Canon 50 1.4 or 17-55 2.8

[valentin_antoci]

<p>I am a new XSI owner and went close to 1500 exposures in a week... I'm learning I think, and I love the set... One concern - the kit 18-55 IS is really great for outdoors, but indoors I'm really having trouble being able to handhold much... I still get sharp pictures at 1/8, but often I need just a bit more help for the indoors...<br>

I'm looking to progress - my favorite shots are city scapes and architecture at night... Last week I also photographed the autoshow... and would like to maybe do some sports sometime...<br>

I typically tend to zoom and get a really tight frame around subjects - I was looking through my shots and 80% probably were done at 50-55... the 18 is nice if framing the skyline... still...<br>

What do you think - what is my solution? Or is it too early to talk lens upgrades?</p>

[karel_uyttendaele]

<p>The EF 50 1.4 will not dissapoint you at all. The bokeh is superb! If you have a steady hand then you allmost won't use your flash at all.</p>

<p>Karel.</p>

[henrik_lauridsen]

<p>Why not try the 50mm f/1.8 instead ? It is a bit slower than the f/1.4, but at approx 1/3 of the cost. It could provide a cheap way for you to find out if you like a 50mm prime.</p>

[luis_g]

<p> It's too early. Basing a lens choice on a mere 1500 exposures is premature lenticulation, IMO. A tripod, even a table tripod, will help you more with night-time "cityscapes and architecture" than anything else. Not criticizing the lenses themselves, but for these subjects, the effective length of 80mm of a 50mm lens on your XSI seems on the long side. Perhaps you should consider a Canon 35/2 (cheap and they work well on a crop body), or for two hundred more, a Sigma 30/1.4.</p>

<p>Sports? Go straight to the "L" aisle.</p>

 

[bueh]

<p>Unfortunately, with Canon you have only either the choice of image-stabilized zooms (none faster than f/2.8, most pretty expensive) or regular, fast prime (the fastest ones highly expensive, though). This means when the faster shutter speeds provided by a good prime are still not enough you are stuck. The same goes for the IS zooms, which are nice, but often too slow anyway (consumer lenses with f/5.6...).</p>

<p>In my humble experience, I need shutter speeds of 1/50, better 1/100 sec to get blur-free images with a 50mm lens on an APS-C body. Shooting in burst mode helps getting an acceptable image, but while I can get sharp (and "sharp-ish") pictures from my (unstabilized) super-wide lens at ridiculously slow speeds, this is much more frustrating with longer lenses.</p>

<p>Since I like to shoot a lot with fast primes, I consider switching over to Pentax. I tried the K10D last summer and its in-body "shake reduction" is excellent. Even night photography was possible at speeds that I would have never even tried with my Canon gear (because I know its limits). So, before you spend $1000 to get that EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM zoom, consider buying a used K10D/K20D with a couple of fast primes for less money (the fast FA 50mm f/1.4 cost less than half of the Canon equivalent).</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I'd second the suggestion of the very inexpensive 50mm f/1.8--the "plastic fantastic"--it's optically very fine and I have bought two used ones at about US$50 each on eBay (one for me, one for my daughter). If you like it, then consider the f/1.4 version at some future date. f/1.8 should work well in available light, especially if you are willing to accept a little more noise and pop up the ISO. Another possibility is the 35mm f/2.0 lens which is a "normal" lens on your XSi. However, if you are already shooting mostly at 50mm or so....</p>

<p>Have you also considered that perhaps the reason you're shooting at 50-55mm is because that is as far out as you can go? You might want to think about a 55-250mm IS lens, although that, of course, does nothing to solve your available light problem. However both the 50mm f/1.8 and the 55-250mm IS <em>together</em> would be much less than you were considering spending on the f/2.8 zoom and not much more than the 50mm f/1.4.</p>

<p>I'm not so convinced that Canon and Nikon aren't right about in-lens stabilization being better than in-body, but if you are thinking about Bueh's suggestion of Pentax, NOW is the time to try it, before you've invested in a system of lenses. Once you've bought a 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens, etc., it will likely be expensive to switch.</p>

[don_bryant2]

<p>> Why not try the 50mm f/1.8 instead<br>

Personally I don't find the OOF shapes pleasing with this lens. Additionally I like the CA and corner softness the 50 mm f/1.4 produces and the manual focus ring is superior IMO.<br />Sure it's more expensive, but you get a better lens IMO</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>I think it is too early to talk lens upgrade, to answer that part of your question.</p>

<p>If you want to try the 50mm prime idea, pick up the f/1.8 version for dirt cheap and shoot it a bit. That way you can find out at very little cost how useful (or not) such a lens will be, and see how you feel about shooting with a short telephoto prime instead of a zoom.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[henrik_lauridsen]

