Canon ef50 f1.8 vs ef35 f2

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by John Ortt, Aug 21, 2007.

  1. John Ortt

    John Ortt Guest

    Hi All,

    I currently own the ef50 f1.8 (mkII) and love it to bits.

    I love using the aperture setting and forcing the camera to take portraits
    at f1.8 which focuses beautifully on the individual and blurs the background
    out.

    My only issue with it is that the focal length (on a crop factor camera) is
    a little long.

    For this reason I am considdering the ef35 f2 and was wonderring if it would
    give comparable results at a slightly wider angle?

    Thanks in advance,

    John
     
    John Ortt, Aug 21, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John Ortt

    Jay B Guest

    On Aug 21, 2:12 am, "John Ortt"
    <> wrote:
    > Hi All,
    >
    > I currently own the ef50 f1.8 (mkII) and love it to bits.
    >
    > I love using the aperture setting and forcing the camera to take portraits
    > at f1.8 which focuses beautifully on the individual and blurs the background
    > out.
    >
    > My only issue with it is that the focal length (on a crop factor camera) is
    > a little long.
    >
    > For this reason I am considdering the ef35 f2 and was wonderring if it would
    > give comparable results at a slightly wider angle?
    >
    > Thanks in advance,
    >
    > John


    Conventional Wisdom is that 35mm is now considered a "standard lens"
    for the small sensor bodies.

    I think you'll like the results...
     
    Jay B, Aug 21, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On 21 Aug, 10:12, "John Ortt"
    <> wrote:
    > Hi All,
    >
    > I currently own the ef50 f1.8 (mkII) and love it to bits.
    >
    > I love using the aperture setting and forcing the camera to take portraits
    > at f1.8 which focuses beautifully on the individual and blurs the background
    > out.
    >
    > My only issue with it is that the focal length (on a crop factor camera) is
    > a little long.
    >
    > For this reason I am considdering the ef35 f2 and was wonderring if it would
    > give comparable results at a slightly wider angle?
    >
    > Thanks in advance,



    I bought the same lens for similar reasons but also to be able to take
    photos indoors without flash. I am moderately happy with it. I get
    some good results and some poor ones. When it is good, it is very
    good. The problem is focus. Of course, at f/1.8 the depth of field
    will be small (which is partly why I want it) but it does not always
    appear to focus on the point that it claims to have used. I review
    the results using the Canon Zoom Browser program which can show the
    auto focus points from a raw image. Sometimes it shows that it was my
    mistake and I have missed the intended focus point but, other times,
    the focus point is where I wanted it to be (usually the subject's eye)
    yet the selected point is not in focus but something else is.

    I use the lens on a 300D so it is about equivalent to an 80mm on a
    full frame camera. This is not an issue for me since I thought that a
    sight telephoto was regarded as good for portraits. Occasionally I
    have some trouble on indoor shots getting far enough back from the
    subject but I can normally live with that.

    I cannot say anything about the other lens you mention but a friend
    has a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 which is very nice if you want that length. It
    can only be used on small sensors. The friend has a 30D and a 5D.
    The lens will physically attach to the 5D but suffers severe
    vignetting. I guess that it was designed for 1.6 crop factor
    cameras.

    This Sigma lens attracted me and so did the Canon 50mm f/1.4. Price
    drove me to the 50mm f/1.8. If I can get more reliable focussing I
    will be happy with it. I cannot decide if I have a faulty lens or
    just poor technique. I don't have these focus issues with other
    lenses but they are all f/3.5 or narrower.

    --
    Seán Ó Leathlóbhair
     
    =?iso-8859-1?B?U2XhbiBPJ0xlYXRobPNiaGFpcg==?=, Aug 21, 2007
    #3
  4. John Ortt

    Eric Miller Guest

    "John Ortt" <> wrote in message
    news:46caa8d2$...
    > Hi All,
    >
    > I currently own the ef50 f1.8 (mkII) and love it to bits.
    >
    > I love using the aperture setting and forcing the camera to take portraits
    > at f1.8 which focuses beautifully on the individual and blurs the
    > background out.
    >
    > My only issue with it is that the focal length (on a crop factor camera)
    > is a little long.
    >
    > For this reason I am considdering the ef35 f2 and was wonderring if it
    > would give comparable results at a slightly wider angle?
    >
    > Thanks in advance,
    >
    > John
    >


    I bought the 35 f/2 for my 10D and sold it when I bought my 5D. I sold the
    10D first. It always takes me a while to convince myself to let go of a good
    lens. Get the 35 f/2, you will be happy with the image quality.

    Eric Miller
    www.dyesscreek.com
     
    Eric Miller, Aug 21, 2007
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    450
  2. David J. Gilmour

    Canon ixus 400 or canon ixus 2 ?

    David J. Gilmour, Jul 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    580
  3. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    879
  4. zxcvar

    Difference between Canon G5 and Canon S50

    zxcvar, Jul 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    430
    Roland Karlsson
    Jul 23, 2003
  5. Canon SD100 or Canon 400 ?

    , Jul 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    387
    Lucas Tam
    Jul 29, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page