Which 50mm on Canon XTi

[alvin_hear]

ok, I purchased a Canon Rebel XTi, and a 50mm 1.4...but now I am questioning

if I should gotten the 50mm 2.5 macro or saved some money and got the 50mm

1.8..<p>I will be using the lens for portrait / full body shooting, mainly

outdoors and indoors will fill flash. I would RARELY shoot below F2.8. I do

enjoy focusing close, sometimes. Thoughts ?

[eric friedemann]

50mm f/1.2L- it just looks funny on the XTi:

 

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images-56/50mm-12.jpg

 

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/rebel%20xti.shtml

[eric friedemann]

More seriously, I'd stick with what you bought. I'd prefer the f/1.4, as the macro lens is not designed for portraiture. That isn't to say you can't take swell portraits with a macro lens; just that the macro lens is designed for shooting at very short distances- inches- and the f/1.4 lens will give you two more stops for throwing backgrounds out of focus.

[tommyinca]

IMHO, the EF50/2.5 is Canon's sharpest 50s. IMHG (G=Guess), may even include the new 50/1.2. Of-course, you don't get to shoot f2 or faster. The problem with portriat is too sharp or too much DOF could get you more work (blur) or less business especialy with ladies. The 50/1.4 is a good choice (next to the new 50/1.2) for portrait.

[mr._smith]

Alvin,

 

If you wanted to do macro photography, the answer is yes. Otherwise, you'd be hard press to see any real image quality differences between these 50mm lens at F2.8 and above.

 

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

[J.W. Wall]

FWIW - If you should decide that macro work is in your future, you may want to research the Canon 100/2.8, which would give you greater working distance. It is capable of 1:1 without the adapter required by the 50mm macro, which only goes to 1:2 without the adapter. The 100 also makes a nice telephoto.