#1 in Digital camera lenses
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product
Reddit mentions of Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens - Fixed (Discontinued by Manufacturer)
Sentiment score: 95
Reddit mentions: 158
We found 158 Reddit mentions of Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens - Fixed (Discontinued by Manufacturer). Here are the top ones.
Buying optionsView on Amazon.com
- 50mm focal length, Minimum focus distance : 0.45m/17.72 inch
- 80mm equivalent focal length on Canon APS-C cameras
- F1.8 maximum aperture; F22 minimum
- Micromotor-type AF motor without full-time manual focusing
- 52mm filters
- Lens not zoomable
|Number of items||1|
|Size||3.30in. x 3.20in. x 3.20in.|
For that blurred background look, you can get a prime lens on your dSLR. The cheap ones are great, and they make you look like a million bucks.
MIT actually did a study that confirms OP's hypothesis, by the way. It's not just that it's an interesting picture. The top 5% of men had more than double the success of the next top 5%. Researchers called this the superstar effect.
The camera that OP used.
And the lens.
The Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II does a good job and is really cheap.
I'm far from an expert, but I have a 7D, and I can tell you a few things to consider.
Again, I cannot stress enough, that I am not as experienced as many of the photographers in this subReddit, so if they have differing opinions, you may want to consider theirs over mine. I hope I could help a little, at least.
EDIT: Changed the order of my comments.
Figure what lenses she has and probably get her a 50mm 1.8
Costs a mere $100 and gives gorgeous photos that are sharper than anything her kit lens will give with a shallower depth of field that looks gorgeous.
It remains my favorite lens to this day because of its awesome low light ability. The only awkward part is it's slightly long on a crop sensor, so it's suggested more for portraiture and still life than walking around at events and such.
Camera: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, aka 500d
Lens: Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
The lens is mostly what gives this "depth of field" effect
> Seriously. Just go shooting like hell, try all the modes to know what to use when that particular once-in-a-lifetime shot will come to your eyes.
Sounds like today will be an ideal day to take my kid to the park :-)
> If you have a few bucks left, get a nice prime. I think canon has a pretty fast normal lens that is very affordable.
By that, do you mean the $100 50mm one that people are saying is great value?
This is highly dependent on your price range, but if you're going to be in it for $500 prizes, I'm going to assume you'd like to spend less than $1000.
In that case, you can't really go wrong with a Canon dSLR, especially the t series, their entry level camera. I think the newest version is the Canon t5i, but the t4i and t3i also shoot high quality 1080p video and you'll be able to find them for cheaper.
The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera is increasingly popular in that price range, but I wouldn't recommend it to an amateur. It has a fantastic image but a high learning curve.
Nikon dSLR's are great too, but if you invest in Nikon lenses as a videographer, you're going to have a bad time. The majority of video camera bodies are manufactured for Canon mount lenses, so if you ever want to leave Nikon, you're kind of stuck or forced to use lens mount convertors.
With all of these cameras, lenses are arguably more important than the camera itself. With the Canon, the best bang for your buck is going to be a Canon 50mm 1.8. It's a cheap lens, but it has a great image for the price and is great in low light. If you can afford a good 2.8 zoom lens like the 17-55 2.8, go for it, but it's often near $1000.
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Having previously used the Rebel XT, you may want to think about upgrading the body to get decent results with the night photography. My XT had noticeable noise when I increased the ISO above 800. I upgraded to a T2i and love it.
Nice and cheap!
Hi /u/Rebelarch - it sounds like you come from fixed lens cameras. With an interchangeable lens camera, you can get shallower depth of field simply by buying a faster lens.
For less than the cost of a new camera and lens, you might try a [$799 Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 for Canon] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OZUELZQ/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B00OZUELZQ&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=battleforthew-20) or, if that's too expensive, a [$125 Canon 50mm f1.8] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00007E7JU/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B00007E7JU&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=battleforthew-20).
Wide open, either of these lenses will give you nice and shallow depth of field on your T2i.
> So far the advice from everyone I have spoken to has been to get a cheap body and spend more money on lenses. Is this the correct approach for a newbie?
>I am thinking that I will pick up a canon 550d second hand if possible. How would this fare as an entry level camera?
Pretty good. Anything from the Canon 550D to the 700D would be a good pick, they're all pretty similar.
>Which lenses should I look at? The main types of photographs I'll be taking will be of people at parties and of scenery when out and about.
Get the camera without a lens, as the lens that normally comes with the camera sucks. Buy a 17-50mm f/2.8 zoom lens, and the Canon nifty fifty 50mm f/1.8 prime lens. For the 17-50, the best option would be either the Tamron or the Sigma version, the latter costs more but is faster and better autofocus. Then get the 50mm prime.
Get the 50mm f/1.8 lens. It is a great all-purpose lens, especially for portraits. Even a used one is a great deal.
That's just regular depth of field, not tilt shift. Probably using a thrifty fifty or similar
the 85mm might be a bit to long for portraits on crop. I would suggest a 50mm canon or I guess the yongnuo just came out.
My current equipment :
Using these, I manage to get these : Album
I want to further my astrophotography, but realize I would need better equipment to better these.
Which of these would be best bang for my buck for a step forward with astrophotography?
I know a good answer to this would be 'everything', but I can't get myself to spend a lot of $$ at this moment. I could spend a few hundred on one of these, and then at a later point re-evaluate.
Thanks for hooking me into this awesome hobby!
Learn how to adapt in low-light. I have an XS (getting a T3i soon), and the XS just doesn't have good low-light performance. That's pretty understandable though, it was $500.
