I've been browsing the forum for a while and see the Canon Nifty Fifty mentioned a lot but I have only seen a handful of shots that where I knew that was the lens used. I'm thinking about picking one up based on what I've seen so far and read, but is anyone interested in posting some shots to this thread to show what it's really capable of? Thanks,
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nifty Fifty Showcase
- Thread starter azkennedy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How about a Canon Forum?
Only over 7,000 posts about it...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=186207
I had one - you get what you pay for...
Only over 7,000 posts about it...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=186207
I had one - you get what you pay for...
Here's a whole still-image continuous video shot with the Canon 50mm f/1.8, all at 1.8.
http://www.andybloxham.com/2008/video/mysummer2009/files/mysummer2009.shtml
http://www.andybloxham.com/2008/video/mysummer2009/files/mysummer2009.shtml
From Avoriaz a few weeks ago, shot with my girlfriend's 350D. Most are at f/5.6 IIRC.
I was already around 1/1250 sec., but probably should have been at f/4 to get above 1/2000 to avoid the motion blur that is visible. Still pretty happy with them though.
I was already around 1/1250 sec., but probably should have been at f/4 to get above 1/2000 to avoid the motion blur that is visible. Still pretty happy with them though.
Great idea for a thread! I've been thinking about getting this lens as well, although on my crop 1.6x sensor, I really need a shorter lens, but this is very eye-opening.
Very nice! What a great shot!
Very nice! What a great shot!
Don't think, just buy it. Its a great started lens and can/will last you a while. I have had mine for only a few months and it has taught me a lot, as well as being great in low light. I would recommend keeping it around F/4 or F/5.6 as the sweet spot for this lens seems to be in that area.
Its $100 you can NOT beat this lens for this price. Just get it and be happy!
Its $100 you can NOT beat this lens for this price. Just get it and be happy!
Thanks
Thanks for all the photos and links. I guess I should explain why I'm debating the lens, because I'm really overwhelmed with options the more I look at what I'm trying to accomplish. My current setup consists of a Rebel XT, an EF-2 15-55 1:3.5-5.6 II(Kit Lens), and an EF 75-300 4-5.6.
The 75-300 is up on eBay currently because I've never been super happy with the shots(they always seem to have soft of a focus), but I'm also considering replacing the kit lens. With baby #2 on the way in August I'm really leaning towards getting a better general purpose lens now and then getting the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L later. Eventually I'd also like to replace the body for a higher resolution Canon, so I want to try to make sure any of the lenses I purchase is compatible if possible.
Given all of that, the lenses I have been debating for my general replacement are:
If your curious about what I typically shoot as subjects you can check out the Easter and Botanical Garden photos on my flickr account(mrbk78). Thanks again.
Thanks for all the photos and links. I guess I should explain why I'm debating the lens, because I'm really overwhelmed with options the more I look at what I'm trying to accomplish. My current setup consists of a Rebel XT, an EF-2 15-55 1:3.5-5.6 II(Kit Lens), and an EF 75-300 4-5.6.
The 75-300 is up on eBay currently because I've never been super happy with the shots(they always seem to have soft of a focus), but I'm also considering replacing the kit lens. With baby #2 on the way in August I'm really leaning towards getting a better general purpose lens now and then getting the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L later. Eventually I'd also like to replace the body for a higher resolution Canon, so I want to try to make sure any of the lenses I purchase is compatible if possible.
Given all of that, the lenses I have been debating for my general replacement are:
- Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
- Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 SP XR ZL Di LD
- Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM
- Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC
If your curious about what I typically shoot as subjects you can check out the Easter and Botanical Garden photos on my flickr account(mrbk78). Thanks again.
I have the Tamron 28-75 2.8 and can vouch for it. Nice and sharp. Most of the photos I have in either the Fortnight Challenge or Photo of the Day are taken with it. Check the EXIF data with each one. My most recent posts were with the 28-300 because I needed the reach.
Dale
Here are two from the 28-75. Not at 50mm, though.
Dale
Here are two from the 28-75. Not at 50mm, though.
If your next camera will also be a crop format (APS-C) then a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 might be a better choice. Any kind of indoor shots on APS-C really need a wider focal length than 28mm. There is also a new version of this lens with stabilization.
I love this lens! It's the first thing I grab for product shots (like below taken last nigth), indoor portraits of my newphews, and live music (no flash).
Here's two other shots:
HDR
Playing around
Here's two other shots:
HDR
Playing around
I don't have the 17-55 even though I've heard great things about it.
I think that the 50mm 1.8 is great in many ways and could add value to your setup. In your case:
1.8 vs. 2.8 is notable
it's very lightweight and small
I find when shooting video w/ the 7D the focus ring is the easiest to operate, it has a short "throw" and is easy to grab and move without moving the camera from what you're filming
it's dang sharp (not that the 17-55 isnt)
it is fun to have a prime!
