The Next Step - After the 50mm lens

[ken_mckenna]

<p>I have a Canon 20d with a 50mm f/1.8. I'm relatively new to photography - I've shot about 3-4k shots. I like shooting street photography, pictures of people in cities, in local shops, and bars, all at both day and night. I like capturing "city life" or "the essence of cities". I'd like to experience shooting at the 50mm and 35mm FOV, as I often find, aesthetically, the 85mm equivalent field of view to be too narrow for my taste.<br /> What should I do? I'm on a budget (essentially I am treating myself by using my savings), and I don't really want to spend more than $200.<br /> <br /> -Buy a film SLR? - I am looking at a Minolta tomorrow, and could buy it with a 52mm lens cheaply? (~$40). This would let me shoot close enough to 50mm, for a low price, and I'd have a sweet film camera. The downside is that it's a film camera, and not really ideal for practicing, since I have to spend money every time I want to buy film or get pictures developed. But it's FILM! Plus the restrictiveness of this format will force me to be great at photography. Also, I wonder if I could get a cheap 35mm lens?<br /> <br /> -Buy a Canon 35mm f/2.0? This would give me an effective focal length of 56mm, which is close enough to shooting at 50mm, and when I eventually upgrade to a full frame camera, I can shoot at 35mm! I have a $50 amazon gift card, so I could buy this NEW on amazon for $260. If I should go this route, should I wait to buy it used on ebay for ~$200 instead?<br /> <br /> -Keep practicing with my 50mm, and save up for something (a used 5d (very far down the road), or glass).<br /> <br /> -Am I missing another option?<br /> <br /> The thing missing from among these is the option to shoot at the 35mm FOV. I would really like this as well. I will be borrowing my girlfriend's kit lens to find out what focal length will be best for me. </p>

[mendel_leisk]

<p>The 35mm f2.0 Canon, assuming that's the older, non IS version, is a good fit with crop bodies. Very light and compact too.</p>

<p>Really, 50mm with 1.6 crop must be giving you tunnel vision ;)</p>

[ken_mckenna]

<p>Should I get the new one for $260 or look for a used one @ $200?</p>

[songtsen]

 

<blockquote>

<p>I'd like to experience shooting at the 50mm and 35mm FOV, as I often find, aesthetically, the 85mm equivalent field of view to be too narrow for my taste. <br>

.... <br>

-Am I missing another option?<br /><br />The thing missing from among these is the option to shoot at the 35mm FOV. </p>

</blockquote>

<p> Why not split the difference and go for a <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12096-USA/Canon_2505A002_Wide_Angle_EF_28mm.html">28mm f2.8</a> (45mm-equivalent)? </p>

[ken_mckenna]

<p>I was also thinking I could get a kit lens (18-55), the only concern here is the aperture of f/3.5 might not be big enough. </p>

[ken_mckenna]

<p>Why not split the difference and go for a <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12096-USA/Canon_2505A002_Wide_Angle_EF_28mm.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">28mm f2.8</a> (45mm-equivalent)?<br>

Only because when I upgrade to a full frame body I will have a 28mm which I'm not sure I'd like yet. </p>

[songtsen]

<p>Yes, but in the meantime, you'll have a long 'normal' (56mm-equivalent) and a short telephoto (80mm-equivalent) which doesn't seem much of an advantage. </p>

[kerry_grim]

I would go with an older version of the 24 2.8 lens.

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>My take is: borrow the kitlens and keep it on ~30mm and around 23mm (where aperture, btw, will be ~f/4 - f/4.5) for a good while to get a better idea which focal lengths you actually like. During the night, it could be limiting, though with either IS (if the kitlens is recent) or a tripod, you can use this deficit to get intentionally blurred effects, which (when done properly) can be really nice.<br>

Do not buy any prime yet until you understand which focal length you're actually looking for.</p>

