Buying one prime lens and 35mm Body: advice please

<p>I am going to purchase a camera body and lens. I am currently trying to decide between an EOS 3 or an EOS 1N. I am most likely going to purchase an EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. My use will be NYC street photography as well as interior and occasional portraits. I don't want to buy a zoom because I want to build some discipline with a prime. The 50's DOF is appealing as well as its speed - usage for night photography. My only real concern is whether or not I am choosing the proper focal length. Other options are the 35mm f/2, 24mm f/2.8 or 28mm f/2.8. Also, are there other brand lenses I should be looking at in the $350.00 price range? Should I consider other camera bodies? I really enjoy shooting with as much manual control as possible. I want the EOS mount lenses so I can mount them to a DSLR in the future to shoot HD. </p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Randy</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If I was only going to use one lens it would be in the range of 50mm, but I did that for years and would never go back to that limit again. Looking back at my photos from then there were many times that a wider lens would have been very nice.<br>

If it were me I would get at least a 28mm to go with the 50mm, but get the 50mm for sure.<br>

Also note 50mm is a bit short for portrait work, 80-100 would be better, IMHO.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Go for the 3.</p>

<p>More recent.<br>

Better AF (whether you use ECF or not)<br>

Better metering<br>

Better flash metering (E-TTL rather than A-TTL)<br>

And in every other regard the equal of the 1N.<br>

The 50mm may be a little short for portraiture and a little tele for internal shots.<br>

If you can only have one lens then the 35mm f2 might be worth more of a look, but this is a full stop slower and not USM. The 50 f1.4 is blazing fast.</p>

<p>Sigma has a range of fast wide-angle primes: they have a 20mm, 24mm & 28mm, all with maximum aperture f1.4. They're probably not as good as Canon lenses, but they're two stops faster than the cheaper Canon lenses, and much much cheaper than the directly-equivalent Canons.</p>

<p>Scott is correct. For outdoor portrais, the 80-100mm length is preferable. Also, a longer length would give you some space between you and your subject when shooting street photography. The 50mm 1.4 or 35mm 2.0 would be a fine second lens.</p>

<p>I'd rather have a 28/2.8 + 50/1.8 than a 50/1.4. Much more useful IMHO.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

<p>For street photography where you are close enough to interact with your subjects then a 50mm is good for a single or maybe two people. Where you want to go for groups or include some context then a wider angle such as 28mm or a 24mm work well.<br>

If you want to take more formal portraits then the 85mm and upwards range is about right and for pickng out detail anything from 200mm upwards.</p>

<p> You will need two lenses. For NYC street photography, a 50mm is not wide enough. Nor is it for interior shots in anything but large spaces. For portraits, it won't be very flattering closer than torso length on a single adult. I'd start with one lens to do either of those things well. I think a 28 and an 85 for the portraits. If you insist on the unilens idea, a 35mm.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If I had to choose just one lens for everything it would be the 50mm. For street photography I would choose a 35mm. However, if you're going to do street photography with a noisy obtrusive camera like an EOS 3 or 1N then you may as well go the whole hog and get the 24-70 f2.8. It won't make it any more in your face than it is already. Plus you'll have all the focal lengths covered.</p>

<p>If you want a quiet EOS film camera I recommend the EOS 30v. It's as quiet as a mouse and is worlds away from the clattering EOS 3 and EOS 1 series.</p>

<p>A lot of outstanding advise from the guys here.I have to agree with them, you will need a wide angle lens too.I would spend less on the body and choose a later Elan Series (Elan II - Elan 7)instead of the pro models that attract a lot of attention (and theft).Put your hard cash in the lenses.A 50 1.4 and a 28 1.8 cover 90% of what you want to do.If your are really pinched for cash a 50 1.8 and 28 2.8 work just fine if you are not doing a lot of low light hand held work.</p>

<p>I'd go for the 50mm, I suppose; but I'm surprised no one has suggested something like the 85mm f/1.8. I guess it depends on what you want to photograph in the street.</p>

