• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

I want a fast lens for low light cheap

R

Rachel Foster

New member
and I[ve been told people in hell want ice water too....

But..what would you recommend? I like to shoot low light portraits. A 50 mm 1.4 fixed lens has been suggested (I have a Rebel XTi). Any opinions?
 
Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Rachel,

If you mean by fixed, a "prime lens" or one focal length, the the EF Canon 50mm 1.4 lens will be perfect for you. I'd even look at the Canon EF 50 1.8, which, although a tad lower in light gathering platic, is still a good lens for low light work.

Good luck!

Asher
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
And if you really do mean cheap, then I second the recommendation to give the 50 f/1.8 a try. It's only about $75. It's optical quality is really pretty good; it's the build quality that's almost toy-like — but then again it's not like you'll be banging it around a lot, and at that price you can almost afford to use it and throw it away.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
M

Martin Kuivenhoven

Member
The 50mm f1.8 is a very safe try, quality is good, resale value is excellent. If you fall in love with the concept and want to go for the 50mm 1.4 later on there is no harm done. I have the 50mm 1.8 and it already gives a very different feel compared the standard lenses.

(which sounds odd because in film days it was the lens a body often standard came with ..)
 
R

Rachel Foster

New member
I found a used 1.4 on ebay for $59.00. I figured it was worth a gamble. I'm skeptical but open, so I'll let you all know how it turns out.
 
D

Deleted member 55

Guest
Such a deal! It seems that every time I find my self with out an L 50 mm lens I get one. I have had three. Two before I had the 50 f1.0L and one before the 50 f1.2L. For the cost to speed nothing can touch it.

Yes it is not the sharpest 50 but with portraits that is not the ultimate goal, the feel or mood is! You should enjoy this lens as I have on many occasions.

Rachel Foster said:
I found a used 1.4 on ebay for $59.00. I figured it was worth a gamble. I'm skeptical but open, so I'll let you all know how it turns out.
Click to expand...
 
S

Sean DeMerchant

Inactive
If the lens is not scratched, then it is without question worth it. I have a well cared for EOS 50/1.4 and it is a delight to work with in low light with the XT. Tv mode at 1/60 or 1/80 and ISO 1600 and it is enough to get grainy black and white portraits in a bar or other low situations. And it is a decent portrait length on a 1.6 crop factor body. A little wider might be nicer, but that bright f/1.4 viewfinder image is a joy to work with.

Here are a few snapshots:

Myself (kitchen lights after dark) (and an obvious fashion victim turning my lens onto me)
SPE33788_20070421_RSE_01.jpg


kitchen light at night
SPE23976_RSE_01.jpg


Porch Light and a LED Frisbee
SPE33749_20070421_RSE_01.jpg


Or Stopping Down A Touch (F/6.3 @ 1/200 w/ bounce flash)
SPE37100_20071031_RSE_01.jpg


Please note these are all snapshots and not portraits/photographs but were instead shot for fun and memories. The b&w shots might have lesser quality boke w/ a 50/1.8 than a 50/1.4, but the color shot would be near identical to a 50/1.8 once stopped down that far.

The real benefit in practice from my experience w/ fast glass is less about the insanely shallow DoF than it is about the brighter viewfinder and greater ease of validating focus. The super shallow DoF is more for artistic control or just downright dreadful lighting. Albeit, ISO 1600 on the XT and a B&W conversion kill most of those issues.

Whatever you choose, I hope you get pleasure from it.

all the best,

Sean
​
 
Last edited:
J

janet Smith

pro member
Hi Rachel

I have this lens too, really useful lens that is often on my camera, not one of those that sits in the bag for months on end, a great workshorse. I use it sometimes for landscapes, flowers, people, animals etc etc..... I'm sure it will live up to your expectations and hope it is in good condition (I'll keep my fingers crossed for you) what a bargain!!!!
 
R

Rachel Foster

New member
I'm excited about the lens. If this one doesn't work out, it's a life's lesson and that alone may be worth the money. If it's in good condition, then I've got my lens. I do a LOT of low light flowers and portraits, so this sounds like it was made for me.

The funny thing is I'm beginning to get effects (even shooting in nature) without having to concentrate so hard on what setting, where, etc. I'm also getting faster at recognizing dreck vs potentials.

The learning curve is steep but so rewarding....:)


The photos you posted, Sean, have me convinced.
 
M

Madhu Tyagi

New member
50mm f1.4 should be the best but I hate its AF as it is lousy. 85 1.8 has best AF in mid range but that will be too long on XTi, I guess.
 
Doug Kerr

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher, Rachel,
Asher Kelman said:
Rachel,

If you mean by fixed, a "prime lens" or one focal length, the the EF Canon 50mm 1.4 lens will be perfect for you. I'd even look at the Canon EF 50 1.8, which, although a tad lower in light gathering platic, is still a good lens for low light work.
Click to expand...

Probably a Freudian conflation of "power and "plastic". Crafty!

Indeed, the manual focus arrangement on my EF 50mm f/1.4 ("full-time manual focus the hard way") is so bogus that I would actually rather have the f/1.8 (which does not have full-time manual focus but a very respectable manual focus arrangement).

And the 50/1.8 is very inexpensive ($99.50 at B&H).

Best regards,

Doug
 
T

Tom Robbins

Member
The 50mm f/1.8 has what must be the craziest hood attachment scheme ever devised. I use the thing on my IR modified 5D because it doesn't reflect infrared wavelength light internally (the f/1.4 version does). No complaints about the optics, though.
 
Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Tom Robbins said:
The 50mm f/1.8 has what must be the craziest hood attachment scheme ever devised. I use the thing on my IR modified 5D because it doesn't reflect infrared wavelength light internally (the f/1.4 version does). No complaints about the optics, though.
Click to expand...
Three lenses are great bargains:

Eos 50 1.8, Eos 85 1.8


They are lightweight, fast sharp enough and bargains! Likely, they will not be the cause any of our pictures being failures!

Asher
 
S

Steve Robinson

New member
I've had pretty good luck on eekBay. I have a gem of an S-M-C Takumar 50mm f/1.4. If you don't mind manual focus and stop down it's a fantastic lens. Of course they are usually pretty expensive. You might have to pay as much as $80 or maybe even more! I know you'll want the 50L but here's a sample anyway. The guy on the right is me!

771424239_ykfif-L.jpg
 
C

Clayton Lofgren

New member
Tamron 28-75 2.8

Not as fast or inexpensive, but this lens is great value. Of course it helps that I use it on a stabilized body. This is wide open, 1/6, iso 800.
4605233556_5fb3ed44fd.jpg
 
C

Charles L Webster

pro member
good - fast - cheap

pick 2

applies to lenses too

As Steve says, if you can live with manual focus and stop-down metering there are lots of choices, otherwise ...

Canon's 35mm f/2 is not bad and decently priced, the 50mm f/1.8 is sharp and crisp but not very well made, the 100mm f/2.8 macro is about as sharp as they get, and not outrageously priced.

<Chas>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top