<p>Ken, the following below might sound a bit discouraging, but I think you're making some points throughout the thread where it might be worth rethinking where you're really after.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Only because when I upgrade to a full frame body I will have a 28mm which I'm not sure I'd like yet.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you currently only have the 50mm on APS-C, frankly you have no clue what 28mm on FF is like. Nor whether you will actually like 35mm on FF. Or 50mm on FF.... It sounds like you look what other use, and think you'd need the same. Well, don't get lured into that idea. Because all the "greats" use 35mm and 50mm on FF from for street photography, that does not necessarily make it the right choice <em>for you</em>. First thing you need here is experience with how different focal lengths "look". You need to learn what fits your vision, and which lens choice fits in that.<br>

A second thing here is: the 5D, according to your own words, is far far away. So, it does not really make sense to start planning for that yet. So I wouldn't base my decisions on assumptions and far-away-maybe-some-day wishes. Also do not forget that good lenses keep their value, so if you dislike them later on, sell them and you won't loose a whole lot.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But it's FILM! </p>

</blockquote>

<p>There is nothing particularly magic about film. Some people prefer it as a recording medium, some don't and a lot of people don't care at all. Most viewers of photos really do not care at all. So unless you KNOW you prefer to shoot film, digital can be an easier place to learn because after the initial investment (which you already did) costs remain quite fixed. Not so with film.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Plus the restrictiveness of this format will force me to be great at photography.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Personally, I do not believe at all that the restrictiveness of film will force you to be great. In fact, quite the opposite might be true too. The fear of wasting a frame might stiffle your lust to experiment, try different settings, approaches and follow creative impulses. Ultimately (but that comes with time, in my view), the restrictions come from within yourself - based on experiences with knowing what does and does not work for you. This is something you have to encourage within yourself. Your recording medium shouldn't be the decisive factor in that.<br>

Becoming a great photographer is a whole different game anyway. You need to choose the gear (and recording medium) that helps you realise your creative vision and that enables you to unleash that potential (yes, unleash - not restrict). It's your creativeness and vision that will make you great. Or in between "pretty good" and mediocre, like most of us ;-)</p>

[luis_g]

<p>Buy an 18-55mm IS II kit lens. It is within your budget new, and they can be found used for a lot less.</p>

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>Plus the restrictiveness of this format will force me to be great at photography.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Naaah, it'll just "force" you to take <em>much, much</em> longer to learn skills that can be picked up really quickly by shooting <em>a lot </em>with digital.</p>

[railphotog]

<p>Not really pertinent to this discussion but I'm wondering about the accent on the Elan:<br>

"You could probably get that Élan with a kit 35-85 thrown in for the same low price."<br>

This would be the French use of elan, don't think I've ever seen Canon refer to their cameras as "Élan".</p>

<p> </p>

[William Michael]

<p>I have all the gear which has been mentioned thus far, except the 24/2.8 (but I do have a canon 24mm lens).</p>

<p>My advice is that you need to prioritize what you goals are – (yeah I know this sounds like a psycho babble exercise coming from the “consultant”) – but really all the key advice thus far has great merit, <strong><em>depending upon what it is YOU really want to PRIMARILY achieve.</em></strong></p>

<p>Taken as accepted you do NOT have any experience at shooting your 20D with prime lenses of ANY OTHER focal lengths than 50mm – then answer this:<br>

<strong>What your primary priority between these two objectives?</strong></p>

<ol>

<li><strong>I want to ‘work out’ what Focal Length Prime Lens I really would like</strong></li>

<li><strong>I want to get a fast and wider Prime Lens and begin shooting and experimenting and learning more about Street Photography. I already know that 50mm FoV is restrictive and that I need wider. </strong></li>

</ol>

<p>Secondly, you must have some reason to write – <em>“I'd like to experience shooting at the 50mm and 35mm FOV’</em> and not to write “I'd like to experience shooting at the 50mm and 28/24mm FOV”<br>

So why is that?<br>

What is your preference predicated upon?<br>

How really serious are you about getting a 5D?</p>

<p>If you do get a 5D – what do you really want – 24 / 50 / 85 OR 35 / 50 / 85 or (the more ‘classic’) 28 / 50 / 85? . . . Or maybe you really don’t have any idea (and that’s OK) maybe you are just regurgitating other ideas you have read about (and that’s OK too.)</p>

