Pixalo Photography Community - View Single Post

Rob Barron · 06-01-2007, 21:10

It seems a strange comparison to ask between a Canon 50mm f1.4 and a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens. They are entirely different and I certainly wouldn't recommend the 100mm lens as a general purpose lens.

I have the 100mm f2.8 macro and it is SUPERB. But I use it for what I bought it as: a macro lens. I almost never use it for anything else. I have a nifty fifty (50mm f1.8) which is one of the best value lenses on the market given its price. Yes it is plasticky but by golly it is sharp. It has superb blurring being only f1.8 so great for low light and being a prime it is extremely clear.

I definitely wouldn't recommend going the Nikkor route as I am firm believer in sticking with lenses made for certain cameras. Why lose autofocus and have to work stopped down (image will appear darker in the viewfinder) when you can get Canon lenses for the same money? I say that with the greatest of respect for Sejanus, I just don't think someone starting out with a new camera wants the extra hassle of working with adaptors, manual focusing and dark viewfinders.

The Tatemron 90mm macro is cheaper than the Canon so if this is about budget, maybe go for that but if not definitely go for the Canon. But if this is the first lens, I would most certainly get the 50mm lens as that is equal to an 80mm lens on your 350D. That makes it ideal for portraits, superb in fact. It is also wide enough for selective landscape work. Eventually you'll want to get a wide angle lens but in the meantime it would do the job you need.

If we put all the ones you mentioned aside, I personally would not recommend getting a prime lens as your first lens as the quality of standard zoom lenses is extremely good and this would give you greater versatility. A lot depends on how long you expect to use this one lens before adding to your optical collection. If you are doing general photography needing a range of focal lengths and not really doing a lot of close-up work, I would avoid the fixed macro lenses for the time being. You can always use close-up filters for macro work if you want to.

A lot to think about but worth getting the lens that will give you widest coverage at least at first.

Cheers,
Rob

06-01-2007, 21:10	#9 (permalink)
Rob Barron Loves the place Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Poole, Dorset Posts: 5,376	Re: My first prime lens what do you think? It seems a strange comparison to ask between a Canon 50mm f1.4 and a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens. They are entirely different and I certainly wouldn't recommend the 100mm lens as a general purpose lens. I have the 100mm f2.8 macro and it is SUPERB. But I use it for what I bought it as: a macro lens. I almost never use it for anything else. I have a nifty fifty (50mm f1.8) which is one of the best value lenses on the market given its price. Yes it is plasticky but by golly it is sharp. It has superb blurring being only f1.8 so great for low light and being a prime it is extremely clear. I definitely wouldn't recommend going the Nikkor route as I am firm believer in sticking with lenses made for certain cameras. Why lose autofocus and have to work stopped down (image will appear darker in the viewfinder) when you can get Canon lenses for the same money? I say that with the greatest of respect for Sejanus, I just don't think someone starting out with a new camera wants the extra hassle of working with adaptors, manual focusing and dark viewfinders. The Tatemron 90mm macro is cheaper than the Canon so if this is about budget, maybe go for that but if not definitely go for the Canon. But if this is the first lens, I would most certainly get the 50mm lens as that is equal to an 80mm lens on your 350D. That makes it ideal for portraits, superb in fact. It is also wide enough for selective landscape work. Eventually you'll want to get a wide angle lens but in the meantime it would do the job you need. If we put all the ones you mentioned aside, I personally would not recommend getting a prime lens as your first lens as the quality of standard zoom lenses is extremely good and this would give you greater versatility. A lot depends on how long you expect to use this one lens before adding to your optical collection. If you are doing general photography needing a range of focal lengths and not really doing a lot of close-up work, I would avoid the fixed macro lenses for the time being. You can always use close-up filters for macro work if you want to. A lot to think about but worth getting the lens that will give you widest coverage at least at first. Cheers, Rob __________________ Rob Barron robbarron@aol.com If you look down on other people, don't expect them to look up to you!