Seriously folks, at a hundred bucks, the only convincing argument I can think of to not own one of these is that you already own a 50mm f/1.4. If not,
Just
Buy
It
It's really that fundamental. Everyone with an EOS camera should own one. You'll never regret it.
<rant>
I think it's sad that the marketing departments of all the large camera companies have decided that the "standard" lens in camera kits must be a cheap-n-crappy plastic zoom with a whiz-bang hard-to-remember name ("EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS"? Really? Why not a USM II version while you're at it?). I wish they'd at least give people the choice of a prime kit.
While I'm at, where the heck is the EF-S standard prime? Canon ignoring this market has created a whole slew of 3rd party alternatives, such as the 20mm Voigtländer Color Skopar I just bought. At least Nikon has a DX 35mm. Hooray for Pentax's pancake primes!
The EF-S 60mm macro is a hidden gem, and they'll probably add their new macro IS to it soon. An EF-S 30mm f/1.4 IS would sell like crazy & give Sigma a kick in the teeth (even if it was f/1.8 I suspect most people in the market for a standard prime would buy it anyway). That's the lens I want in my 550D kit!
</rant>
Just
Buy
It
It's really that fundamental. Everyone with an EOS camera should own one. You'll never regret it.
<rant>
I think it's sad that the marketing departments of all the large camera companies have decided that the "standard" lens in camera kits must be a cheap-n-crappy plastic zoom with a whiz-bang hard-to-remember name ("EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS"? Really? Why not a USM II version while you're at it?). I wish they'd at least give people the choice of a prime kit.
While I'm at, where the heck is the EF-S standard prime? Canon ignoring this market has created a whole slew of 3rd party alternatives, such as the 20mm Voigtländer Color Skopar I just bought. At least Nikon has a DX 35mm. Hooray for Pentax's pancake primes!
The EF-S 60mm macro is a hidden gem, and they'll probably add their new macro IS to it soon. An EF-S 30mm f/1.4 IS would sell like crazy & give Sigma a kick in the teeth (even if it was f/1.8 I suspect most people in the market for a standard prime would buy it anyway). That's the lens I want in my 550D kit!
</rant>
I feel like a party crasher here... since I don't shoot Canon, but someone asked about the 50mm 1.8 vs the 17-55 f/2.8... I do have a Nikkor nifty-fifty and a Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 and the 17-55 has made the nifty-fifty almost retire. I'll still keep it because it was so inexpensive, lightweight, small and makes such nice images, but the versatility of the 17-55 combined with it's ability to produce equally a nice, or even better images (speaking of bokeh) offsets the loss of 1.3 stops of aperture. This is because the Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 lens is optimized for wide-open performance, making it useful wide open. I'm not as familiar with the Canon version. That's from the Nikon perspective, but I'm thinking it's got to be the same situation with the Canon lenses.
I will admit the diminutive size of the nifty-fifty on my D300 makes it a delight to carry...
For the money, you can't go wrong with a nifty-fifty. I'd even say get a manual focus old school one if it will fit on your camera--- oh, I forgot the EOS mount was changed from the old FB Canon mount, so... it'll have to be an autofocus lens with the Canon.
I will admit the diminutive size of the nifty-fifty on my D300 makes it a delight to carry...
For the money, you can't go wrong with a nifty-fifty. I'd even say get a manual focus old school one if it will fit on your camera--- oh, I forgot the EOS mount was changed from the old FB Canon mount, so... it'll have to be an autofocus lens with the Canon.
There is an EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II USM
There are a few different versions of the 18-55mm.EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II USM
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_18-55mm_lens
The USM versions are micro-USM and were sold separately and not in a kit.
I don't have a picture of one off-hand but you can sometimes find them on eBay.
And Canon having digital full frame bodies for much longer than everyone else would probably rather see you buy into a full frame system than make a fast, inexpensive, fixed lens for crop users. Or they just expect you to buy the EF 35mm f/2 which serves the purpose just fine on crop systems. There is no hole to be filled according to Canon.
It's not about being a party crasher. It's just a different tool for a different person.
A fixed lens is about speed, size, weight and price that a slower, larger, heavier, about 10 times more expensive zoom lens cannot match, albeit being more versatile for certain situations.
You use one for some things and you use the other for some others. They don't need to butt heads.
Is that a quip about Canon moving to EF?
It was a somewhat justifiable way to usher their camera system into an all electronic system without carrying the excess baggage that mechanical systems had. Everyone else is actually following suit and doing the same thing Canon is doing now, except Canon did it about 23 years ago.
The EF system is actually able to take Contarex, Contax RTS, Leica R, Nikon F, Olympus OM, Pentax K, M42 and some other lenses with simple adapters that do not hinder image quality in any way. So in essence, any of those "manual focus old school" lenses that you may want to use on your Nikon, you can on a Canon
And it will actually meter on every Canon body, which is something that can't be said on Nikon unless you have a D300 body and above. Talk about Nikon's legendary compatibility.And for the record, it's FD not FB.