I'm wanting to buy a 50mm macro lens for my Canon 550D. However, I'm struggling to decide between the apparently available macro with F2.5 aperture setting or the non-macro with F1.8 aperture setting ... Can anyone give me advice? Many thanks. Issi
It kinda depends on your main reason for wanting the lens... I have the 100mm macro which is lovely... I also have the 50mm 1.8 which I do not love... But if you're liking for a reasonably priced fast prime lens, I expect it's a pretty good deal :)
Thank you folks, ... it's tricky. I have a 100mm macro, which I LOVE! What I thought I wanted is a 50mm macro with a F1.8 setting, but I don't think that exists as a macro lens. I think I'll go with the 50mm macro with the F2.5 setting as I want it for close-ups. Maybe I'm being greedy, maybe all I need is my 100mm macro! Argh, I don't know!
Issi, I used to have the 50mm 2.5 compact macro and it was awesome, but since I got the 100mm 2.8, it stayed in my bag, so I gave it to my son. The same with the 50mm f1.8, I didn't really get on with it, gave it to my son...( he's been doing quite well !) I have the 50mm 1.4 now and like it. The only advantage to me with the macros is that the 50mm 2.5 is smaller and lighter. A lot of my photos at the beginning of my project were taken with the 50mm 2.5 . Here's one : http://365project.org/cazann/365/2013-01-14
I've got the 50mm 1.8 and I love it.
As a cheap, quality prime, I'd advise it but I wouldn't by any stretch of the imagination call it a macro and wouldn't advise purchasing it as such.
A general comment and thought Issi, since I don't shoot Canon and can't comment on the specific lenses. Like Northy @northy and Caz @cazann, I find longer macro lenses significantly more useful and more flexible than the shorter ones. You can step back a bit and still get the close up, similarly for portraits.
I would think the 50 you describe would add very little, if anything, to the 100 macro (either the 2.8 or the 2.8L) you have. Can you rent first and try it out? I seem to remember you live around the NY metropolitan area where there are a significant number of good places to rent from.
Yep, definitely depends what you want it for. Personally, for my use a 50mm macro would often mean having to get too close to the subject, and already having the 100mm would mean I would hardly use it. Is it for the increased light levels it lets in, or the shallow dof. I think I would find the decreased dof a hinderance with macro work.
@shutterbugger srsly? do you have the 1.8 or 1.4? i have the 1.8 and find it sluggish at best... plus the 50mm is exactly the wrong focal length for me as a walk around lens... i either want to shoot wide, or i want something in the 75-80mm range at a minimum... i have the scrumptious 17-55 2.8 and i do LOVE that one, altho' it's a bit of a beast to lug around... i use that mostly for my set up shots at home, and if i'm heading out specially to shoot (i take the nex7 to and from work with me)... the 50mm almost never gets used these days...
@northy you are I love different things though...or course you love your wide! I have a serious love for my 1.8. Put 50love into a photo search on here...those are the ones that I've thought to tag. Not even the best ones.
I asked Santa for a Sigma 10-20 (?). Have you ever shot portraits with yours? Interesting, different and cool
@shutterbugger Hi Jenn. Portraits with a wide angle lens? I find such a lens seriously distorts the face.
@northy I remember you saying more than once that 50mm is not comfortable for you. With your APS-C camera that provides the same angle as a full frame 75. OK for a portrait, 80 is a classic portrait length, even though I find I am too close and like to shoot out at 120 or so and still get the "close" shot. And that's on the D7100 APS-C sensor too, ffe 180 or so. I bet when you have your scrumptious 17-55 on the camera you are shooting 35 and below.
@shutterbugger that's pretty funky! but no, i struggle so much with portraits that the few times i've tried, i've avoided doing anything creative with the camera side
@barrie True for average macro lenses, in Canon-speak the non-L type. My inexpensive Canon SX260 similarly. But nothing beats good glass and a good camera for the ultimate sharpness and clarity up close. And a tripod of course if you go that far.
@aprilmilani Just a question for my own curiosity April. Do the Canon full frame cameras (your 5Diii) actually prevent use of the cropped sensor size lenses? Or do they allow it and then you have to crop out the dark sides where the light doesn't reach? You would have to guess of course on the crop. if the last then you could use it, just have to guess on the frame and crop the image.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Hope that helped ?
As a cheap, quality prime, I'd advise it but I wouldn't by any stretch of the imagination call it a macro and wouldn't advise purchasing it as such.
I would think the 50 you describe would add very little, if anything, to the 100 macro (either the 2.8 or the 2.8L) you have. Can you rent first and try it out? I seem to remember you live around the NY metropolitan area where there are a significant number of good places to rent from.
I asked Santa for a Sigma 10-20 (?). Have you ever shot portraits with yours? Interesting, different and cool
@northy I remember you saying more than once that 50mm is not comfortable for you. With your APS-C camera that provides the same angle as a full frame 75. OK for a portrait, 80 is a classic portrait length, even though I find I am too close and like to shoot out at 120 or so and still get the "close" shot. And that's on the D7100 APS-C sensor too, ffe 180 or so. I bet when you have your scrumptious 17-55 on the camera you are shooting 35 and below.