RottnBullies Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) I may just be able to finally get a second lens or 2 in the coming weeks, and would really like a wide angle prime, problem Is I've been trying to research them on P.O.T.N and It's doing my head In, every time I think I've found It, something negative Is posted and It throws me off track again So any advice from those who own one would be much appreciated, It would be used for mainly dogs off course and maybe If I ever needed It for landscape. I have the canon 40d and the 50mm 1.8 and I'd prefer either a canon or sigma version price range roughly not too much more than maybe $600 If that's possible Also Is It worth upgrading from the 50 1.8 to the 1.4? Or would that money be better well spent on another lens like the 85mm 1.8 which I've had my eyes on forever Thanks ETA: I'm after a prime lens not zoom Edited June 20, 2011 by RottnBullies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirislin Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 If you are happy with the 1.8s perfomance I'd be waiting until it dies before replacing it. Cant advise on the other lenses only to say you will always find someone willing to can something. If I beleived all the negative threads about the 7d I wouldn't have touched it with a barge pole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) Define "wide angle" - what range are you looking in? Sigma does a 20mm that is really great. I tried one out a while back and was very impressed - especially for the money. Sigma's 30mm 1.4 is a gem and I wouldn't be without it. SHARP and fast. Just great. And inexpensive, if I remember correctly. Wider than 20mm you're looking at more than $600 ;) Edited June 21, 2011 by kja Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 I do seem to be having some focusing Issues with the 50mm 1.8 It's really hard to nail It where I want, and It's normally @ 2.2 or above and I rarely use @ 1.8. And If I focus and recompose which I often do I can forget It, the focus point moves after I recompose......yes I'm still keeping half shutter down while doing It. Just not sure what I'm doing wrong or If It Is indeed the lens. Just seems like there's too many misses than hits. I think the 1.4 also has some focusing Issues as well. So If I decide to upgrade I may look Into the Sigma version. As for the wide, I was looking at these all canons: 20mm 2.8 USM / 24mm 2.8 / 28mm 1.8 USM / 28mm 2.8 around the $600 except for the non USM which are well below that mark. Will have a look at those 2 Sigma's Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Trying to recompose at 1.4 is going to be a biatch because your DOF is SOOOO tiny. A few mm can make a difference. You can get the eyelashes in focus but not the iris at 1.4 ;) I personally have never had any problems with focus on my 1.8 or my 1.4. I only moved to the 1.4 because sometimes I want that extra light. But shooting wide open takes practice, patience and acceptance coz you're going to miss :D IMHO 28mm isn't a great choice - if you're looking at that one, head for the Siggy 30mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 Ok thanks kja, I don't think I'll ever get It shooting wide open, that's why It's normally at the 2.2 mark But I will keep At It! Those 2 sigma's are looking really good, and price wise as well........... at least I may have narrowed It down to just 2 now Much appreciated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda K Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 the 50 1.8 is a cheapo lens that is a plastic mount and has a very wide tolerance of acceptability on the glass - ie you could buy 4 lenses and all of them could be slightly different quality. It can therefore be very frustrating to work with if you do not have a great copy. Any lens is also going to have its own sweet spot, which is generally at least 1 or 2 stops below the widest setting, so a 1.8 will generally give its best results at about 3.5. As KJA has said, depending on how close you are to what you are shooting, you are not going to have a very wide DOF to play with, so focus recompose is not your best technique in this case - toggling focus points, using (shudder) manual focus or back button focus might work better for you. FWIW I changed from the 1.8 to the 1.4, which has a metal mount, and a less wide tolerance for bad glass at the factory, and the immediate improvement in nailing shots in focus was dramatic. I would not bother going to the L on that lens, as from what I have seen and read, there is little to be gained by spending the extra. The 50 1.4 is one of my main working lens, it rarely if ever lets me down in focus, even at wide apertures (I can shoot at 1.8 or 2 easily and get sharp images), and I would not trade it for anything. I am also going to go against the trend and not support the 3rd party lenses, I had a Sigma 16-35 and it was horrible, I could never get a decent shot out of it, got the Canon 17-35 and it was so much better, I just love it, esp for landscape shots. I would think a nice prime lens if you want to avoid distortion would be the Canon 35 F2 - I would always stick with name lens, as you will also hold the resale value later on too. As a guide, if anyone is interested, here is a link to a depth of field calculator, that you can specify the camera model, the focal length, aperture and distance to subject, and it will then let you know what DOF you will have to play with My link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 ... got the Canon 17-35 and it was so much better, I just love it, esp for landscape shots. 