<p>Donald, I am sure the f/1.4 is very much superior to the f/1.8. My point was, the 50mm f/1.8 is a cheap way to try out if shooting with a prime is for you, and even though not as good as more expensive versions of the same focal length, it still outperforms the kit zoom.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I will also argue against the 50mm F1.8 and for the 50mm f1.4. About 30 years ago i bought the old FD50mm f1.8 as it was all I could afford (I still have it and it is much better constructed than the new EF version!). About 2 years later I upgraded to the F1.4 and i doubt if I have used the F1.8 since. With either lens you should have no trouble handholding indoors (unless you shoot in churches a lot). As for switching systems - my advice is to stick with Canon (if you must switch go to Nikon) there is no benefit going to Pentax as you are comitting to the Pentax / Samsung family. They appear to make good lower end DSLRs and reasonable lenses but the range is limited and you may find you want to grow beyond what they offer. I would also personally advise against the 17-55 F2.8 IS as it restricts you from going full frame - it is almost the same price as the 24-70 F2.8L which is a superb lens. The only advantage of the 17-55 F2.8 is that it will give a wider angle of view on crop bodies but it is now clear that the full frame sensor is taking hold of the mid to high end market. Sony and Nikon have joined Canon and you can go full frame for around $2500 - given the quality, high ISO performance and wide angle capability of the full frame sensor I expect it to migrate further down market. Either of the 50mm lenses will work but the F1.4 is a great lens - better quality, USM motor and better Bokah.</p>

[akajohndoe]

I do not own any EF-S lenses. Just a decision I made and will stick to, at least until some EF-S lens comes along that just knocks my socks off.

[m._scott_clay1]

<p>All the other posters have very good points. You didn't really get into your thoughts behind the 17-55 mentioned in the title of the post.</p>

<p>I'll be the odd man out and recommend the 17-55 2.8 IS. I know several pros who use this lens on their 30d's and absolutely love it. I had one on my 40d before I went with the FF 5d. If I could only have one lens for my 40D (and didn't have a FF camera) it would be the 17-55 2.8 IS. It's one of Canon's best lenses even though it doesn't have the coveted "L" insignia. Look at the test results and you will see it's superior to your 18-55 in almost every way.</p>

<p>It is an EF-s lens, which means you can't use it on a FF camera, however, they seem to hold thier value very well. You can always sell it if you do go FF at some point. The bottom line is "do you really want to invest that kind of money in a lens"? It is an expensive investment. If not, certainly go with the Canon 50 1.8 or 1.4. I have the 50 1.4 and love it.</p>

<p>I would caution you that it's still early in your journey to be moving to expensive lenses. I do agree with the others that the 50 1.8 or 1.4 would be a better fit for you now, but, if your mind is set on spending a sizable amount on a lens and you want good low light capability with IS, the 17-55 2.8 IS still gets my vote.</p>

<p>Best regards,</p>

<p>Scott</p>

[bueh]

<p>In case no one got it: I am all for image stabilization. The benefits of fast glass in regards to shutter speeds are limited. It is next to impossible to get anything faster than f/1.4 (already expensive enough!) which is merely two stops faster than a professional zoom. Shutter speeds will not be fast enough for hand-held photography in casual indoor settings with normal, artificial lighting (unless you raise ISO to 1600+ or so, which is not really recommended if you value image quality). So the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is a sensible (albeit heavy-weight) choice that will not freeze action, but will give you better, blur-free images at slow shutter speeds despite the smaller maximum aperture.</p>

<p>But before you fork over $1k for this lens just to get hand-holdability in poor light, consider other alternatives. For $1000 you can buy a nice K20D kit. I don't say that you should switch over completely. If you think your Canon offers you benefits, there is nothing wrong with using a Pentax dSLR for low-light photography and your 450D/XSi for everything else.</p>

<p>And to all naysayers: Please state a couple of lenses you miss in the Pentax line-up. Unless you are into professional sports or full-frame-only photography, you won't miss anything, in my humble opinion. Virtually all popular and not-so-popular lenses of Canon/Nikon are availble for Pentax, too, and they also offer some interesting APS-C-only primes that NikCan don't. Plus good backwards-compatibility and excellent built-in image stabilization <i>with any lens</i> .</p>

[matthijs]

<p>You might want to borrow or rent lenses before buying. Lenses are very much a question of taste. Some choose based on images, others on handling and others on looks.</p>

<p>To me the buying of a 50/1.8 was like seeing the world anew. Others threw it away after two shots because it handles and feels ultra cheap.</p>

<p>Maybe you have photographer friends or a club nearby. Try stuff out before you buy...</p>

[yakim_peled1]

