| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/04/2007 12:18:08 PM · #126 |
My favorite lens is:
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS
Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:34:42 PM · #127 |
Hard to pick a favorite really
Sigma 18-50 f2.8
Sigma 28-70 f2.8
Nikon 24-120 VR
Tokina 12-24 is amazing too
Lately I have been shooting more with my Sigma 18-50 and the very old MF Nikkor-T 10.5cm f4
Diferent lens for different things but for now It's the Sigi 18-50 EX-DC f2.8 very nice fast clean, sharp, my studio is tight for space so its used for portrait now too. |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:39:16 PM · #128 |
A question for all the 50mm fans and other short primes - did any of you go there first and love it, or does this sound familiar:
Get an SLR.
Have loads of experienced people say 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!'
Get a 50mm.
Feel restricted, hate it. Get a decent mid-range zoom instead. Think everyone else is nuts.
Shoot for a few years.
Rediscover the joy of 50mm and moving your feet, now that you have a better grasp of composition, being in the right place at the right time and able to cope with composing with more elements, so you don't need a telephoto to crop it out.
Shoot with nothing but primes 90% of the time and tell new folks to 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!' and wonder why they don't like it ? :)
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:40:16 PM · #129 |
Originally posted by ursula:
"Foot zoom", I like that! :)))) I'm trying "snowshoe zoom" these days. |
You should get the prime lens USM equivalent and try 'ski zoom'. It's much faster, at least one way.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:42:14 PM · #130 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
A question for all the 50mm fans and other short primes - did any of you go there first and love it, or does this sound familiar:
Get an SLR.
Have loads of experienced people say 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!'
Get a 50mm.
Feel restricted, hate it. Get a decent mid-range zoom instead. Think everyone else is nuts.
Shoot for a few years.
Rediscover the joy of 50mm and moving your feet, now that you have a better grasp of composition, being in the right place at the right time and able to cope with composing with more elements, so you don't need a telephoto to crop it out.
Shoot with nothing but primes 90% of the time and tell new folks to 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!' and wonder why they don't like it ? :) |
Or never get/do much with the zooms since you're used to fixed lenses from way back when, and like them (for the fitness value) :) |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:43:26 PM · #131 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by ursula:
"Foot zoom", I like that! :)))) I'm trying "snowshoe zoom" these days. |
You should get the prime lens USM equivalent and try 'ski zoom'. It's much faster, at least one way. |
Not if you're attacked to a stretchy cord. The ultimate experience, "bungee zoom"! |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:45:29 PM · #132 |
The Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 was my favorite for awhile but I suspect it's being replaced by my recent addition, the 70-200mm 2.8L IS. I could see loving the 50mm 1.8 but the autofocus on mine has always been a little funny so it's not top in the running.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:45:46 PM · #133 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Not if you're attacked to a stretchy cord. The ultimate experience, "bungee zoom"! |
Hmm, I've always played with the zoom with the camera on a tripod, or just running forward or spinning in a circle. Never thought about using bungee cords.
Interesting...
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:46:41 PM · #134 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
A question for all the 50mm fans and other short primes - did any of you go there first and love it, or does this sound familiar:
Get an SLR.
Have loads of experienced people say 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!'
Get a 50mm.
Feel restricted, hate it. Get a decent mid-range zoom instead. Think everyone else is nuts.
Shoot for a few years.
Rediscover the joy of 50mm and moving your feet, now that you have a better grasp of composition, being in the right place at the right time and able to cope with composing with more elements, so you don't need a telephoto to crop it out.
Shoot with nothing but primes 90% of the time and tell new folks to 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!' and wonder why they don't like it ? :) |
I find the 50mm to long on today's SLR, not counting the nice Full Frame's such as yours. I opted for the 35mm f2. Reminds me of the good old days and my standard lens I have on for most situations. I'm debating upgrading to a MF 35 1.4. I use primes almost exclusively, because I like the low light ability, and comparable zooms are out of my price range. Though I think zooms definetly have their niche and there are more than a couple I would like to have. I love renting the 70-200 2.8, but alas that purchase is going to have to wait. |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:48:08 PM · #135 |
While we really like our 50mm 1.8, this lens is the one we enjoy using the most - Sigma 18-125. It seems to be the strongest weapon in our arsenal.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:50:15 PM · #136 |
Originally posted by jaysonmc:
I find the 50mm to long on today's SLR, not counting the nice Full Frame's such as yours. |
Actually, that is a really good point. I didn't like it much on a 1.6x crop D60. My current camera isn't full frame, but still closer to it (1.3x crop) and I do find the 50mm much more generally usable. (Though I also use an 85mm a whole lot more now, where I used to use a 100mm - again I suppose that makes a lot of sense too). So I think my rediscovery of the 50mm, was in part that I was a bit more adept at using it, but also the change in apparent focal length.
So while the standard film days advice was always to get a 50mm, the 'normal for many DSLR' advice should be 35mm like you said. The fly in the ointment there is the cost though. Double gauss lenses are lovely and cheap, unlike just about everything else.
Message edited by author 2007-01-04 12:51:39.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 12:56:25 PM · #137 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by ursula:
Not if you're attacked to a stretchy cord. The ultimate experience, "bungee zoom"! |
Hmm, I've always played with the zoom with the camera on a tripod, or just running forward or spinning in a circle. Never thought about using bungee cords.
Interesting... |
Skipping down the sidewalk at night gets some interesting results (and strange looks, especially in a small town). |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 01:01:16 PM · #138 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
A question for all the 50mm fans and other short primes - did any of you go there first and love it, or does this sound familiar:
Get an SLR.
Have loads of experienced people say 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!'
Get a 50mm.
Feel restricted, hate it. Get a decent mid-range zoom instead. Think everyone else is nuts.
Shoot for a few years.
Rediscover the joy of 50mm and moving your feet, now that you have a better grasp of composition, being in the right place at the right time and able to cope with composing with more elements, so you don't need a telephoto to crop it out.
Shoot with nothing but primes 90% of the time and tell new folks to 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!' and wonder why they don't like it ? :) |
Once upon a time, zooms were heavy, expensive, dim and generally produced much poorer quality images than they do now. My first camera was a Canon FT QL. I had two lenses, a 50mm f1.8 and a 135mm f4. I rarely used the 135mm and I shot with that camera for several years.
When I got my first Nikon, all I had money for was the 50mm f1.8, so I just shot with that until my dad started giving me lenses for my birthday and Christmas. I never really felt limited by only having the 50mm. Though, on my 10D, it is a bit long for everyday use. I'd like to get a 35mm f2 or maybe the Sigma 30mm f1.4. Either one would be in the "normal" lens range for the APS-C sensor.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 01:09:39 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Gordon:
A question for all the 50mm fans and other short primes - did any of you go there first and love it, or does this sound familiar:
Get an SLR.
Have loads of experienced people say 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!'
Get a 50mm.
Feel restricted, hate it. Get a decent mid-range zoom instead. Think everyone else is nuts.
Shoot for a few years.
Rediscover the joy of 50mm and moving your feet, now that you have a better grasp of composition, being in the right place at the right time and able to cope with composing with more elements, so you don't need a telephoto to crop it out.
Shoot with nothing but primes 90% of the time and tell new folks to 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!' and wonder why they don't like it ? :) |
Once upon a time, zooms were heavy, expensive, dim and generally produced much poorer quality images than they do now. My first camera was a Canon FT QL. I had two lenses, a 50mm f1.8 and a 135mm f4. I rarely used the 135mm and I shot with that camera for several years.