<p>As others have said - I would buy the EOS 3 over the EOS 1N as it is a better camera and essentially a cut price EOS 1V (but with eye control which I like). You need a wide angle I would suggest 24mm but 28 or even 35 will work depending on your shooting style. For portraits the 85mm is the way to go. As Jamie says the EOS 3 and the 1N are both noisy cameras. All of the Canon bodies I have owned have been noisy (New F1, A1, AE1, T90, EOS 1, EOS 1N, EOS 1NRS, 3, EOS 1V, EOS 5D II, EOS 7D) and rather obvious for street use. I personally use one of my wife's Contax G2 cameras with the 90mm, 35mm, 28mm or 21mm lens for street use. This small rangefinder is very quiet compared to an SLR (but nosier than a Leica) and unobtrusive. THe image / lens quality is very high but it has AF and a motor wind. With the G2 and a wide angle lens you can shoot from the hip so you can snatch photos that are difficult with an SLR.</p>

<p>I never liked using an SLR, especially a big one, for street photography because they scream "hey, look out, here comes a serious photographer". I much prefer a high-quality P&S with a fixed focal length lens. Then you can get up close and most people won't care. There are many to choose from, and they typically have focal lengths in the 28-50mm range. The focal length you chose makes a big difference in the style and look. Shorter lengths let you get more background in and make it easier to get a dramatic look, but you need to have guts or charm your way into photographing strangers.</p>

<p>i'd rather have a wide/normal combo. i like the 24/50 duo. if that's out of your budget a 28 2.8 and a 50 1.4 (or 1.8).</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>I don't want to buy a zoom because I want to build some discipline with a prime. The 50's DOF is appealing as well as its speed - usage for night photography. My only real concern is whether or not I am choosing the proper focal length. Other options are the 35mm f/2, 24mm f/2.8 or 28mm f/2.8. Also, are there other brand lenses I should be looking at in the $350.00 price range? Should I consider other camera bodies?</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm going to take this on directly - and you may not like what I say... :-)</p>

<p>First, since you don't really know what focal length you want, I think it would make a ton of sense to at least <em>start</em> with a zoom. While you might guess right and pick the "correct" focal length (more on that in a moment) the first time, it is at least as likely that you won't. The problem is that apparently you don't have background experience with these focal lengths that would allow you to form a preference based on your own experience. By shooting first with a zoom - even an inexpensive one - you'll have a chance to learn from your own shooting which focal length (assuming that there is one such focal length) is the one that you would prefer to work with when you do go out armed with only a prime. (There is no right answer to the "which FL is appropriate for street photography Some prefer to work wide, say at 24mm. 35mm is favored by others. HCB supposedly mostly shot at 50mm, so many think that is right. Still others like to work with a slightly longer FL and either be back a bit or focus on smaller details.)</p>

<p>Second, what is with the "building discipline" thing? The goal in selecting a lens and camera is not so much to "discipline" yourself as it is to "enable" yourself. Using a prime to limit your shooting opportunities makes little sense to me. (Using one to keep it simple or reduce camera bulk/weight might.) Frankly, I don't find street photography to be about "discipline" much at all - it is more (for me at least) about wandering around in a feast of visual opportunities that are constantly changing, appearing, disappearing, evolving and working quickly and intuitively to try to see and capture them. While I have and still occasionally do use a prime for this, I can work more quickly, intuitively, flexibly, and successfully with a single zoom.</p>

<p>Third, why film? There is virtually nothing that you can do with film that you cannot do with digital, and there are a good number of things you can do with digital that you cannot do with film. For one thing, you can shoot a LOT more with digital - you won't have to interrupt your flow as often to change film, you won't have to carry film, you'll be able to adapt more quickly to changing lighting and so forth, you'll have greater opportunities to work the images in post when necessary. If you think you want it, you can even get a "film look" if that is what you are after.</p>

