50mm 1.8 vs. 85mm 1.8 - which better for wedding

Just wondering people's opinions. No need to have a civil war :D

 

P.S. I would then look to get maybe a Sigma 30mm 1.4, Canon 35mm or

even look at the 10 to 24 mm prime range for wide angle.

 

P.S. This is for a Canon XT, 1.6xlens factor

Between those two lenses I would pick the 85 simply because of build and image quality.

 

However... if it's going to be one of your only lenses I'd choose to go with the 50. The 85 is going to be pretty long on your XT... the 50 will be more versatile.

Both lenses are on the long side, considering the cropping factor. I find I use a 17-35/2.8 zoom (17-55 would be better) for 80 percent of my wedding shots. I use a 70-200/2.8 VR for shots of the ceremony from the rear or Sacristy door, and a 28-70/2.8 for smaller formal group shots (1-6 persons).

 

Whether you "believe" in zooms or not, these are the focal lengths I find most useful. For this reason, the 50 and 85 are largely outside the most useful range (except for formals) - too long for "candids" and too short for ceremony shots. Of course, if that's all you have, you'll find a way to use them - like a guy with a hammer, looking for nails.

Richard,

 

go to http://www.photodo.com, and compare the rating of all of these lenses.

 

hope this helped

In my opinion, for a wedding you need a minimum of two focal lengths: wide angle for groups and something for portraits.

 

For portraits the 50mm would convert to 80mm on the XT and would be more useful than the 85mm which would convert to about 136mm, which might be a bit long.

 

You would then need to find a lens to give you a minimum of a 28mm film focal length for groups. The kit lens would do the job, but then, why consider the 50mm or 85mm, except for the faster lens speed? As you suggest, something between 10mm and 20mm would be useful.

Todd has it right. Most 50mm f/1.8 lenses are the film format equivalent of a "kit lens", OK as far as optics are concerned but the build quality may be compromised for price. Usually the f/1.4 glass is put in a better built mount. It's an ideal focal length for portraits on digital. For your groups something in the 20 to 25mm range should cover you. The 85 is a bit long to see much use and at the same time not long enough when you really need the reach. A 100mm would be better, or even a 135, and these can often be picked up used very cheaply.

I use Olympus digital cameras for weddings and portraits, and everything in color. The Olympus system has an adapter for using older film camera lenses in manual modes on digital cameras. This is great since I can use a beautiful $15 OM 50mm f/1.8 lens on my E-1 and E-300.

 

I am not familiar with the Canon options. Is there an adapter for the Canon digitals that will allow you to use the wonderful FD film camera lenses? If such is possible, that might be something to consider, and would save you hundreds of dollars.

Hold on a minute! Ratings don't matter. Richard is not shooting newspapers taped to a wall - that's a P.NET thing. He's shooting a wedding. As long as the lens doesn't fall apart in his hands, he's OK. With digital, even aperture is not all that important - just crank up the ISO.

 

Really wide angle lenses are a problem. You'd need at least a 14mm prime to be considered wide. That costs about as much as a 10-24, which is more versatile and faster to use.

 

The 18-80 kit lens is good enough for most of the shots, particularly with flash. Throw in an $80 50/1.8 and you're covered for relatively low light conditions, and a little sharper for the formal groups.

I think 50mm lenses are the most boring on the planet always intensly disliked shooting 50mm, my opinion.

There is no such thing as a boring lens. Only boring people.

50mm and 85mm lenses are usually a bargain considering the quality you get for the

money (except Leica 50mm, where the quality costs an arm and a leg ; -)

 

Canon's 50/1.4 is a very good lens, can be had used for a song, and fits in a jacket pocket.

1.6X makes it a super inexpensive 80/1.4 equivalent on a Canon XT. That gives you a

perfect head and shoulders portrait lens that at f/1.4 will isolate your subject from the

background. How can you miss at that price?

 

The Canon 85/1.8 is also a no-brainer choice. Excellent image quality, is the equivalent of

a 135/1.8 on the XT ... which is a tad faster than the Canon 135/2 used on a full frame

camera.

 

Canon wides are a bit more difficult to figure out. I'd hold out and search for a used 16

-35/2.8L.

What's this about using 28mm or wide angle for group shots ? Only use wide angle for group shots if space dictates. Use the Longest focal length possible for group shots, by moving back, to produce nicer looking groups. The benefits of using the primes for groups far outways the ease of a zoom, in terms of picture quality.(if you can stand far enough back) A group shot is set up and should not be rushed, so take your time and use the best lens possible, idealy a prime and a 50mm is perfect even on a digital body, space permiting.

 

regards wayne.

When I still had my 10 D I used a canon 85 1.8 and a canon 28 1.8. It was a good combo, but the 85 was a much better performer than the 28. The 85 and the 50 are cheap enough that I'd be tempted to get both. Like Marc said, the wides are tougher particularly on a cropping digital. The 28 was an ok lens, but nothing stellar wide open and close up. And it really wasn't that wide.

A 28mm lens on the referenced Canon DSLR has the same FOV as slightly wide (app 45mm) normal lens on film. Perfect for group shots.

 

The film fixated here either have to start reading the questions posted and/or get their head unwedged.

"There is no such thing as a boring lens. Only boring people."

 

 

that is true too, but there is such a thing.

The 50mm 1.4 is perfect...very sharp, good color and will focus very close- and very fast. How could that be boring?<div></div>

Like Stacy and others have said, the 1.4 lens is awesome and the ONLY single, solitary, must-have prime lens if you have to own just one (prime). Do not trust your bank to the cheap, plastic, noisy, slow-focusing, non-USM 1.8 lens.

50mm boring?<br>

So.. what are your primary focal lengths at your wedding gigs? (18-35) & (85-300) something like it?<br>

You must be really good at what you're doing... or... <br>

50mm boring?<br>

So.. what are your primary focal lengths at your wedding gigs? (18-35) & (85-300) something like it?<br>

You must be really good at what you're doing... or... <br>

Okay, that is the wrong word, just don't like 50mm okay, and would never recommend it to anyone when someones asks a question that is between lenses.

I use both 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 on my 20D plus 24. 24/1.4 is the most expensive of the bunch

I can't say I like 50mm on FF either, I also find it boring, most of my wedding work is shot at 24-40 and 60-70 on my 24-70L zoom. A 50mm on a crop DSLR is close to my 85mm and in my opinion perfect for portraiture and pretty good for candid.

If your 30mm is soon to follow I would advise the 85mm 1.8.