Canon 50mm Macro as a standard and portrait lens?
Aug 8, 2012 17:00:57 #
Does anybody have any experience using this lens as a walk around? With just a slightly larger aperture I would think that the lens would be much more useful than the 1.8 and the build quality I believe to be far superior.
Aug 9, 2012 03:57:24 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
Does anybody have any experience using this lens as a walk around? With just a slightly larger aperture I would think that the lens would be much more useful than the 1.8 and the build quality I believe to be far superior.
Hi Blurryeyed: From what I gather it is considered a good prime 2.5 compact macro with an old style barrel. You can read more about it at this website on Canon lenses. http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html
Aug 9, 2012 10:35:17 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
Blurreyeyed
You talking about the 1.4 lens. It is a great lens and is a good walk around lens because it does not weigh a ton and can be hand held at around 15th of a sec.
You talking about the 1.4 lens. It is a great lens and is a good walk around lens because it does not weigh a ton and can be hand held at around 15th of a sec.
Check out Digital Artistry section of our forum.
Aug 9, 2012 10:35:17 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
Blurreyeyed
You talking about the 1.4 lens. It is a great lens and is a good walk around lens because it does not weigh a ton and can be hand held at around 15th of a sec.
You talking about the 1.4 lens. It is a great lens and is a good walk around lens because it does not weigh a ton and can be hand held at around 15th of a sec.
Aug 9, 2012 10:51:02 #
No I actually have the opportunity to buy a like new 2.5 macro for $150 but don't really need the macro feature as I already have a 100 and a 180 and was just looking for a good 50mm lens.
Even though that price is really good, I am thinking that I should just wait and find a good deal on the 1.4 as setting the macro aside I think that the 1.4 can be more creative. I have a good zoom (15-85) that covers the 50mm range but the aperture at that focal distance is something like 4.5 or 5.0. I just thought that this was a good deal but the more I think about it the more I am deciding just to pass on it.
Even though that price is really good, I am thinking that I should just wait and find a good deal on the 1.4 as setting the macro aside I think that the 1.4 can be more creative. I have a good zoom (15-85) that covers the 50mm range but the aperture at that focal distance is something like 4.5 or 5.0. I just thought that this was a good deal but the more I think about it the more I am deciding just to pass on it.
Aug 9, 2012 12:44:41 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
If you have a shot at the 1.4 wait. That is a great lens and will end up being the lens you leave on the camera.
Aug 9, 2012 13:01:28 #
I actually have both the Canon 2.5 macro and the 50MM 1.8 lenses. I've never really used the 2.5 macro as a portrait lens, but it is a fair lens for macro. seems a bit soft though when not macro shooting. The 1.8 on the other hand is quite sharp as a standard walk around lens.
50mm Macro
50mm 1.8 F/4 iso 1000 no flash Tungsten white balance
Check out Wedding Photography section of our forum.
Aug 9, 2012 13:07:08 #
Thanks for the input, I already called the seller declined to buy the macro as really the point of the purchase would be the ability to create background blur for creative purposes... the macro is not the best lens for that purpose... I just needed some reinforcement in making the decision to pass... it was a pretty good deal on that lens, but if it just ends up sitting in a camera bag then it would not have been a good deal at all.
Thanks.
Thanks.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Bridge Camera Show Case section of our forum.