<p>When you peel back everything and get down to the absolute of your street photography, it will be much DEFINED by your GENERAL VISION of the (street) world and how you wish to generally depict it: and that might (usually will) be by (almost) exclusive use of one Prime Lens, even if that choice of one Prime Lens <strong><em>changes</em></strong> over the stages of your DEVELOPMENT.</p>

<p>The 35 (on your 20D) gives an ‘equivalence’ of 56 – if you live down the street from me - you can borrow my Rokkor 58/1.2 and one of my Minolta Bodies – but I really don’t think that road (the film road) is a good one for you IF your main aim is to get your teeth into this street stuff and LEARN.<br>

I like (love) my Rokkor 58/1.2 (on a 135 Film Body) - but I rarely use that combination.<br>

My 35/2 on my 20D is a wonderful experience.<br>

But I like a 24mm lens on my 20D better though.<br>

But my experiences and likes and dislikes (should) only mean only a little bit more than zip to you - unless you interrogate my rationale, my vision and my style and then think through how all of that applies to you. gee could be up for that but it might take a bit of time and I think that you would still need to experiment yourself, anyway.</p>

<p>Digital is quicker it has instant gratification: one can train one’s mind into the DISCIPLINE of <em>‘no machine gun shooting’</em> and reap the benefits of the instant gratification of digital (over film). I really don’t think buying a Minolta Film Kit is a good idea – IF you want a 135 film body then a get Canon one. But understand why you are buying a film body - and do NOT confuse then or convince yourself that it is for the same reasons you have posted this question, here.</p>

<p>As I see the situation, after 3ooo frames and using only a 50/20D combination you don’t (can’t) really know precisely what Prime Lens you “NEED”. So, therefore any wider, fast Prime will fit the bill - IF your primary goal is to LEARN and EXPERIMENT to find what is, the exact path you really seek.</p>

<p>If you want to ‘zoom-zoom’ and to have the equivalent of ‘lots of Prime Lenses with which to experiment’ – then get the kit zoom (get the IS version) - BUT before you go the route of the kit zoom lens consider this criterion - <strong>if you do ALREADY USE the 50/1.8 at around F/2 and that aperture then means you are ‘at the limit of adequate SHUTTER SPEED for your low light shots’ then don’t buy the kit lens.</strong></p>

<p>Borrowing your Girlfriend’s Kit lens is a great idea – it will give you ‘some’ information.<br>

Keep her kit lens for a year and shoot about 10,000 street shots with it and it will give you a better idea.<br>

(that’s serious, not sarcastic) – you’re entering an evolution of revolutions: if you are seeking to make this street stuff with Prime Lenses your goal – my advice is take the plunge.</p>

<p><strong>Bottom Line -</strong><br>

<strong>Choose what Aperture you (really) require to accommodate the SHUTTER SPEED you require in the VAST MAJORITY of your SHOOTING SCENARIOS – and get that PRIME LENS and get out and start experimenting – no Focal Length choice between 24 28 and 35 will ‘bad’ – the wrong APERTURE CHOICE will restrict you much more, for the goals you state.</strong></p>

<p>Couple of other questions . . . For your low light work –</p>

<ol>

<li>How far and how often do you push the 20D’s ISO?</li>

<li>Are you regularly at ISO1600 and occasionally (25%) at “H” equivalent ISO 3200?</li>

</ol>

<p>WW</p>

 

[dthew]

<blockquote>

I was also thinking I could get a kit lens (18-55), the only concern here is the aperture of f/3.5 might not be big enough.

</blockquote>

 

For the same money ($199) you could get the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM Zoom For Canon D-SLRs, which is slightly faster and would allow you to experiment with different focal lengths to find the one that suited you before shelling out on a prime.

[ken_mckenna]

<blockquote><ol>

<li>How far and how often do you push the 20D’s ISO?</li>

<li>Are you regularly at ISO1600 and occasionally (25%) at “H” equivalent ISO 3200?</li>

</ol></blockquote>

<p>I usually shoot in very low light, (basically at night) so 800-1600. Yes, occasionally 3200 ISO. I shoot 60% of my shots between f/1.8-f/3.5, 25% at around f/4-6, and 15% at f/8. Thanks for your insightful post.</p>