<p>I understand the romantic notion of going out and emulating HCB, but just because a great street photographer did wonderful work using a Leica film camera, manual focus, and (mostly) a 50mm prime there is no requirement that you adopt the same equipment. (If you were climbing Mt. Everest today, I doubt that you would want to use the gear that Mallory used, or if you were a concert pianist you would probably not want to use the fortepiano of Mozart's time...) The real questions when it comes to photography in a certain genre (like "street" or any other) are not "What did old time photographer X shoot with?" but perhaps "What about old time photographers X, Y, and Z makes their photography work?" and "What is my vision for this type of photography?" and "What equipment will let me most effectively and efficiently create images that match my vision?"</p>

<p>If you want "small," take a look at one of the recent "rebel" series bodies in the XSi, XTi, or t1i category. If you are really new to this, give the EFS 18-55mm IS kit lens a try - if nothing else it is inexpensive, decent, and it gives you a chance to try the angle-of-view-equivalent focal lengths that you contemplate. And the image quality from these current cropped sensor bodies is as good as that from 35mm film. If you really want to go prime, the 35mm f/2 is not too big and it is close to a 50mm equivalent on these bodies - a small 28mm or 24 mm is also an option.</p>

<p>Finally, if you really want to work in the mode of HCB the current cameras that perhaps come closest to letting you emulate those working processes are perhaps not DSLR bodies at all but some of the high end P&S bodies like the Canon G11 or some of the fine new micro 4/3 bodies.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>I would side with Dan on film issue. I might be wrong, but it seems to me that you go to film route since cost it's an issue, otherwise, you might have opted for 7D or 5DMk II since you mentioned HD. If that is the case, the cost of developing film can add up quickly, especially nowadays, since less and less lab are offering the service. To save the cost, one might as well pick up a Rebel DSLR, 20D or 30D or 40D plus a lens. If you like 35mm focal length on full frame, you might want to try 24mm f/2.8 on crop sensor. Not the same, but close.<br>

In short, going to film route doesn't make sense to me, especially in your case.</p>

 

<p>I was going to chime in, but I can find nothing more to add to G. Dan Mitchell's advice. I especially agree with his take on "discipline," and as much as I like film, street photography is one area where I would embrace digital. A Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 with the 14-45mm lens would be my recommendation.</p>

 

<p>Film will be a lot of fun! My favorite film camera is my 1vHS for sure but if you're going to do discreet street photography, the EOS 7 or 7N might be a better choice. It's a super capable camera and it's lightweight and the quietest of all the EOS film cameras. The 7N is a metal-bodied, 4.5fps camera while the 7 is plastic (very sturdy plastic though) and 4fps with the same super-quiet film advance. We also have a 7N that complements the 1vHS and it is a beautiful camera to use. Digital is wonderful but film has a wonderful quality that, to me, can't be matched by anything else. While a 50/1.4 is a great lens, a short zoom would be much more helpful but the 50/1.4 will certainly challenge your creativity. Whatever you choose, have fun and post some pics!</p>

<p>there is hardly anything that you can't do with a standard lens. Still, if you like to shoot street I would certainly consider some of the above advice and go slightly wider and take a 35mm or even a 28 mm. Don't worry, despite some of the negatives of using just one lens as described here (not that they are wrong) it makes for a disciplined approach as you yourself already noted. When I was trained we were only allowed a standard lens, one kind of film and one kind of paper for two years in a row while cropping was out of the question. It's not the only way but certainly one of the best, at least in my mind.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Using a prime to limit your shooting opportunities makes little sense to me</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Dan, yours is certainly good advice but being limited I found to be of great value with hindsight. To name just one example it helps considerably in developing compositional skills. I shoot a lot of street and while I use(d) short zooms for a considerable amount of time because they are quite handy I have been going back more and more to primes in the range of 20mm-50mm.<br /> But of course, as they say over here, there are more ways that lead to Rome.</p>

<p>The only "problem" that I can see with using the G1 for street photography is its 2x crop factor, which means you'll lose at the wide end. A huge advantage of this body, however, is that because of it's very short registration distance, almost any SLR lens is adaptable to it.</p>

<p>Eos 3 and 1 are very big cameras with big motor drives. How about something smaller like A2E or 7</p>

<p>As for lenses. I don't think you can really go wrong with a 50/1.4 if you're interested in street.</p>

<p>That said, why limit yourself to a single lens. The zooms and primes thing doesn't have to be an either/or question. Why not get a zoom <em>and</em> a prime. DSLRs are all about interchangeable lenses and versatility. I think you'll find that it'll enhance your creativity, not limit it. You'll find some days/locations are 50/1.4 days, other days are zoom days.</p>

<p>Another thing about zooms: if you're into discipline, you can previsualize the shot and choose a focal length <em>before</em> you raise the camera to your eyeball. Dial in the focal length before you raise your camera, and don't touch that zoom ring once you're looking though the lens. The zoom then kinda becomes like a bag of primes all in one. Not as fast of course, but if you need speed you can always mount a prime. Do have a look at Tamron 28-75/2.8 Sharp, fast, small, unobtrusive, inexpensive.</p>

<p>Enjoy. Merry Christmas</p>

<p>I'm not sure how to answer your question any better than anyone else, but here is my somewhat offbeat take or advice.</p>

<p>If you really want to stay with a single focal length lens, aka, prime lens and shoot with an EOS film body I would recommend the EOS 1N and an EF 28mm f/2.8 or f/1.8 or possibly a Zeiss ZE 28mm f/2 (this would be my choice if money isn't a problem).</p>

<p>The 28 will allow you to make portraits (though not head and shoulders) and scenics as well as interiors and street photography.</p>

<p>A study of the paintings of the impressionist Gustave Calliebotte, by modern academics, revealed that Calliebotte's depictions of scenes still in existence often matched the view one would obtain by photographing with a 28mm lens and 35mm camera.</p>

<p>I know this sounds a bit arcane but I've found that focal length to be quite useful on a 35mm body. Shooting with a body that has a 100% viewfinder is a big plus and augments composing with this particular focal length, thus my recommendation of the 1N.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>From the fifties through the seventies the 50 mm prime was the most popular for 35 mm bodies, because of its relatively simple design, light weight, speed, low cost and very slightly telephoto perspective. The wider primes seem to have recently come into more use for tighter street shooting. My favorite over the years was Nikon's 35 mm f/2 Auto Nikkor.</p>

<p>Thanks for the replies. I decided to go with film because I could get a top of the line product (body) for a couple hundred dollars as opposed to a mediocre digital slr for the same price. I intend to purchase a DSLR but I am waiting for the HD technology to develop a bit and I don't feel like spending 1,000 bucks on a temporary camera body. I have experience with street photography. I used to go around with a large zoom lens and large minolta body - I decided I wanted to lose the zoom for a few reasons. First was the size. Second was that I wanted to learn the specific differences between focal lengths. I figure the best way to do this is start with 1 prime and then build my way up with more primes. I figured start with a standard then a wide then a telephoto. <br>

In regards to bodies, how big of a deal is it that the EOS 3 gets 97% frame as opposed to 100% Also, which of the small, more quiet bodies works - A2E or 7 EOS 7 or 7N </p>

<p>Randy, as for wanting to use just one prime for its small size I can understand, I often only use my 28mm on my 50D, which is about the same FOV as a 50mm on a 35mm body.</p>

<p>But for learning the differences between focal lengths, you need the different focal lengths to learn. </p>

<p>

<p>One very nice thing about digital BTW is that it records what focal length each of your photos was taken at, which makes it a lot easier to recall what FL worked well, or not so well, for a given photo. I have make good use of this in the past when trying to decide what lens to take for a given shooting situation. Each FL gives a different feel to a photos, the only good way to learn which FL gives which feel is to shoot at different focal lengths and then be able to tell which photo was taken with which FL. </p>

</p>