Difference between the 50mm prime and Sigma 50-200mm

[audra_lofrano_white]

<p>How do pictures differ using fixed 50 mm prime and the 50-200 mm and the 50mm range? I'm trying to figure out if the Sigma 50-200 will let me take the same type of portraits a 50 mm prime would.</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Yes in the sense of perspective but no in the sense that a 50mm prime (you don't say which one) is generally going to be significantly faster--a wider maximum aperture. Not only does this allow a higher shutter speed/less light, but when used in this way also reduces depth-of-field, making it easier to isolate the subject by throwing the background out of focus. That said, some prefer portraits with longer focal length, and the longer focal length also helps isolate the subject from the background as well, even if the lens isn't as fast.</p>

[jon_robert]

<p>50mm is 50mm so they are the same. The real question is are the 2 going to produce the same quality and the same Bokeh. Primes tend to be better quality due to a compromise inherent in zoom construction. But will anyone notice except the fanatical tester.<br /> Testing will reveal your answer. In the mean time reading will gear you up to recognize the answer<br /> <strong>Nikon 50mm Lens Comparison </strong>http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/bokeh.htm<br /> <strong><strong>Bokeh </strong></strong>http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/bokeh.htm</p>

[ryans]

<p>I'm the ultra-beginner, so I may be totally wrong. Wouldn't the main differences probably be aperture and things like lens distortion? I would guess if the choice was 50mm prime or 50mm off a zoom, I'd go with the prime.</p>

<p>I've also read that certain portrait work might look nice with a longer focal length because you can set the depth of field such that the background becomes really blurry and the subject "pops out" more. I guess it depends what kind of effect you're trying to get. Maybe someone with more knowledge can enlighten us both.</p>

[kevin_delson]

<p>I've yet to meet a zoom type lens that can do all things equally well.<br>

From a convenience POV, they are great. I know of no one who carries 20 primes at 10mm intervals. LOL<br>

If you are a generalist; zooms are a must unless you shoot only one type of subject.<br>

I shoot quite a few portraits and use a zoom or two..what I <strong>don't</strong> do is use zooms that have a maximum aperture of f/5.6 above 80mm.</p>

<p>The 50mm prime is a great education for most who have not yet had the seasoning of a professional.<br>

The 50mm prime forces each of us to think about the shot; composition, f/stop choice.</p>

<p>...and yes, the distortion is almost non existent with quality primes.</p>

<p>I often will put on the 50mm and leave it on all day; the quality of the image not to mention the weight reduction are a joy.</p>

<p>The only negative (if it is a negative) is that quality primes are usually expensive with few exceptions.<br>

Nikon's "Nifty 50" @ f/1.8 is one of those exceptions.</p>

[ellery]

<p>The answer to your question, from my pretty much beginner status at this point, assumes in what situation you are using the lens. The zoom lens will have its advantages for certain scenarios...for example candid portraits perhaps - like children running around or situations where the flexible focal lengt will give you compositional flexibility greater than the prime.....the prime on the other hand can drop down to as low as f1.8, giving more light for low light scenes and for "no see-um bokeh's". Let the situation dictate which lens I would say. I have a kit lens 18-105 and my prime, and I shoot my prime indoors *mostly*, but when I want good depth of field and/or wider focal length and flexibility of zoom, I make exposure adustments with my kit lens (boost ISO and/or add flash). Hard to beat that prime - you can achieve 100mm by "zooming with your feet" anyway....but I presume if you are in a situation that you need/desire to use 200mm-300mm, then the zoom would have some advantage.....so perhaps this is like comparing apples and oranges?? Others can correct my beginner assumptions please :D</p>

[bpzimm98]

<p>5omm as stated before is just 50 mm's no matter if zoom or fixed. Fixed 50's have a tremendous amount of benefits inherently. First, fixed 50's are fairly easy to make and to correct optical abberations for. Far less lens elements compared to zooms make them a "Given" when campared to entry level zooms. Zooms need to try to correct abberations throughout the entire zoom range where as fixed only deal with one focal length. Second, they usually are much faster. (letting in more light). So you have far greater control over Depth of Field, greater flash distance, faster and more accurate AF in low light and the list goes on. I never leave home without one. Almost in every case, the fixed 50 will be razor sharp and highly corrected from F2.8 to f11. Try that with a zoom anywhere near the price of that 50 and you'll soon see why it remains in my kit bag.</p>

[bpzimm98]

<p>Oh and just to get your creative juices flowing... Add extension tubes and that fixed 50 becomes a macro lens! Add 25mm of extension tubes and your now at half life size magnification (1 stop light loss). Add 50mm of extension tubes and your at LIFE SIZE (2 stops light loss) for cheap! Life size cuts down light by 2 stops. Even slow 50's are usually f1.8 or f2. What are the telephoto zooms largest f stop at 50mm's...3.5, 4.5? Wide angle zooms that end with 50mm's usually end up at f5.6 on the standard (entry level class) zooms. So life size with ext. tubes on that one would end up at an equivalent f11 at widest! Remember, zooms have there place in your kit as do fixed focal lengths. Use wise judgment to get the results you need that fits your pocketbook!</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>The 50mm prime forces each of us to think about the shot; composition, f/stop choice.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Composition and f stop choice don't change between primes and zooms. Composition is inherent in seeing the image and f stop choice is always something that can be made, even if it is slightly more limited.</p>

<p>Weight is going to be significantly different, and that may impact your ability to hand hold steadily, which can be a factor in low light situations. For a beginner, differences in lens characteristics are going to be far less important than how you show what you are shooting in the photograph.</p>

[kevin_delson]

<blockquote>

<p>Composition and f stop choice don't change between primes and zooms.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Interesting how you are so easily able to "spin" what others say Jeff.<br>

Re-read my post; did I say these elements change?</p>

<p>After looking thru the multitude of responses you offer on PN, I find your input is more often than not a challenge to attempt to prove someone wrong through YOUR interpretation of what was said.</p>

<p>Are you truly that angry or are your challenges just perfect?</p>

[fceltia]

<p>A 50 mm f 1.2- 1.8 prime is the best choice for portrait. Allowing shallow depth of field and better background blur. As well as being fast in low light situations when using a flash may be undesireable.</p>