greg_koni Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 I currently shoot a 1D2 with a 24-70 f2.8L and a 70-200 f2.8L. The 70-200 sometimes gets mated with a 1.4X TC. I shoot mostly outdoor sports as a hobby but I am starting to make a little money at it. My question is regarding a fast prime lense choice for indoor sports as well as portraits considering the 1D2's 1.3 crop factor. I am trying to choose between the 50 f1.4 and the 85 f1.8. I know the 85 comes in a f1.2 but I understand the AF is not suited for action shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 Although the original poster was asking about lenses for full frame film use, the issues have been extensively discussed in this very recent thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BMKf especially as many respondents also assumed he was shooting digital. Look particularly at the links to Bill Castleman's evaluation of lens alternatives. I'd guess that 50mm is a little short on a 1D unless you can get very close to the action, or are looking for 3/4 length portraits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bens Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 tough choice. i have both for indoor basketball and use both. directly under a basket, for example, the 50 is better because i can pack in more action, and its hard to sometimes keep the ball in the frame with the 85 there. but from the baseline, the 85 is better, cuz of the greater reach. in terms of which to get first, i suggest the 85, because on balance you will probably get more cuz of the reach, and because its usm is clearly superior to the 50, which is a little problematic focussing in low light at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bens Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 p.s. if you look in my candid portraits folder, the photograph of the player shooting the ball, called release, is with the 85/1.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant g Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 I find with the 24-70 and 70-200 in my bag, the 50/1.4 goes along more often. It is more versatile because it is sharp and it can be cropped quite a bit. However, the 85/1.8 goes when it is more of a portrait or sports situation. Sounds like the 85 would be the better choice for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul hart Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 The 50/1.4 and 80/1.8 are both superb lenses. I am fortunate to have both; if I had to choose, I'd go for the 50, but it is a close call. As you can afford a 1D2, I think you can afford both too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin_krumwiede2 Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 Tough choice. For me it would come down to what I'd be using it for the most. Considering the crop factor, the 50 would be my choice for portraits, and the 85 for sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueworldstudios Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 The 50 AF is such a POS I don't trust it for anything moving faster than a walk. The 85 has a real USM and is a far better choice for sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick tom Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 I'm kind of curious...wouldn't you be better off using the same zooms for indoor use(more flexible in composition)...you could turn that lovely iso one more notch and get the same effect...now if you're bumping up at 3200(does the 1d2 have 3200iso?(I have a 20d))then it could be an issue...neat image could take out noise as well..just my opinion of course.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg_koni Posted March 5, 2005 Author Share Posted March 5, 2005 The lense will probably be used mostly for sports in poorly lit gyms. I am also being asked to shoot graduation pictures for several seniors and even though I could pop for both the 50 and the 85, I want to get a 420 EX as a slave to my existing 550 EX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_man Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Especially if you also intend the lens for portraiture, I would go for the 85/1.8. I use this for portraits all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric merrill Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Greg: I have both. I like them both at different times. I think the 85 would be more useful to me shooting indoor sports where a little more extra reach could come in handy, as well as the blazingly fast AF. The 50/1.4 is no slouch, but the 85/1.8 is exceptional for the price. Depending on how far away you are, I'd consider the 135/2, except it will be a bit long for portraits given the crop factor. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted March 6, 2005 Share Posted March 6, 2005 I think it basically depends on your distance from your subjects and the size you want them to be in the final picture. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now