Oh my golly, I have a few hundred dollars to invest in a lens but the decision is very confusing. Want to help?
I have a Canon Rebel T3i with its kit lens (18-55mm, f3.5-5.6, IS). My only other lens is a nifty fifty (f1.8) that I acquired with my film rebel back in high school. I pretty much never use that one because:
1. It's too long for me with my cropped sensor, at least when I'm indoors, which is where the f1.8 speed would really help.
2. I can't see any real advantage in sharpness or focusing speed/accuracy over the kit lens. Is that just because the 50mm is 20 years old and I was hard on it? (ie, should I try a new nifty fifty?)
I'd like to get a prime lens that approximates a normal focal length with the crop sensor, and that will give me faster and sharper focus than my kit lens, along with a wider max aperture.
There are two lenses I have been considering, but neither one is cheap (okay, I know they are *relatively* cheap, but it's still a lot of money for me). Do you think I would be happy with one of these on the Rebel, or do you have other advice?
Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM Lens ($549)
Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM Lens ($449)
I have read the online reviews. Thus my confusion. Some say the 28mm is soft, while others say it's great. I think I'd prefer that length, if the focus were good.
I mostly photograph my baby and small natural things. I am interested in street photography and better portraits.
Well I don't think I'm qualified to give you much advice, but I will muse a little with you if it helps! I have an old Rebel (450D) with the same kit lens along with a 55-250, and found the aperture very limiting (esp, like you, shooting my kids indoors, and gigs before I had kids). I know what you mean re 50mm being a quite long on that sensor, but I reckon you should get it out again anyway and leave it on the camera for a week or so because the 1.8 is awesome, and the length might just take a bit of getting used to. That said, I've just bought a 50mm (1.4) to go with my new 6D, and while it's my first prime lens and is taking a bit of getting used to, I think that length is pretty good to work with on the full-frame. Quite flexible. So this would be your 35mm. If you shoot small things the 28mm might be a bit wide (and also for portraiture)? Sorry probably not a great deal of help …
@aliha Thanks a lot for musing along. That's just what I need. I'll follow your suggestion to use the nifty fifty for a while and see if I get used to it.
About shooting small things: for that purpose I'm pretty happy with the kit lens at 55mm + close-up filters - this gives me a higher magnification factor than the macro lens I could afford...
Unless you really threw your 50mm f/1.8 around a lot then it's unlikely to be damaged -- it's a pretty resilient lens despite being mostly plastic, so a new one is unlikely to perform any better than the old one. The design is from 1990 so there are no performance changes in the newer lenses.
The advantages you are looking for with the 50mm f/1.8 aren't necessarily all that significant. It's a very cheap lens, so it's not amazingly sharp, especially wide open, and it has a very old-fashioned focusing mechanism, so again, it's not particularly fast to focus. The main advantage is that it's a very cheap way to get an f/1.8 aperture, with the advantages in low-light performance and shallow depth of field that brings.
The 35mm f/2 IS lens is a great, brand new lens and is very sharp, as well as having a very fast autofocus system, so will likely prove to be a lens that gets closer to your expectations. It is relatively slow (narrow aperture), at f/2, and while it does have IS, remember that IS does not freeze subject motion, so for anything that moves it is of less value.
The 28mm f/1.8 lens is again a much older design, introduced in 1995, but does have a good, fast focusing system. However, it is a lens that isn't amazing when used at very wide apertures, in terms of sharpness. For me, this lens wouldn't rate high on my list unless you absolutely need that exact combination of aperture and focal length.
The lens that would be highest on my list given your needs is the new Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens. It's designed for APS-C cameras like your Rebel, which means that it's still well-priced and light despite the impressive specs. With a f/1.4 aperture it's a faster lens than any of the others you are considering, and will perform better in low light with moving subjects than the Canon 35mm f/2 lens. It's also extremely sharp, even wide open, and has a super-fast focusing system. (When looking at reviews, make sure they are for the new, 'Art'-designated lens, not the older Sigma with the same specs)
Both the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and the Canon 35mm f/2 are great lenses that I suspect will impress you more than your 50mm, as well as providing a more useful focal length for you. They are similarly priced, so it depends whether you think that the IS of the Canon would be more useful, or the slightly wider field of view and one stop wider aperture of the Sigma is a better choice.
I would recommend the Sigma 30 1.4, I loved that lens so sharp and quick to focus and the 1.4 is great in low light. I have also had the 35 f/2 and sold it before buying the sigma. It was a slow noisy lens and the build was no where near as good as the sigma.
