[intelligentcreative]

Hi, my first post here 



I'm looking at getting a lens for my Canon 550d for portraits and food photography and was just about to get the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4. read some great reviews, but as my camera is crop sensor camera I guess it will work out to 80mm. So, would anyone recommend the 35mm f/2.0, which I guess would work out to 56mm on my camera? I'm looking for sharpness and nice smooth bokeh.

Which out of these two would best suit my need?

 

I really fancy the 50mm 1.2 but not sure I can justify it as have already bought the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and 24-70 f/2.8.

 

Thanks

 

[couplos]

hi,

 

if you already own a 24/70 lens, you could find out what works best for you by taping the zoomring resp. on 35mm and 50mm,

personnally I own a 30mm 1.4 sigma(about the same focal lenght as the canon 35mm) and a 50mm 1.4 canon,

 

the 50mm is one of my favorite lenses and used very often, as it is designed as a standard lens, it can handle most situations,

just keep in mind the focussing barrel is very fragile...leave the lens hood on it all the time even when in the bag

 

my sigma 30mm on the other side is gathering dust most of the time, besides from the drawbacks of the lens,

I find it too wide or just not wide enough for most situations

 

kr

couplos

[Brightcolours]

Hi, my first post here 



I'm looking at getting a lens for my Canon 550d for portraits and food photography and was just about to get the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4. read some great reviews, but as my camera is crop sensor camera I guess it will work out to 80mm.

50mm will be short tele, as mentioned yourself, 80mm FF equivalent. Just a tad short to be ideal for portraits, but it should be fine for that. Food, that depends on the field of view (and resulting perspective) and distance you want and need. The 35mm f2 has smooth bokeh when you shoot close up, so ok for food, and average bokeh when shooting further away.

So, would anyone recommend the 35mm f/2.0, which I guess would work out to 56mm on my camera? I'm looking for sharpness and nice smooth bokeh.

Which out of these two would best suit my need?

The 35mm f2 will be a standard prime with its 56mm FF equivalency. So that makes it a bit less ideal for portraits (the "ideal" portrait range is 85 to 135mm, long enough to be flattering and short enough to not be to flattening). But it of course depends on what FOV you are after or find attractive. And the distance you can or want to have to your subject(s).

I really fancy the 50mm 1.2 but not sure I can justify it as have already bought the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and 24-70 f/2.8.

Since you have bought a FF standard zoom, the 24-70mm, you can try for yourself which focal length will suit your food and portrait needs best. Then you can decide on which lens. 

 

An alternative for a standard prime is the Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM (the old version has nice bokeh). Also nice is the Voigtlander 28mm f2.8, It is manual focus only, metal, and a very compact pancake design. It renders things nicely on APS-C.

 

For portraits I would prefer a Tamron 60mm f2 Di II macro. 96mm FF equivalent just looks nicer to me FOV wise, and it has very nice smooth bokeh. Or the Canon 85mm f1.8 USM. 136mm FF equivalent puts it in the long end of the "ideal" portrait range, and that gives it a FOV I find very attractive. In fact, I love 85mm on APS-C.

Thanks

 

[Brightcolours]

hi,

 

if you already own a 24/70 lens, you could find out what works best for you by taping the zoomring resp. on 35mm and 50mm,

personnally I own a 30mm 1.4 sigma(about the same focal lenght as the canon 35mm) and a 50mm 1.4 canon,

 

the 50mm is one of my favorite lenses and used very often, as it is designed as a standard lens, it can handle most situations,

It is designed as a standard lens... on full frame. On APS-C it can not "handle most situations" as it is not anywhere near a standard prime (80mm FF equivalent, a bit clumsy focal length).

just keep in mind the focussing barrel is very fragile...leave the lens hood on it all the time even when in the bag

 

my sigma 30mm on the other side is gathering dust most of the time, besides from the drawbacks of the lens,

I find it too wide or just not wide enough for most situations

That means that for YOU a standard prime is not ideal. It happens. But that does not make the 50mm a standard prime on APS-C, though... And personally 50mm does not work for me so much.

kr

couplos

[intelligentcreative]

Thanks for the feedback guys. How much difference would there be shooting at 50mm on my 24-70 @ f/2.8 when compare the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4? A highly noticeable difference? I understand there would be a shallower depth of field but what else? Sharpness? Bokeh?

 

Regards

Andrew