| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/14/2004 01:55:07 PM · #1 |
| Which lens would you buy first, the 50mm or the 85mm and why? |
|
|
|
12/14/2004 02:00:55 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by photomayhem:
Which lens would you buy first, the 50mm or the 85mm and why? |
50mm, cos it's $70
|
|
|
|
12/14/2004 02:04:49 PM · #3 |
I'd absolutely buy the 50mm f/1.8 because of the focal length (you can get more in the photo with the 10D and it works more like a regular portrait lens on a full-frame media/sensor). It costs about $75 USD and will give you a functional focal length of 80mm. The 85 is slightly more expensive (around $350 USD) and it can get a little long in the legs for portrait work (which is what a lot of people who used it with film cameras were used to doing with it).
Having said that, I have both, I like both but if you asked me now that I own both which I'd rather use, I'd put the 85mm on the 10D and love the quality of the shots all day long. The 50mm is nice but I just love the 85 more.
Either will give you nice bokeh and fairly sharp results.
Kev |
|
|
|
12/14/2004 02:19:40 PM · #4 |
Think I would go for 50mm.
It costs less and I think it is more practical all around. As 85mm it can be used as a portrait lens and possible macro with extension tubes. Under many circumstances you can gain the extra 35mm by getting closer. |
|
|
|
12/14/2004 03:32:09 PM · #5 |
Actually, while the 50mm is a steal, I've already found it too long for shots "in the house". I was trying to take pics of candlelighting for Hannuka and I couldn't get far enough away to get anything but a closeup in our kitchen. Or maybe I need a bigger kitchen?
I did quickly switch to my 18-125mm, but it's F3.5 and I had to use ISO 400. I am really thinking about buying a shorter, wide aperture lens. |
|
|
|
12/14/2004 05:01:25 PM · #6 |
The 85mm f/1.8 gives some pop to portraits that you don't get with the 50 f/1.8. The bokeh is wonderful and I like the amazing DOF variations you can get with the slightly longer lens. 50*1.6 is equivalent to 80mm, which is a little short for a portrait lens and the 85*1.6 equivalent 136, which is a little long for me but matches Canon's traditional 135mm portrait length. I hope you don't minde the shameless self promotion, but these shots were under similar situations with 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 lenses. This might help with the perspective and DOF differences between the two.
50mm  
85mm  
|
|
|
|
12/14/2004 05:43:05 PM · #7 |
| Nice photographs... Is it just me or are the 50mm shots sharper? They all look great though... I ended up buying the 85mm 1.8 at lunch today. I hope to see some nice results tonight... I plan on taking some long exposures of our xmas lights on our house for a night test. I guess I can always go and buy the 50mm since it's only $70 bux anyway... LOL |
|
|
|
12/14/2004 05:52:57 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by photomayhem:
Is it just me or are the 50mm shots sharper? |
Probably just poor shot selection on my part, but I think it is very hard to beat the sharpness of the 50mm f/1.4 at f/2.0. Anway, congradulations on the new lens, you going to love it!
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/13/2025 07:27:39 PM EDT.
