Suggested wide prime on 450d for street photography

[marco_landini]

<p>Hello. I' m looking for a wide prime for the 450d. In the streets, I' d like to be discreet and low weight, so I guess a compact wide prime could be the choice. And I prefere prime over zoom , because with primes I can concentrate in perspective, framing, and depth of field, and I hate zooming. I' m also concerned in high IQ, so I' d need your opinions about which lens could be the right one, in 20-28mm (in aps therms), i.e. 30-45mm circa in full frame therms. The simplest choice seems to be the Canon EF 24 2.8. It' s rated quite well. But I even know that is possible to mount, via a ring adapter, other brand' s lenses. Come to my mind : 21 3.5 Zuiko, 20 f4 ai nikkor. How they compare to ef 24 .28 canon about IQ ? I will use the camera in M or A mode only, like a p&s, prefocusing the lens to hyperfocal distance. So, the lens aperture will be kept to f8 or f11 most of the time. And I know other brand' s lenses via adapter can be used only in stop down, so I guess the viewfinder will become quite dark at those apertures. Is it ? It will be really that difficult to use those lenses in stop down on street sessions? Coud the live preview lcd function help to this matter ? Other great primes to suggest ? Thank you very much. Ciao. Marco.</p>

[peter_foiles2]

<p>Just reading the title my first thought was the 24/2.8 and after reading your full post I still think that is the best choice. Yes you can use adaptors and mount other lenses but street photography (for me at least) is a fast paced activity. Most who go the adaptor route are doing landscape work where the stop down metering, manual focusing routine is less of an issue. And yes the viewfinder will get quite dark when you stop down, why wouldn't it? To see with your current setup, set the camera to f8 or f11 and use the DOF preview button (see the manual if you are not familiar with this function.)</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>I have used Nikon lenses on a Canon DSLR and this is a great way to get excellent lenses inexpensively. However I either shot wide open for sports or stopped down and on a tripod for landscapes. Walking the streets and taking "random" images quickly may be difficult especially with the darkness of the viewfinder with a stopped down lens at f8 to f11.</p>

<p>While the image quality of the Nikon 20 and 24mm lenses is likely better than Canon's you may be better off with either the Canon 20/2.8 or Canon 24/2.8. The Canon 24/1.4 L is extremely expensive but perhaps the Sigma 24/1.8 might fit the bill for evening shots as well.</p>

[sattler123]

<p>You want an auto-focus lens with integrated metering, not an adapter introduced complication! I actually use Nikon and other manufacturer's lenses on my Canon bodies, but would NEVER use them for street photography. It is way too slow - esp. the metering aspect.</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>A few thoughts...</p>

<p>While I also enjoy shooting street with a prime (generally a 50mm or 35mm on FF), if I might not be quite so quick to dismiss zooms. There is nothing about zooms that prevents you from "concentrating on perspective, framing, and depth of field" - in fact you actually have more control over these elements with a zoom than with a single prime.</p>

<p>Unless your approach to "street" is a bit different than that of many other photographers, I have to agree that using non-Canon lenses that don't AF can be more of a disadvantage. Lots of street stuff happens quite quickly and you don't necessarily have a lot of time to react. You might counter by pointing out that folks using older rangefinder film cameras to do street managed, and you would be correct. They often guesstimated the focus and worked quite quickly. But then the lens quality issue becomes moot since you aren't going to see the results of using an extraordinarily sharp lens if you manually focus, work quickly, and handhold the camera.</p>

<p>(Quite of a lot of classic "street" work is not particularly sharp when you come right down to it. This is not meant as a criticism, but as a recognition that what makes these images work is very little about super IQ and more about composition, quick reactions, and the moment.)</p>

<p>If you are looking for a "classic street prime" approach you probably want something in the 20mm to 24mm range and there are some decent examples from Canon that have been mentioned above. I would not bother with the f/1.4 Canon 24mm L for this kind of work, but YMMV.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[jim_rais]

<p align="justify">Another vote for EF 24/2.8. It is a small discreet lens, even with its lenshood attached and goes as close as 0.25m. The results are also satisfying. For the 450D you will get ca. 38mm in term of FF which is - in my opinion - a nice a bit more than normal angle. Like the others said, adapted lenses are slow in metering and are more suitable for static objects. Good luck with your choice.</p>

[wgpinc]

