Need opinions on a new lense! Canon users halp!

[Oxer]

So Recently the lense bug has bitten when I picked up a nifty 50mm f1.8 lense.

Now I want to try out one, maybe two others... I have compiled a small list of ones that are in my price range.... Just looking for opinions on them if anyone has used them previously..

1) 24mm EF f/2.8 $515

2) 28mm EF f/2.8 $300

3) 28mm EF f/1.8 $705

4) 35mm EF f/2 $405

5) 50mm EF f/1.4 $599

#3 is a bit much, I mean, I would rather get #2 an #4 for the same price haha... But let me know opinions peeps!


Also, Im shooting with a 400D body. Not that that matters...



Oh and James, that sigma 1.4 is $600+ lol... Too much for a non canon lense imo...

[J. Evins]

85mm 1.8 is a fun lens. 35mm 2 would be a good bargain lens.

The 50mm 1.4 isn't bad but I'd hold out on upgrading the 50 until your other ranges are covered.

[Oxer]

Yeah I figure the 50 1.4 wouldnt be that much different to the 1.8 for now anyways...

Im leaning to wards the 35mm f2.... Cheap...

Might save up for something with a zoom, but since using the nifty50, prime lense's have stolen my heart.

[J.Owen]

It really depends on what you are shooting. I shoot a lot of people and portraits so my 50 f1.4 is used a lot. Also, the 50 1.4 is worlds above the nifty fifty. The focus speed, clarity, and bokeh are more then worth the extra cost.

The 28 2.8 is a good lense for the money, but it is aging, somewhat slow, and can get soft when down at 2.8. I use it in a pinch when I need a few extra stops over the 17-85.

Since you already have a 50mm, I would say go wide with a 24.

[Oxer]

I guess the 28 2.8's age reflects the price then hey...


James when you say 85 1.8 you mean THIS lense right? That is also within budget, I skipped straight past it to be honest...

While Im here, Anyone use an extention tube with a prime lense? would they be a more suitable investment to practice with first? At the end of the day, Im only a novice and anything I do buy will be something to learn from..

[Han]

Lens.

And beetle guy pretty much summed it up.

[Oxer]

It really depends on what you are shooting. I shoot a lot of people and portraits so my 50 f1.4 is used a lot. Also, the 50 1.4 is worlds above the nifty fifty. The focus speed, clarity, and bokeh are more then worth the extra cost.

I shoot cars mostly... but I also shoot people and Random things... Sounds like I should have forked out for the 50 1.4 haha... Ill see if I can palm off the 1.8 to a mate.... If so Ill grab a 1.4

Lens.

And beetle guy pretty much summed it up.

I just realised I added an e to the end of every time I wrote lens. God damn night shift messes me up.....


Im really stumped now that James threw the 85 into the equasion.... fook.

[J. Evins]

The Canon 50mm 1.4 isn't bad. It is a little bit sharper tan the 1.8 and will focus a little better. The build quality is better. The bokeh is harsh and its soft as hell wide open.

The Sigma 50mm 1.4 I prefer, the bokeh is much smoother and its pretty sharp. You just need a good copy.

The problem with third party lenses is you absolutely have to buy them somewhere you can return them if you have a problem. Otherwise, you'll eventually get burnt. The quality control at Sigma, Tamron, etc isn't the best so bad lenses routinely slip through the cracks. Thats why I don't shoot third party glass anymore, but if I were on a budget I would.

The following would be good choices

Sigma 30mm 1.4
Sigma 50mm 1.4
Tamron 28-75 2.8 or 17-50 2.8
Canon 85 1.8
Canon 35mm 2
Canon 70-200 F4 non-IS

There are multiple wide angle lenses out there between $400-500, many people recommend the Sigma 10-20 but that was the last third party lens I ever bought and it was de-centered and super soft on one side. Its worth saving for a 10-22 if you plan on staying crop body.

If you're on full frame, the 17-40L can't be beat. Its super affordable for L quality.

[Oxer]

Thanks for the input fellas! I might try and head down to the store one of these days and take a look.. Last time they let me snap a couple pics with the display lenses, If they have them all in stock Ill give them a testrun...

Im leaning towards the 85 and 35 though... maybe the 24....

[J. Evins]

Do you have a rental place out there? I rent every lens I consider buying for a week or so just to give it a test run and make sure I'm making the right decision.

[Oxer]

I wish!

Nah... only way to do that is if I know someone who already has that lens.

[J.Owen]

You can always go online to somewhere like lensrentals.com. I just rented a sigma 10-20 f3.5 for some interior office shots and the process from start to finish was great.

On another note, definitely check out the lens and be sure you can return it. J. Evins mentioned the 50 1.4 getting soft wide open, and have seen many that were, yet my copy stays sharp. On the flip side, I went through 3 sigma 70-200's before I got a copy that would stay sharp.

also, you say this ...

Also, Im shooting with a 400D body. Not that that matters...

But it does make a huge difference. A 24mm on a full frame is a lot different then on a crop sensor. You can get away with some less expensive lenses on a crop sensor as it will crop off the areas where you will get the most distortion/ blur/ vignette. On a full frame good glass goes a long way.

[Oxer]

Im in Australia dude... Doubt they'll rent to overseas

But thanks for the advice... The reason I want to buy these EF cannon lenses is because later on down the track when I can afford to buy a new body (7D or 5D mkII) I will be able to use these straight. Plus for some silly reason to me, I'd preffer to have camera specific lenses, it just gives me a bit more piece of mind and I know if I were ever to sell, the resale value would be better then a sigma/tamron.

Ill suss it out anyways... Thanks again for the help!

[J.Owen]

ahhh, yeah. I was on my phone and didn't see your location. I would definitely look into renting from a local shop if you can. Its a bad thing though. Im pretty sure every lens I've rented i purchased shortly after.

[Oxer]

Hahaha... I dont want that!