bjscharp Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Bob, Canon doesn't make a better equivalent to the Sigma. It has the `fast standard prime for aps-c' category all to itself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 >> Bob, Canon doesn't make a better equivalent to the Sigma. It has the `fast standard prime for aps-c' category all to itself... 28/1.8 USM? Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjscharp Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Good point. However, it's just as expensive as the Sigma, is half a stop darker wide open, and it's more like 45mm than 50mm. As I'm not planning on selling this lens as long as I have a crop-factor camera, the lower resale value doesn't really bother me, and the Sigma handles very nice (good MF ring) and is build like a tank... :-) The 28 does have the advantage of working on FF cameras though. It's up to personal preference I guess :-) (isn't everything in photography?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 >> is half a stop darker wide open Isn't this a third of a stop? Is it meaningful? >> and it's more like 45mm than 50mm. Which is (1) absolutely negligible and (2) can be corrected with half a step forward or backwards. >> The 28 does have the advantage of working on FF cameras though. Yes, though it's corner sharpness means you would not want to use of FF.... :-( >> It's up to personal preference I guess :-) (isn't everything in photography?) Absolutely. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjscharp Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 <quote>>> Isn't this a third of a stop?</quote> <p>Actually, it's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number#Typical_one-third-stop_f-number_scale">two-thirds</a></p> <quote>>> Is it meaningful? </quote> <p>I really doubt it, unless you're an enormous fan of limited dof...</p> <quote>>> Which is (1) absolutely negligible and (2) can be corrected with half a step forward or backwards.</quote> <p>I agree on both points. Moving the photographer, the best zoom-lens ever...</p> <quote>>> Yes, though it's corner sharpness means you would not want to use of FF.... :-(</quote> <p>However, on a crop this wouldn't really matter, while the Sigma doesn't really excel at corner sharpness either... </p> <p>Isn't choice a wonderful thing? :-)</p> <p>Happy shooting to you too!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 <p> <ul><i>I really doubt it, unless you're an enormous fan of limited dof...</i></ul> </p> <p> Actually, <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/607298">I am</a>ナ :-) </p> <p> <ul><i>Moving the photographer, the best zoom-lens ever...</i></ul> </p> <p> Yes, but isn't it a pity it doesn't work for upright bird shots? :-) </p> <p> <ul><i>Isn't choice a wonderful thing? :-)</i></ul> </p> <p> As Luis Armstrong once put it: Oh yeahhhhhhhhhhhナナ... </p> <p> Happy shooting, <br> Yakim. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjscharp Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 <quote>>>Actually, I amïᄒ… :-)</quote> <p>Bought yourself a noctilux yet? :-) </p> <quote>>>Yes, but isn't it a pity it doesn't work for upright bird shots? :-)</quote> <p>Never heard of jumping? I heard it works <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Philippe-Halsmans-Jump-Book-Halsman/dp/0810923386">very well</a> with photography ;-)</p> Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 >> Bought yourself a noctilux yet? :-) No. MF lenses do not interest me. I love AF too much. I have only one (1000/11) but will probably sell it. >> Never heard of jumping? I heard it works very well with hotography ;-) Nah. I'm too lazy for that.... :-) Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjscharp Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Well, then there's the EF 50mm 1.0 of course, it's just a bit less of a name, but the effect is the same... Too lazy to jump, too lazy for manual focus. Good thing pressing the shutter isn't that much work :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Luis Armstrong-- the famous salsa trumpeteer? And I think the 50mm f/1.0 is mostly for collectors. Users will find the current EF 50mm f / 1.2L USM a superior lens optically, to judge from the reviews I've seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob.velkov Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 The newer 50 1.2L is a much better lens then the original 1.0. It is smaller, focuses faster, is sharper and the difference between 1.0 and 1.2 is, well, alsmost theoretical.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjscharp Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 We were talking about limited dof, in which the 1.0 will have a slight advantage, though admittedly, not very much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_crowe4 Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 The "plastic fantastic" is a very fragile lens which was not built for either quality or for durability but, simply to provide an el-cheapo normal angle lens for the low line Rebel film cameras. Canon took their perfectly good 50mm f/1.8 Mark-I lens and changed it to the flimsy plastic bodied Mark-II without a focusing scale (which to me is important when shooting in low light levels). I broke a Mark-II by simply tapping it against a door frame. This was the only lens of the hundreds of lenses I have used in 50 years of photography. I was a combat cameraman in Vietnam so I put my gear through some pretty hard conditions. Thankfully, I never had to use a Mark-II. When I brioke my Mark-II I decided, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me!" I purchased a used 50mm f/1.8 Mark-I lens which the inferior build Mark-II replaced. A used Mark-I will cost about half again the price of a new Mark-II (which might tellyou something about the relative esteem in which these two lenses are held by photographers) however, the Mark-I will cost less than 1/2 the price of either the 30mm f/1.4 Sigma or the 50mm f/1.4 Canon. The Mark-I might be an alternate choice for photographing your chld. The image quality is similar to the Mark-II but, the build is a lot better. However, the 50mm f/1.4 will often give a more pleasing portrait than either of the f/1.8 lenses because it has better bokeh. On the other hand, for around $130 or so, the Mark-I will give you decent low light performance with a solid build. The really strange thing about prices is that you can sometimes find a used Canon EOS film camera on eBay with a 50mm f/1.8 Mark-I lens that is priced lower than the lens alone. If you buy the camera and lens - you can throw away the camera, donate it to goodwill or save it for an emergency back-up. Just make sure the camera you buy isn't a film version Rebel or you will probably get the Mark-II lens. 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