<p dir="ltr">The 17-55/2.8 IS caused me to sell one great lens (Sigma 50/1.4) and offer for sale another great lens (Canon 35/1.4) as they simply became redundant. </p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Regarding the Canon 50/1.4 well, I must admit I am not a fan of it. In the past I had one alongside the 50/1.8 and sold it after two weeks. Currently I have one at home for 3 months (this is a friend's lens which hasn't picked it up yet) and I haven't mounted it on my camera even once. Reason: That cursed :-) 17-55/2.8 IS. BTW, you may want to look at <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/717198/">this comparison</a>. </p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Also, I urge you to test the boundaries of the IS in your 18-55 IS. Treated carefully, <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/679313/2#6092326">it can do wonders</a>. </p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

<p dir="rtl"> </p>

[tdigi]

<p>I would highly recommend getting a 50 1.4, even if you get a 17-55 or some other high end zoom there is no substitute for a prime under certain conditions.</p>

<p>However, I agree with trying before buying if possible. </p>

[kasperhettinga]

<p>The first prime I bought was the 50 f/1.8. It's a cheap way to find out whether you like prime lenses or not. I found out I liked them and recently bought the sigma 30mm f/1.4 and would like to get the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 in future as well. I really like shooting with primes...but have no idea whether you would :)</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I am not sure why Bueh B does not think you can handhold indoors. If you check indoor lighting is generally from LV7 to LV11 in most households. At 100 ISO LV7 = EV7 this is 1/60 at F1.4. At 1600 ISo which he mentions if you need 1/125 then you can shoot at F4. In practice I find that most rooms are around LV 10 in daylight and LV 9 when with the lights on at night. Using 200 ISO this gives 1/60 at F4 to F5.6 easily enough to handhold a 50mm lens (on a crop sensor you may need to go to 1/125). Is may not help much depending on the subject - I find that unless formally posed you need 1/60 to shoot children as they move so much.</p>

[jeff_bubis]

<p>I've had a similar dilemma in the past. I can't say enough about the 17-55 - and there really is no equivalent on the FF EF lenses if you want IS (which is very important to me). While I agree with some of the prior posts that it may be early to consider investing in such an expensive lens, I can't say enough about this one. The build quality is excellent (though not quite "L"), as is the IQ. It is my standard walk-around lens and stays on the camera at least 80-90% of the time. Because of how great it is, I'm not sure that the 50 mm prime (especially on a crop body) is all that it's cracked up to be. ONTH, the 50/1.8 is so cheap used that you might get both. Personally, I continue to question the benefit of the prime in this setting as the IS should compensate for low light and the bokeh on this lens can be quite harsh (see the dpreview review from last week). I think if the prime is that important, I would either spring for the 1.4 or go to a 35 mm - one of which is what I will do if I ever decide to take the plunge on a prime.</p>

[bueh]

<blockquote>

<p>I am not sure why Bueh B does not think you can handhold indoors.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, I wouldn't have noticed this issue if it wasn't true for me. Things may be different in power-consumptive USA, but here in my apartment my Sekonic gives barely around 6 EV at ISO 400. This is 1/30 sec at f/1.4! I'd rather not raise ISO to 800, but even then getting blur-free portraits with the 50mm on my crop-factor camera is tricky (to say nothing about using the EF 100mm f/2). And stopping down a little to improve image quality -- forget it! As I said, I know this from experience -- not just from my apartment, but from indoor events and even concert/stage photography and other situations where I find the shutter speeds too slow.</p>

<p>And in this critical lighting is were in-camera IS shines: Just barely below the treshhold to get consistently good hand-held results, but where I must make compromises with my Canon by raising the ISO number or accepting a little camera shake (unless I go for flash, then all bets are off, obviously). Again, don't just repeat Canon's mantras about lens IS, but give a stabilized body a try and see for yourself. For one of my two main applications -- indoor photography -- I find Canon's strategy flawed and I will switch over to Pentax unless I see a sign from Canon that camera-based IS is on the horizon.</p>

[anov]

<p>Don't forget to put them on our classified should you decide to do that. And if you go the Pentax route, the Samsung GX-20 is actually a bit cheaper. </p>

[kasperhettinga]

<p>Also depends on what your indoor shooting targets are. For me, it are my kids playing around. For that, IS (lens or body) is of no use, as it will not help stabilize the kids :)<br>

So I settled for a big aperture prime and have some OOF shot due to shallow DOF...</p>

<p>Having around 5-6EV (don't see how EV9 would be average...) at night in my home, at ISO 400, it gives 1/60'-1/125' @ f/1.4 which is acceptable...and more than enough for handholding a 30 or 50mm prime.</p>

[bueh]

<blockquote>

<p>Don't forget to put them on our classified should you decide to do that.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why should I do that? When I make the switch I don't want to wait ages to sell the gear and I doubt that there are many European buyer here.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>And if you go the Pentax route, the Samsung GX-20 is actually a bit cheaper.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not in Europe, unfortunately. Last summer I had I great deal on a K20D, but as money is a problem, I did not have the funds I needed to buy it. I could have bought that kit and would have made good money if I sold it! Maybe later this year... for now I am stuck with Canon.</p>