finding the 50 a bit too "zoomy"

lukechad

lukechad

lukechad

Soldato
Joined
25 May 2004
Posts
8,925
Location
Burton-On-Trent
Recently I've started doing photo shoots in my living room of my son and children of friends and family! Obviously my lens of choice for all of them is the 50mm, however I'm finding that I'm struggling when wanting to capture the whole body.

My living room is not exactly small and I guess I'm 2m from the subject, and they are 1-2 m from my backdrop.

So, is it worth seriously considering swapping the 50 for a 35mm f2? What are peoples honest opinions on making this move?

Thanks in advance
 
I sold my 50mm in favour for a Sigma 30mm F1.4 - don't regret it in the least. It's awesome! Much nicer focal length on a crop body.
 
Go for it. Although I would add the 35mm rather than swap the 50 for it.

I wouldn't do head and shoulder shots with a 35mm even on a crop personally.
 
I'd keep the 50 as well (works like an 85mm on a crop), I also really liked the sigma 30mm when I only had a crop camera. I have the 35 f2 now as I also have FF as well as a crop, but I don't like it anywhere near as much as the sigma.
 
Ok, we'll ive got a basic lens selection currently with the 18-55, 50, and a 55-250,

I don't think I can afford or justify new, however I would consider a sigma or tamron alternative to the 35 if one exists that's a fair replacement to canons 35
 
The sigma 30mm f1.4 in my experience is much better on a crop than the canon 35mm f2. I still consider now picking one up again just for use on the 7D. It is more expensive than the canon though, second hand they go for around £250 whilst the canon is around £175.The canon is ok but I miss the f1.4...

This is with the sigma @ f1.4:


Bournemouth August 2011 by jj_glos, on Flickr

This is with the canon @ f2.2:


Jennie by jj_glos, on Flickr
 
Very happy Sigma 30mm on a 7D owner here... focus is a bit slow but other than that it's perfect and a nice walkaround lens :)
 
Love my sigma 3omm hardly ever off my camera. Picked mine up off talk photography forum, I originally had the 50mm sigma but found it to long on my 550d.
 
A friend of mine with a 7D bought the Sigma 30mm as he really liked the fov of the 50 on my 5D3, he's very pleased with the results he's been getting with it!
 
The sigma is supposed to be very soft everywhere but the centre (read a few reviews) whereas the Canon 35 f/2 is sharp all over. However as you're looking at portrait shots then the centre is all you need to be sharp.
 
The corners are a bit soft, but they are on the canon as well. Bokeh is much better on the sigma as well. If you want to see really dodgy edges just stick it on a full frame :D


Jennie by jj_glos, on Flickr
 
I have the Sigma 30 1.4; awesome lens for money. I bought it for the exact same reason you were saying OP,
 
Nah it's a preset, I'll have to check on my laptop at home but I think it is an OnOne preset that I either bought or got free when I bought their suite.
 
I had the same feelings towards my 50mm in that it felt a bit too long in more and more scenes. I ended up buying a Canon 28mm 1.8 second hand as it was going cheap.

The 28 isn't the most optically amazing lens around and does have noticeable CA round the edges in some shots but overall it's a pretty decent prime and certainly gives me the extra width I needed for some shots. On the crop sensor it is more like a 50mm :)

I still always end up at my 50mm though as my go-to lens.
 
This is really an area lacking in Canon's lineup, the 35mm f/2.0 is not the cheapest for EF-S users and the image quality is not great, f/2.0 is on the slower side for a prime. The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is very soft outside the edges and is not cheap fro a 3rd part crop-only lens. Canon 28mm f/1.8, same problem not the cheapest and fairly poor image quality.

[Fanboy Mode On]
The Nikon 35mm f/1.8 however has great image quality, even usable on FF (close focus at large apertures). To get the image quality (and I don't just mean sharpness but out of focus rendition etc) of the Nikon 35mm DX on Canon you really have to get the Canon 35mm f.1,4 which is in a different ball park price wise.
And it is similar at the 50mm end, the Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a it of o a dog, the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 is pretty dam amazing for the money, probably surpassing the canon 50mm f/1.4, I even saw a comparison some time back that showed the Nikon 50mm f.1.8 to have better Bokeh and other characteristics than the Canon 50mm L....)

[Fanboy Mode OFF]


These canon lenses are started to show their age, i'm pretty confident Canon will update them in the coming years. The Sigma 30mm is just disappointing compared to their 50mm and 85mm offerings, hopefully their 35mm F/1.5 behaves like the latter 2.
 
The original 35/2.0 sucked.
The new 35/2.0 has a stupid price.
The 50/1.8 mkii (not mk1) is like a toy.

Although in practice these dont concern me. Entry canon wide primes basically need an overhaul, this coming from a Canon shooter as none of them really are up to the standard of Nikon.

/don't need to be a fanboy, truth are truth, it is what it is.
 
Coming into a thread of a Canon user inquiring about lenses to say how great the Nikon lenses are is the very modus operandi of a fanboy :D :p

Canon need something in the area of the 30\35, I'm not convinced we'll see a straight upgrade of the 35mm f2 now though... They can look at doubling the price of the 50mm f1.8 to get it in the ball park of the Nikon, but it looks a popular lens because of its £75 price tag...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom