[joebuzz]

Was thinking which lens to get for my canon eos350d im considering the tamron 90mm macro the canon 100mm macro or the canon 50mm f1.4 which do you think will suite me more i shoot more portraits and landscape even tough i know that with the eos the 50mm would become an 80mm in 35mm format so which lens do you think has the best overall picture quality?

[shipwack]

Of those, I only have the Canon 50mm (assuming you're talking about the $300 model, not the cheap $70). I have been nothing but happy with it. Picture quality is far better. Most of my shooting is done under poor lighting, and the quality of my pictures has improved drastically.

[stepheno]

Hi Joe....I don't think any of those mentioned are what I would call prime landscape lenses, you would probably need to go down to 20 or 24 mm. However as you say you also want it for portrait then I would, myself, consider the Canon 100mm and the Tamron 90mm for that purpose but bear in mind these are true macro lenses and you would be getting double benefit.

In order to combine portrait and landscape then the Canon 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 are both excellent lenses allowing for super sharp images. I have never used the 1.4 but from what I have read it seems an awful lot of dosh over the 1.8. I do have the 1.8 MkI (metal mount and distance scale) and, for the money it's a must have lens. So for about 50 smackeroonies you would have an awesome portrait lens and money over towards something more suited to landscape. Just my opinion and HIT.

[stepheno]

Just as an aside, why not have a browse in the Equipment Reviews section Oh...and welcome to Pixalo, shipwack, we have a Welcome Forum where you mght like to introduce yourself.

[sejanus]

I use a Nikkor 50/1.4 and a Vivitar 90/2.5 on my Eos 10d with adaptors. You might like to consider this route as you could get the pair of lenses and adaptors for around the price of one new Canon lens. The disadvantage is that you lose autofocus and you have to shoot stopped down. It works for me but might not for others.



Nikkor 50mm

[Dabhand16]

I agree with Stepheno. The 50mm f1.8 is fantastic VFM, and will probably allow the purchase of another lens too.

[Dave]

Take a look how the Nikon version of 50mm does against a £1K Pro zoom lens here :- Budget prime vs Premium Zoom vs Pro Zoom lens

[cotter]

I just got a Canon 50mm 1.8 mkII from Santa (okay I asked him for it) but what a lens.

Okay it's a bit light and plastic but the quality is very good. For £60 it's a must have.

Cotter

[Rob Barron]

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

[sejanus]

Fair comment, Rob, I use the Nikkors because I have them - as you say, it might not be appropriate for someone just starting out. On the other hand, if you do have any manual lenses (other than, ironically, Canon FD) then it's well worth considering using those manual lenses on an Eos digital - it could save you a lot of loot!