17-35? Do you mean the 17-40L? Or the really old 17-35 that they don't make anymore? No relevance to this thread as we are talking primes, but just curious as I haven't seen anyone using the old 17-35 Canon in almost forever! Also, I don't know about the Sigma 16-35, but I think there was one years ago maybe - is this what you are talking about? Or have I missed something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda K Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 really old, I bought second hand but I love it, and yes the sigma one was many moons again too (2004) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Good to know - thought I'd missed something LOL And honestly, I wouldn't be applying experience from circa 2004 to today's lenses - sometimes the third party makers have offerings that no one else has (hello my wondrous Tokina 10-17 and my lovable Sigma 30 1.4!) and the quality in some cases is extremely high in lenses that are close to Canon/Nikon offerings (Sigma in particular seems to have some very strong offerings in both primes - 50 1.4 - and zooms - 120-300, 70-200 2.8, 17-50 2.8 etc). God, so many good choices - I'm glad that I bought the bulk of my kit before all these extra choices became available (and before all the price rises!) hehehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 I was also looking at the canon 35mm F2, from what I've seen It does also give a nice background blur, but I kinda like a little distortion, It would be one of the main reasons I want to add a wide so focus recompose is not your best technique in this case - toggling focus points, using (shudder) manual focus or back button focus might work better for you I think I'm going to give up on re composing as yes It's really not working for me, I can forget manual focus my eyesight Is too poor to do It that way Lol. I haven't had much luck with toggling outer points either but I was also re composing with those so that may be the main problem. Granted I probably haven't taken an enormous amount of shots, but I do have 1 where I've nailed the focus perfect and even managed catch lights in her eyes.....straight centre focus point with no re compose. That's what I aim for in every shot but finding It very difficult. So hard to tell If I'm the lemon or the lens Is! Would you mind explaining the back button focus as I have no idea on that one Also which lens would give the best kind of distortion, but also nice background blur, If that's possible, I've seen that many photos that I don't remember which lens does what now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 God, so many good choices - I'm glad that I bought the bulk of my kit before all these extra choices became available (and before all the price rises!) hehehe I know, I thought It would be easy going for a second lens, but I can't believe how hard It's been Too many choices Is right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 "best" is subjective. If you want a lot of distortion head to a fisheye or as wide as possible and put your subjects on the edge. Any fast prime and some distance behind your subject will give you the blur in the background when you shoot close to wide open. Can you rent? Or borrow? Although I understand wanting new gear, if you aren't sure what you are trying to achieve, making the right choice is very hard and so far you're just a bit vague on the specifics. I'd still say head to the 20 Sigma for the most distortion possibilities or the 30 Sigma for the potential for some (you need to work at it a bit more with this focal length) but a very usable lens. None of the lenses in between really sound like they give you what you want and are also more expensive (I adore Canon's 24L but it's about three times your budget and after trying, I think the Siggy 20 is a good runner up). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 (edited) Sorry sometimes I'm not real good at explaining things when I write, but here's a few links to basically what I'm after. Wide Angle Dog Shots Another Dog I'm not keen on fisheye lens kind of distortion ETA: Can't really borrow, If I can't decide maybe I'll think of renting but would rather not due to limited funds I'd rather It went straight to a lens. Edited June 22, 2011 by RottnBullies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda K Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 not really good at explaining, so have done the next best thing - here is a link that details how to set it up - but basically what you are doing is setting up the focus on one button, and then using shutter control on the other, My link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 I'd say the Canon 24 will do that But it's stupidly expensive so I continue to suggest the Sigma 20 as an option. I wouldn't go longer than 24. Does it have to be a prime? I get the appeal (kind of) but opening up to something like the Sigma 17-70, Canon 17-55 2.8 or Sigma 17-50 2.8 will give you more room to experiment while giving you the desired effect, too. In the end, it always comes down to that point where you have to stop overthinking and just bite the bullet and do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 I do prefer primes, but maybe I'll be better of with a zoom In this case then, thanks for those other suggestions I'll have a read on them.... and you're right I think the more I look Into It the more difficult It becomes In deciding, but hopefully I'll be learning more about more types of lenses beyond the 50mm 1.8 Thanks for link Linda I will have a sticky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Just for the hell of it - here's one with the 24L today Tilly sleeping on my bed 1/30, f2.8, ISO 640, window light Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 That Is so what I want,....... but oh so not far for posting It kja as It's well outta my reach Gorgeous pic :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Go the siggy 20mm - it'll get you what you want and save you some dosh ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now