What is the Use of the 85/1.8 Lens with the Canon D30 or 10D?

[bens]

I've got a D30 (may be getting a 10D) the Canon 50/1.8 and a Sigma 70-

200/2.8. Tempted to buy the Canon 85/1.8, but with the magnification

factor, what do you use it for indoors besides sports? Doesn't it

get too close for other events? Doesn't the 50/1.8 serve about the

purpose of the 85 if there were no magnification? And related

question -- at 2.8/400-800 ISO, photos break down on the D30. Will i

have a much better experience with a 10D, making the 85 redundant of

what i've got even more so? Please let me know your thoughts. I

shoot a lot in low light.

[vpi]

Yes, I use my 50/1.8 on my 300D for (indoor) portraits when on my Elan IIe, I would have needed the 85. Works like a charm. And what do you mean by "photos break down" on a D30 at 2.8 at 400-800 ISO? Too much noise?

[John Crowe]

Even if the 10D holds up better at high ISO (I do not know), I would hang onto the D30 for a few more years until DSLRs become better and cheaper. Your D30 is a pretty good start in digital. With the digital factors the 50 does become an ideal portrait length lens. The 85mm is really too close in focal length to make it worthwhile, especially since you have the zoom. I would be more tempted to go for a 28/2.8 or 35/2 to get you your normal focal length lens with reasonable speed. A possible longer telephoto for low light work would be a 100/2 but as you say perhaps this gets too long for what you use it for. If indoors means an indoors stadium then longer is better. If indoors is your livingroom then the 50 would be plenty. Good luck!

[bens]

thanks for the comments. i have the 24/2.8 and 35/2. they are pretty good, but having 1.8 has saved me many times (2.0 would be good, but the focussing mechanism on the 35 is louder and slower than on the 50, which can cause a problem at times). and yes, noise is the breakdown problem.

[joe_fikes]

I really like the 50mm focal length on my 10D. I have the F-1.4 version. It's a great portrait lens, and I find I enjoy it for many other situations as well. If I were limited to just one focal length, it would certainly be 50 mm (on a 10D or equivalent).

 

And about the "break down"... I use NeatImage. It is absolutely astonishing in its ability to reduce or even completely eliminate noise in high-ISO images. There's a free version that you can download, but it's easily worth the asking price for the all-up version.

 

I hope this helps. Joe

[joe_choi]

The 1.6 crop factor of the 10D etc does not magnify the image 1.6 times. The crop factor is exactly what it says it is..it's a crop factor, not a magnification factor. At 85mm it would have the same field of view as a 136mm lens, NOT the REACH of a 136mm lens.

[bens]

joe, don't think i said otherwise. its just that the frame gets too crowded, doesn't it? so, do you find it useful on a d30, d60 10d? how so?

[bens]

joe, just looked at my comment, and it does suggest the reach is further, which i know is not the case. sorry, thanks for pointing it out.

[digitmstr]

for one thig the AF is faster (if you shoot moving subjects) but, most importantly, it has a flatter FOV. Even in a small room you can take great headshots with the 85 f/1.8 on a camera with a 1.6 crop factor.

 

Whether it's worth it to you...no one knows but you.

[brambor]

there is NO magnification. just a tighter crop. The 85/1.8 works just fine for anything. You just make two steps back and fill the frame. Great lens.

[jim_larson1]

You have a 70-200. You already know what you would use an 85 to shoot.

 

You also know if you shoot wide open all the time, and what one stop will give you.

 

What the heck do I (or anyone else here) know that you don't?

[bens]

well actually jim, i rarely use the 70-200 indoors besides for basketball games cuz its 2.8 is a little dark and it doesn't focus very well on the D30 in low light. i've read a lot about the 85's bokeh and crispness. so i'm thinking, if i get the 10D, will the 70-200 focus better, cuz i've heard the 10D focusses better in low light, or should i get the 85 to overcome the inherent focussing issues between the sigma lens and canon camera. the 85, as a prime, has its limits for basketball, and i just have played a lot with that length at events (parties, weddings, etc.) for the reasons just stated, but have noticed that the 50 can get cramped for me at times. so hence, the question.

