| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/08/2005 08:01:33 PM · #1 |
Ok i know one lens is for macro and the other one isn't but what makes these two lenses diferent, i'm using this lens but could use another...
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens
Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro Lens
CAn you explain whats the major diference? or is it just another stupid question!? :)
|
|
|
|
02/08/2005 08:29:47 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by Discraft:
Ok i know one lens is for macro and the other one isn't but what makes these two lenses diferent, i'm using this lens but could use another...
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens
Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro Lens
CAn you explain whats the major diference? or is it just another stupid question!? :) |
The only stupid question is the one you didn't ask. Or the one you asked twice.
One opens wider for low light and costs less. If you don't need macro and shoot low light get this one.
The other does macro and costs more. If you want to do macro shots get this one.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2005 08:32:54 PM · #3 |
In addition to nsbca7's accurate information, the 50/2.8 Macro has much better buld quality than the 50/1.8, but for $70 or so you can hardly complain about the 50/1.8. It's simply a great value. you can also do macro with the 50/1.8 by buying a relatively inexpensive extension tube set.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2005 08:54:09 PM · #4 |
thats what i thought if i buy the cheaper lens i can do macro and use it for different things right?
|
|
|
|
02/08/2005 09:07:07 PM · #5 |
Yes, but to do macro with the 50/1.8 you will need extension tubes. The way to go is the set of Kenko tubes for around $129. Together with the 50/1.8 it's still cheaper than the 50/2.5 but not that much. In the end it boils down pretty much to personal choice. The one solid advantage for the 50/2.5 version is that you don't need the extension tubes, so it takes up less room in the bag.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2005 09:51:37 PM · #6 |
thanks a lot for the information i don't want to buy these lenses i was just questioning myself why where they so diferent that the price would be so diferent to... so if i buy the macro lens i would like, have to lenses for one? i have a sigma 105mm 2,8 macro, but i was just wondering that. thanks for all the anwsers.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2005 10:30:16 PM · #7 |
I have the 50mm f2.5 macro. The 50mm f2.5 macro focusses much slower than the 50mm f1.8. Much noisier motor too. Some say that the f2.5 macro is even sharper than the f1.8
|
|
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: 09/14/2025 06:32:47 AM EDT.