<p>I use my XSi on the street with the 18-55mm IS kit lens for very decent results if I work at it. Or else sometimes I use the 35mm 2.0 prime lens which gives 56mm view classic for HCB street photography. The 28mm 1.8 is a little bigger and heavier for 45mm view. For me the 17-50mm 2.8 Tamron lens is the ideal lens for street or event or whatever photography with the XSi. Best for the new year.<br>

Canon XSi with 18-55mm IS lens <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/8325179-md.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[bobatkins]

<p>I just finished looking at a bunch of 24mm lenses (and zoom lenses with a 24mm setting) and I was impressed by the Canon 24/2.8. Small, cheap, sharp - what more could you want. I found it about equal in sharpness to the 24-105/4L at 24mm, maybe just a touch sharper. This was on full frame (5D)<br>

The only other 24mm prime I looked at was the Tamron 24/2.5 and despite it's solid construction and smooth focusing, it wasn't as good as the Canon 24/2.8 optically, especially in the corners.<br>

For street work you really don't <em>need something</em> that has super high resolution all the way into the frame corners. Even on full frame the corners of the 24/2.8 are pretty decent, so on a crop sensor camera there are really no worries in that department.</p>

[marco_landini]

<p>And what about the Canon Ef 28 1.8 usm ? The difference to ef 24 2.8 in focal lenght for me is negligible. The price not that different. It' s 1.8. could be usefull. And about IQ, how does it compare to 24 2.8 ef ?</p>

[ralph_jensen]

<p>To me, street shooting is about getting the shot, <em>right this instant, </em> in focus, much more than it is about ultimate "IQ" that might be marginally better by using a Nikon, Zuiko, or Zeiss. Let the landscape/cityscape/studio folks who have <em>time </em> to set up their shots worry about "IQ."</p>

<p>So I agree with the recommendation to go with whatever lets you work quickly--18-55, 24/2.8, or a comparable Sigma/Tamron that autofocuses on EOS--rather a lens that gives you slightly better sharpness when shooting test charts from a tripod but doesn't autofocus on your 450D.</p>

[scherbi]

<p>I have a 28mm f/3.5 Olympus lens that I use on my 40D with an adapter. It's my first choice for street photo. The lens functions superbly, and I got it on ebay for $8.</p><p><br></p><p>Something from Canon around that focal length range would include autofocus and would probably be great too.<br></p>

[bob_osullivan]

<p>24/2.8 is a no brainer. Why would you want to mess around with adapters?</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>I agree with Gil Pruitt. Rather than a full-frame wideangle prime, get an APSC zoom. Canon 18-55 IS may be a good choice. IS might save the day if you intend on shooting f/8 to f/11 only.</p>

<p>I've got a Tamron 17-50/2.8. At 24 mm it's sharp even wide open. At f/4 it's very sharp and f/5.6 it's stupidly sharp. I don't have Canon 24/2.8 but I have Canon 20/2.8. The Tamron is substantially sharper, particularly in the corners. The Tamron flares much, much less. At 24 mm there is negligible distortion. The Tamron has better bokeh (not that this matters much at this focal length), Bokeh of the Canon 20/2.8 sucks, 6 blades only. The Tamron has less CA than the Canon 20/2.8, which suffers from red/green fringing. The Tamron vignettes less, believe it or not. The Canon vignettes even at f/16. The Tamron is cheaper that Canon 20/2.8, probably costs about the same as the 24/2.8 </p>

<p>I see no reason to buy a full-frame f/2.8 wideangle prime if you want a wideish normal lens. Get an APSC zoom. The Tamron is like having several f/2.8 primes in one. If you dislike zooms and prefer working with primes for the reasons you state, just dial in your chosen focal length <em>before</em> you raise the camera to your eye.</p>

[marco_landini]