When I got my first Nikon, all I had money for was the 50mm f1.8, so I just shot with that until my dad started giving me lenses for my birthday and Christmas. I never really felt limited by only having the 50mm. Though, on my 10D, it is a bit long for everyday use. I'd like to get a 35mm f2 or maybe the Sigma 30mm f1.4. Either one would be in the "normal" lens range for the APS-C sensor. |
The 50mm was the only lens I had for many years on my old film Pentax. I never felt limited by it (mainly I think because I didn't realize I could have a lot of other lenses, and was having too much fun with the one I had). I would like to get a shorter lens now though, because my daughter's boyfriend let me borrow his fisheye for a little and I really enjoyed using it. Lots of possibilities there. I think though I won't get a fisheye.
The advantage of the short lenses is that they are a lot less intimidating to people, and easier to carry around. |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 01:10:06 PM · #140 |
| My Canon 50mm f/1.8 seems to live on my camera most of the time. Though I do hope my new Tamron 28-75mm becomes my favorite since I just bought it and it gets here tomorrow. |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 01:23:01 PM · #141 |
My 50mm is a pretty useless for me. Either too long or too short unless I used it for something specific. Simply put...it's not how I see the world.
My favorite lens is my 70-200mm 2.8 VR which is exactly inline with Canons version. Incredibly sharp throughout it's entire range and it renders the sweetest bokeh.
Message edited by author 2007-01-04 14:36:18. |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 01:42:02 PM · #142 |
Hate to be too predicatble but the Canon 50mm 1.8 II is mine.
Although i've just ordered a Canon 24-70 2.8L so that may soon change.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 01:48:03 PM · #143 |
For indoors with natural light
- Canon EF 35mm 1.4 L
- Canon EF 50mm 1.4 L (best lens in my bag considering the price)
For Landscape and Studio
- Canon EF 17-40mm 4.0 L (wonderful lens and great price. If I have to stay with only one lens (because of money), this should be the choice)
For all around
- Canon EF 24-70mm 2.8 L
Message edited by author 2007-01-04 13:48:34. |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 02:09:47 PM · #144 |
Originally posted by ursula:
The advantage of the short lenses is that they are a lot less intimidating to people, and easier to carry around. |
That's another reason that I think I'm favouring my 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 (I upgraded to the 1.4 for more lowlight, better focusing and particularly, better balance with a heavy camera body)
I'm shooting with more non-professional people in front of my camera and want something that isn't so intimidating as a big white lens or huge piece of glass pointing at them. I'm thinking of buying a smaller camera to further reduce that aspect.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 02:33:14 PM · #145 |
Originally posted by jaysonmc:
I find the 50mm to long on today's SLR, not counting the nice Full Frame's such as yours. I opted for the 35mm f2. Reminds me of the good old days and my standard lens I have on for most situations. I'm debating upgrading to a MF 35 1.4. I use primes almost exclusively, because I like the low light ability, and comparable zooms are out of my price range. Though I think zooms definetly have their niche and there are more than a couple I would like to have. I love renting the 70-200 2.8, but alas that purchase is going to have to wait. |
A 28 or 35 is probably a better 'standard' lens on the 1.5-1.6 crop cameras. With Canon, the 35mm f/2.0 is a great little prime that is also faily inexpensive. I'm not sure which Nikon would be favored in that range, but I'm sure they have one.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 02:41:00 PM · #146 |
i don't have much to choose from, mainly because i gave away a couple lens with my old camera, and have been undecided on what to fill in the zoom gaps with.
but even with zooms - most of the photos i take are with
canon ef 50mm f1:8
& sigma 105mm f:2.8 ex dg macro
my next purchase will likely be a canon ef 70-200mm f:2.8 L ( non-IS) or the sigma version for a lot less money.
on the fence over a wide angle zoom ( likely one of sigmas ) - but i think the long tele will end up getting more use.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 02:41:39 PM · #147 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
A question for all the 50mm fans and other short primes - did any of you go there first and love it, or does this sound familiar:
Get an SLR.
Have loads of experienced people say 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!'
Get a 50mm.
Feel restricted, hate it. Get a decent mid-range zoom instead. Think everyone else is nuts.
Shoot for a few years.
