hey tyler]

I understand your point, these are good advices. Thank you.

However, like Ken said, shouldn't I choose a zoom lens? I'm pretty sure I will need to zoom in or out when I shoot a photo because I want to shoot not only bokeh but also city photography. I don't know if I made a mistake. I feel like I'm limited in framing by normal lens when I shoot a photograph with it.

Well, considering there's a ton of people that shoot weddings with exclusively prime lenses (myself included) I don't think a zoom lens is necessary. Prime lenses make you think about your shot. You can always take a few steps closer or farther away.