<p>I took attention to the tamron 17-50 2.8 and it seems very nice, comparing well to the canon 17 40 f4 L, if not better. The tamron is also less expansive and it' s lighter. I need hi IQ because I will use the zoom not only for street, but also for landscapes. Other candidates ? What about Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4 ; Tamron 20-40 f2.7-35 ; sigma 20-40 f2.8 ? I guess these last 3 zooms can work well on full frame cameras too. Essentially, I woud use the lens for street, documentary, cityscapes and lanscapes too...No prime lens seems quite good for IQ , these zooms are better , right ? I will use the zoom in question in combination to a 85 1.8, covering all the focal lenghts in my interest, from now with xti, to the future, upgrading to 5d mk2. For instance : xti+ zoom (?) : street, scapes, not so wide but enough for me. xti+85 1.8 : portraits. 5d mk2 + zoom (?) : landscapes, well wide. 5d mk2 + 85 1.8 : classic portraits. So, I could build a 2 cameras + 2 lenses system. And get convenience from FF or from aps-c in relation to the situations and needs. And now, actually, I have to choose the first lens I need : the wide to normal zoom. As I said above, how they compare tamron 17-50 2.8 ; tamron 20-40 2.7-3.5 ; tamron 17-35 2.8-4 ? I don' t care at the difference in focal lenght. I do really care at IQ , because I will use the lens for landscapes too, and I' d really prefere a lens that can work well on FF (5d mk2) too. Please, give me your kind suggestions. Thanks, Ciao. Marco.</p>

 

[tdigi]

<p>The Tamron 17-50 will not work on full frame. If your looking for good IQ Primes with USM or Canon Ls are the best. I rarely do street photography but I have done it with my 10-22 and it works well. </p>

[michael j hoffman]

<p>Marco,</p>

<p>If you will be photographing at f/2 or f/2.8 get the 28/1.8 USM. Otherwise, the 24/2.8 will yield noticably sharper images. I have both and like both (for different uses), but, given enough light or use of flash, the 24/2.8 would be my choice every time.</p>

<p>Michael J Hoffman</p>

[marco_landini]

<p>Resuming : my ideal lens is a wide prime, i prefere primes to zooms, and great IQ, cause I would use it for street on 450d (wide to normal), and on 5d mkii for lanscapes (wide). The lens reviews and tests say 24 2.8 prime is not as shap, not as contrasty as zooms like 17-40 f4-L . Now Michael says 24 2.8 is a great lens...If 24 2.8 can produce great sharpness and contrast, and low distortion to be the ideal companion on 5dmkii in landscape and building photography, it will be MY lens, and I can use it on my 450d for street (38mm ), being my ideal lenght for street on aps, lightweight and very unconspicious.</p>

[marco_landini]

<p>What I would say : is the canon 24 2.8 prime enough good to justificate putting it on the 5d mkii? Is the 24 adeguate to resolve the great amount of data of 5d mkii ? If the answer is yes, the 24 2.8 will be my lens. On 450d for streets, on 5d mkii for landscapes and great detail for large prints. If the answer is no, I'll go for the tamron 17 50 2.8 for streets on 450d and I will put a 21 3.5 zuiko or a nikkor 28 2.8 ais on the 5d mkii. No problem stopping down in static shooting.</p>

[marco_landini]

<p>The only 2 contenders for my first lens choice are, finaly, ef 24 2.8 and 17-40 4/L. They can work on either aps and FF. I dont' care about f2.8 or f4. I would happier with the prime, because of portability and to be discreet. So, I don' t care about flexibility of the zoom, i' m used to primes and zooming by feet. But i' m really concerned in IQ, on 450d and more important on 5d mk2, 'cause I do not only street but a lot of landscapes and buildings too. So, the only reason to choose the 17-40 4L is IQ, if this zoom was better then 24 2.8 in sharpness, contrast, distortion, vignetting, ca ecc..AT f5.6 AND SMALLER APERTURES, 'cause, I repeat, i' m interested in street and scapes, where extended depth of field is required, so I will stop the lenses at 5.6 and smaller almost always. So, for my needs and my consideration, which one is better : canon 24. 28 prime or canon 17-40 4L zoom ? This is the final question. Thanks !</p>

[michael j hoffman]

<p>The 24/2.8 lens is a fine lens. It will yield excellent image quality (especially at moderate to small apertures) on any Canon SLR. The only reason I ever use any other wide angle lens is for extra speed. I shoot the 28/1.8 USM almost exclusively at f/2. I think the OP would best be suited by the 24/2.8 lens of all the options listed.</p>

<p>Michael J Hoffman</p>

[marco_landini]

<p>Thank you very much for your wonderful replies. Great suggestions ! Apart from small size question, I' ve seen there are more alternative zooms that could include 20mm focal. And they could be usefull on FF camera too. I mean : sigma 12-22 ; sigma 15-30. Are they really good zooms, in therms of sharpness, contrast and distortion on both dx and fx format ? As I said, I will use the lens at f5.6 and smaller apertures. If these zooms would be better at 20-24 than primes at f 5.8-8, one of these zoom will be my choice.</p>