I had the 50 also but sold that as well because I didn't use it, I much prefer the 30mm focal length on the crop sensor.
Even now on my full frame the Sigma 35 1.4 is a firm favorite :)
That's two votes for Sigma. Thank you Lisa @mummarazzii and Alexis @abirkill !
I had that lens on my list of four, but I took it off when I narrowed down to two options because I thought I should get something that will also work on my future (maybe someday) full-frame camera...
You are tempting me to reconsider. Glad to know the Sigma focuses quick and sharp...
I'm putting money on the side for the 35mm f2.0. With my crop-sensor I think it will be good enough for portrait (better then my 18-55), but since I mostly used my 18-55 I consider buying the new SIGMA ART 18-35mm f1.8 DC HSM but very expensive.
As Alexis Birkill (@abirkill) The 35mm would be a good choice. Thanks Alexis for your post.
@bsheppard If I were you, I'd invest in a better body instead. A Canon 5D classic (the first generation) would be my choice with your budget. It's now about £250 (approximately $420) second hand. A full frame body means better low-light performance and forget about crop factor - you'd get 50mm with your 50mm lens. And from then on, you won't have to worry about your investment on lenses like "Will this useable if I upgrade to full frame?" (I know using Canon is a pain when it comes to upgrade, unlike Nikon. I have used both, and I'd choose Canon again! - no offence, Nikon fans)
After buying that, you can use the old 50mm 1.8 that you have always feel "too long for me" indoors - it does seem to me that you are looking for lens that, after multiply with crop factor, get you around 50mm. And the money from selling your old gear (if you are willing to sell), can boost you a little for the next lens.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
About shooting small things: for that purpose I'm pretty happy with the kit lens at 55mm + close-up filters - this gives me a higher magnification factor than the macro lens I could afford...
The advantages you are looking for with the 50mm f/1.8 aren't necessarily all that significant. It's a very cheap lens, so it's not amazingly sharp, especially wide open, and it has a very old-fashioned focusing mechanism, so again, it's not particularly fast to focus. The main advantage is that it's a very cheap way to get an f/1.8 aperture, with the advantages in low-light performance and shallow depth of field that brings.
The 35mm f/2 IS lens is a great, brand new lens and is very sharp, as well as having a very fast autofocus system, so will likely prove to be a lens that gets closer to your expectations. It is relatively slow (narrow aperture), at f/2, and while it does have IS, remember that IS does not freeze subject motion, so for anything that moves it is of less value.
The 28mm f/1.8 lens is again a much older design, introduced in 1995, but does have a good, fast focusing system. However, it is a lens that isn't amazing when used at very wide apertures, in terms of sharpness. For me, this lens wouldn't rate high on my list unless you absolutely need that exact combination of aperture and focal length.
The lens that would be highest on my list given your needs is the new Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens. It's designed for APS-C cameras like your Rebel, which means that it's still well-priced and light despite the impressive specs. With a f/1.4 aperture it's a faster lens than any of the others you are considering, and will perform better in low light with moving subjects than the Canon 35mm f/2 lens. It's also extremely sharp, even wide open, and has a super-fast focusing system. (When looking at reviews, make sure they are for the new, 'Art'-designated lens, not the older Sigma with the same specs)
Both the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and the Canon 35mm f/2 are great lenses that I suspect will impress you more than your 50mm, as well as providing a more useful focal length for you. They are similarly priced, so it depends whether you think that the IS of the Canon would be more useful, or the slightly wider field of view and one stop wider aperture of the Sigma is a better choice.
I had the 50 also but sold that as well because I didn't use it, I much prefer the 30mm focal length on the crop sensor.
Even now on my full frame the Sigma 35 1.4 is a firm favorite :)
I had that lens on my list of four, but I took it off when I narrowed down to two options because I thought I should get something that will also work on my future (maybe someday) full-frame camera...
You are tempting me to reconsider. Glad to know the Sigma focuses quick and sharp...
@mummarazzii I'm guessing, since you mention it was noisy, that you had the old 35mm f/2, introduced in 1990, that looked like this?
This was replaced in 2012 with the new 35mm f/2 IS, which looks like this, and is a far superior lens:
As Alexis Birkill (@abirkill) The 35mm would be a good choice. Thanks Alexis for your post.
After buying that, you can use the old 50mm 1.8 that you have always feel "too long for me" indoors - it does seem to me that you are looking for lens that, after multiply with crop factor, get you around 50mm. And the money from selling your old gear (if you are willing to sell), can boost you a little for the next lens.
Hope that helps a little :)
I ordered the Sigma 30mm f1.4. Yippee!
Thanks again for your advice.