Rediscover the joy of 50mm and moving your feet, now that you have a better grasp of composition, being in the right place at the right time and able to cope with composing with more elements, so you don't need a telephoto to crop it out.
Shoot with nothing but primes 90% of the time and tell new folks to 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!' and wonder why they don't like it ? :) |
I shot with a 50mm on my F3 (film) and loved it.
I bought a consumer level zoom, 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5, with my 10D and never enjoyed it as much as my old 50mm prime. I sold the zoom and went back to a prime, which seems to suit me better. This may sound a little esoteric, but each prime lens seems to have it's own character. The 85mm f/1.8 is very sharp with amazing bokeh and nice compression for portraits. The 35mm f/2.0 is sharp (and a little noisy) but the images have more of a reportage feel. I'm sure a zoom can do all these things, and even more, but I enjoy the character of the primes.
Message edited by author 2007-01-04 14:44:13.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 04:20:14 PM · #148 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Get an SLR.
Have loads of experienced people say 'get the 50mm, its fabulous!'
Get a 50mm.
Feel restricted, hate it. Get a decent mid-range zoom instead. Think everyone else is nuts. |
I think everyone else is nuts...
I'm kidding of course but "foot zooming" doesn't always work....with or without experience, innate timing or whatever.
Shooting what I like to shoot, in the street or when I'm taking candids indoors, at an event, running back and forth is simply out of the question. If people can do it...that's great but I can't see how they remain anonymous while moving in and out to get a good crop. That's essential to what I do.
I have had fun and some good luck with that lens but far too many times to tell, it was all wrong. You turn around, see some action, one person is in frame when the action contains 6 people and by the time you move backwards it's all over. The same thing happened over and over in the other direction.
Why bother. Getting great shots is tough enough. I don't need the extra fight. Again...I'll add that I have had some great times with the 50mm.
Message edited by author 2007-01-04 16:21:38. |
|
|
|
01/04/2007 04:35:34 PM · #149 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I think everyone else is nuts...
I'm kidding of course but "foot zooming" doesn't always work....with or without experience, innate timing or whatever.
Shooting what I like to shoot, in the street or when I'm taking candids indoors, at an event, running back and forth is simply out of the question. If people can do it...that's great but I can't see how they remain anonymous while moving in and out to get a good crop. That's essential to what I do. |
I'm not that good at it either, so certainly wouldn't claim to have a good answer. It did strike me reading this though that most of the great or considered great street photographers all shot with 50mm primes or wider. HCB would be a good starting point for that 50mm only perspective (though in 35mm terms, not 1.5 or 1.6x crop cameras again)
I don't normally like 'street' or 'candid' photography that's obviously shot with a telephoto though. It just lacks intimacy that I find necessary to not feel voyeuristic when looking at it. But again, that's just what I like from street photography. Many, many like the long lens candid style.
I wish I had the bottle to shoot all my candid/ street stuff with a 17mm
Message edited by author 2007-01-04 16:37:05.
|
|
|
|
01/04/2007 04:49:39 PM · #150 |
I shoot people but that doesn't make me a pure street shooter, even though I fall into that category, I guess.
I'm sure if I left the lens on all the time and slugged it out, I'd come home with some cool stuff over a period of time but if I get out more than once a week these days I'm super lucky so I have to make it count.
I don't know whether you like this shot but if I had a 50mm on my camera at the time, I would have had to zip through a parked car and into two lane traffic to get this crop.
To get this one with a 50mm, I would have had to jump a pedestrian barrier, run into the middle of traffic, stand there, compose and then suffer a major ass-kicking from 20 pissed off punks in Camden.
For the record I don't like a lot of street work. Some of it's amazing and at times....maybe too often, I think people are just assigning importance to otherwise boring stuff. Just an opinion, of course but I find people the most interesting thing to look at of all photographic subject matter. They are what I love to look at. They are what I love to shoot.
Message edited by author 2007-01-04 16:56:11. |
|
