Forum menu
I'm looking for a prime lens for a Canon 500D, a short ish focal length and wide aperture.
I've got 17-85mm USM which is great in most scenarios but lacks a bit indoors in low light.
I've got 50mm 1.8f which is amazing in low light but a bit too long, can't fit everything I want in the frame.
Anything up to about 24mm I reckon, no more than about 2.4f and on a budget = happy to consider Sigma or Tamron.
Any recommendations?
Cheers
Sigma 24mm Macro (it isn't really - but does focus nice and close).
Quite a nice lens, soft at the edges I grant you, but that isn't an issue on crop!
Cheers capt, is that compatible with a 500d or just full frame?
I reckon you need a 35mm, they normally capture what the eye sees, if you go any smaller its getting into wide angle.
This canon lens is well reccomended by Ken Rockwell
http://kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/35mm-f2.htm
Or take you pick from any of his reviews
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/index.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/index.htm
Sigma 30mm? For cannon efs
Cheers capt, is that compatible with a 500d or just full frame?
If it works with full-frame it'll work with APS-C. It's the other way round where you might have issues, EF-S lenses won't work on a full-frame body.
On the other hand full frame lenses tend to be expensive so unless you plan to upgrade to a full frame camera, you're better off buying a cropped frame lens.
Note that the focal length of a lens doesn't change regardless of the camera you put it on. The effect you see is cropping, not a change in focal length. On an APS-C frame camera, the image you end up with from something around 35mm would be closest to a 50mm lens on a full frame digi or, dare I say, the original full frame camera shooting 35mm film. This is closest to your own field of vision.
Keen photographers tend to fall either into 35mm or 50mm camps when it comes to prime lens choice for street or general photography. I use 35mm but I'm a rank amateur and I tend to rely on the high pixel count to then facilitate cropping, down to what you would otherwise get with a 50mm focal length. Probably I should be in the 50mm camp but the camera I have/wanted is 35mm fixed only.
For an APS-C camera, I'd suggest looking at something around 25-35mm in focal length.
I reckon you need a 35mm, they normally capture what the eye sees, if you go any smaller its getting into wide angle.
That's correct on a full-frame sensor (as it was with film), but on APS-C sensors such as the 500D, you'd want a 24 mm (24 mm x 1.6 = 38.4 mm effective focal length)
Also, I'd tend to do the exact opposite of whatever Ken Rockwell recommends
Keen photographers tend to fall either into 35mm or 50mm camps when it comes to prime lens choice for street or general photography.
Well, I once went out to take pictures along a bike ride in London with a 25mm lens on my Olymus (so 50mm equivalent) and it was terrible. Too short to pick anything out and too long to get any vistas in. When in a street you can't move any further away than the other side of the street...
I bought the better half a canon 24mm f2.8 pancake for christmas as a lightweight walkabout lens. Image quality pretty much as good as the 24mm end of our 24-70 f2.8 and a tiny fraction of the weight and cost. would recommend it. Its been great for indoor family shots over christmas and I can see me 'borrowing' it a lot for street photography.
That's correct on a full-frame sensor (as it was with film), but on APS-C sensors such as the 500D, you'd want a 24 mm (24 mm x 1.6 = 38.4 mm effective focal length)
Well, I once went out to take pictures along a bike ride in London with a 25mm lens on my Olymus (so 50mm equivalent) and it was terrible.50mm is usually accepted as closest to the equivalent field of vision to the human eye, not 35mm, so 35mm on APS-C would give you a crop factor that results in the 50mm field of view.
Sounds like you fall into the 35mm group then Molgrips 😀
They do a 17mm pancake but only in micro 43...
I bought a EF 24mm f/1.4L II from Ebay for my 550D and it was incredible the quality of shots it allowed indoors, but i ended up reselling to get a EF 24-105mm f/4L IS as I figured the versatility of having some zoom was worth dropping down to a smaller aperture... As pointed out already, the full-frame lens on a 2/3 body does make you feel a little close to the action, so I often find myself having to back away from the action to get everything in frame...
Santa got me a EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 which is designed for the cropped body, so it'll be fun experimenting with such wide angles 🙂
50mm is usually accepted as closest to the equivalent field of vision to the human eye, not 35mm, so 35mm on APS-C would give you a crop factor that results in the 50mm field of view.
That's a myth, or at best open to argument, a lenghty and complicated one. Anything between 35 and 50 equivilent is normal. Whatever you prefer.
Agreed - hence the use of the word 'usually' and 'closest' and the reference above to 35mm and 50mm shooting. 😉
A concensus on a camera thread? Must be a Christmas miracle. 😯 😀
The old sigma 1.8s a worth a look. I've just got a 28mm f1.8 and it's really quite impressive.
I have a 28mm f2.8 alongside my 50mm f1.8 and it's a more versatile walkabout lens, I find. In some ways you could call it dull...as in very normal, but that's kinda the point, you can photograph pretty much everything with it. It's very capable too. I go through stages of absolutely loving it, to not not being all too inspired by it.