[leonard_richmond7]

Joe Choi - "it would have the same field of view as a 136mm lens, NOT the REACH of a 136mm lens."

 

OK, Joe, I know what "field of view" is, but what the heck is "REACH"?

[kevin_krumwiede2]

<i>At 85mm it would have the same field of view as a 136mm lens, NOT the REACH of a 136mm lens.</i>

 

<p>Uh... what's the difference?

[jbq]

With the crop factor, the 85/1.8 makes a good long portrait lens.

 

In all cases the combination of short focal length and cropping result in more depth-of-field on the smaller sensor (for the same numerical aperture and angle of view), which can be an issue when trying to obtain strongly out-of-focus areas.

[rodolfo_negrete]

they are the best lens that I got. the blurry effect sharpness and color sautration is just beatuful on the 10D.

but at this point I would higly suggest you to buy a wide angle lens like the 24mm 1.4 or the 35mm 1.4.but then if you are in a budgget and you still wan the best get the 17-40 L .with a 10D 17-40 is a must no question about it .the 85mm are the best I got as far it goes for quality but for reabilitie I use the 17-40 and the 24-70 2.8.

OK lets say 800dls is still alot of money then buy the 28-75 tamaron (300dls)they are excelent lens(for the money)

 

I use the 85mm very seldomly altough they are excelent for my 35mm film camera wiht black and white film (for takind candids)

[samusiskin]

300D, EF85mm f1.8, 1/100 sec, ISO 200, Handheld.

[samusiskin]

Smaller.

[bens]

thanks for the advice, and sam, beautiful kid.

[catchlight]

Ben, I've used the Canon 85mm f1.8 for a couple of years on a D30 and a 10D to capture concert and theatrical photos under low light conditions. I use it in tandem with a 50mm f1.4 on the other body.

 

For me, the 85mm f1.8 is a great performer, and is also a bargain because, with the crop factor, the 85mm becomes the poor man's Canon 135mm f2L on your D30. (1.6 x 85mm = 135mm)

 

The two big advantages the 10D offers over the D30 are twice the pixels at top resolution, and much faster AF in low light.

[tom w.]

I haven't had my 85/1.8 very long, but I've already found it useful for capturing indoor low-light shots, particularly when I want to isolate an individual at a party or reception. It is too long for full body shots in most homes, and too long for torso shots in a real small room, but its great for head shots in any room, and head-and-shoulder shots in a normal living room.

 

You can get some candid shots with it on the 10D. Its unobtrusive.

 

Plus, its sharp as a tack, focuses fast, and had a very nice bokeh (as Sam's pictures show).

[ryanjoseph]

People confuse themselves to much with this "crop factor" foolishness. The fact of the matter is, your 85 is going to ACT like a 135. I don't care if its a TC, crop factor effect, or whatever the hell people want to call it.

[digitmstr]

>>People confuse themselves to much with this "crop factor" foolishness. The fact of the matter is, your 85 is going to ACT like a 135. I don't care if its a TC, crop factor effect, or whatever the hell people want to call it.<<

 

Indeed :) the bottom line is that, when compared to film, to get *equal framing* the distance between camera & subject *increases* (by a value relative to the crop factor). Inversely, given the *same distance* the image will be bigger.

 

As Puppy Face aptly noted in one of his posts, this is nothing new for those who ever worked or read about view cameras where the image circle of a lens would be relative to the size of the negative. This is exactly the same. Beginners are getting way too confused by this and it's too bad because it shouldn't be a point of confusion.

[trevor_richardson]

I've pretty much made up my mind from reading here that I really want the 85 1.8. The question I have is, will I be happy with it on my full frame camera just as much as everyone here seems happy with their cropped frame cameras? I could of course just crop my image if I needed to, but who likes to do that? =)