And for anything else I can think of.
Last but not least, get this lens! It's the best $100 you'll spend.
I have the same camera and lens and I agree with the other commenter - Do yourself a favor and start reading/watching video - check out youtube for tutorials on how to take pictures and what all the settings mean and once you get into using manual made you can make this 100% better. Trust, me I was literally in the same boat as you, I have the t3i and the kit lens to start. If you really want to take good pictures or care about editing them in post then you should look at RAW vs JPEG - I started shooting RAW and haven't EVER looked back but I want that flexibility you might not need it.
So the focus on your girl is great, the rest of the photo was blurred due to movement. But movement wasn't really your issue - low light is what killed you here. Also, White Balance, you need to make this one colder, see how everything is a bit yellow? It's just a color balance issue that can be slightly corrected.
Since this will come up soon - If you want to make any upgrade purchases start with a 50mm prime
Ah. The good ol' Rebel XT. I started with that camera, so I know for a fact it's got sucky low-light performance (a super grainy max of ISO800). You will probably need to start thinking about a camera upgrade to something that can do slightly better low-light shooting. Also, maybe invest in a "nifty fifty" (I linked a new one, but you can easily buy used), because those lenses rock in low light scenarios.
I can give you a few of the most important pieces of advice, and answer the most common questions right away.
The time to throw out the kit-lens and replace it with a better standard lens, is when you understand for yourself why you need to throw out your kit lens and replace it with something better. You will eventually get to a point where it's your equipment and not your skill that's holding back the quality of your pictures. That time wont come around this year. Quite probably not next year either.
do you know what kind of lenses she has? Do you also know what kind of Canon camera she has? There will be numbers and letters on the right side of the body if you have it facing you.
Is probably one of the most popular "cheapest" lenses for Canon.
Nice! This shot was taken with the Canon Rebel T3i, just the step above yours. The kit lens is just alright, if you want to get some seriously amazing shots, invest the $100 in the nifty fifty lens. The details and clarity will amaze you.
I think you have potential. Seek out more of your friends for some portrait practice! If it is a sunny day, set your camera to ISO 100, an aperture less than f8, and adjust your shutter speed until the exposure is accurate.
If you end up taking more shots, let me know how it goes!
How do you like the 60d? I was using the 50mm for most of these shots. It's an inexpensive lens, amazing for portraits of people, and great for food and drinks. Link below to the exact lens. Highly recommend.
Also check out the Food and People sections of my photography site if you want to see more of what that lens can do. Feel free to message me if you have more questions :)
If money is a big factor, then the 700D would be just fine. It has a solid 18 megapixels, and good enough ISO performance that you definitely won't be at a big disadvantage.
The added Wi-Fi in new cameras is silly to me. I don't want to post a shot to facebook straight out of the camera, and I don't want to edit it on my phone. So even though my new camera has a similar feature via Bluetooth, I only ever used it once just to see how it worked.
Sure the 750D has a few more megapixels, and a bit better ISO, but if you're just getting your first DSLR then none of that will matter.
You'll do well to spend any extra money on lenses. After the 18-55mm kit lens, the next affordable ones you should look at would either be:
55-200mm so you have enough zoom for some light wildlife, travel, or sports shooting.
50mm f1.8 since everyone should have an f1.8 lens.
18-135mm if you want to consider getting rid of the 18-55 and replacing it with one lens which can go all the way from wide angle to telephoto.
Hmmm. I like to have at least one prime. The Nifty Fifty is cheap, and if you must get another zoom with that $600, you should at least get this too.
They should be getting her a t3i. Or a t2i.
The difference between SDXC and SDHC cards, from what I know, is mainly how much data storage they support. SDHC, or Secure Digital Extended Capacity, can support up to 2 TB, 2.0 limits this to about 32 GB. The new 4.0 format will fix this.
SDHC, or Secure Digital High Capacity, are rated up to 32 GB, run on 2.0, and are known for their compatibility.
Is one BETTER than the other? I don't think I am qualified to say that, but I think SDHC will be a better bet for now. I am not even sure if the t3/t2i/t3i support 32 GB. But you don't have to take my word for it.
If you can afford it, buy this lens for her. Tell her to use that with her kit lens for awhile until she gets the hang of her camera.
I would also look at Kata Bags
If you be stackin' benjamins like a real pimp yo (sorry I'm really white) then get her Lightroom 3
DSLR. I just say SLR, but some people have sticks in their buttholes about terminology. (I mean shit, I corrected you, right?)
I'd say get the Canon t2i kit with the 18-135mm and a nifty fifty.
That's $970 so far, but he'll probably want a bag that can hold the camera and extra lens. Tamrac makes great bags.
So you've got a great kit with a lot of range and a sharp prime that rocks at low light.
Additional recommended purchases would be the book Understanding Exposure and Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.
Edit: To be fair, maybe have him check out a Nikon DSLR (D5100 would be a comparable choice) along with a Canon to determine which one feels better. Both companies make great cameras of similar quality and performance—it really does come down to personal preference. And as a side note, I personally shoot a Nikon.
I would add to this a recommendation for considering a "nifty fifty" as one of your near future lens additions. I still don't know why Canon doesn't include this as a kit lens, but hey, I guess they figure it's a great way to squeeze an extra $125 out of everybody. This is a de facto standard prime lens for all Canon users.
I have an EOS M.
I'd suggest installing Magic Lantern firmware to unlock 3x lossless crop zoom which gives you the same benefits of the t3i crop zoom.
Along with the 22mm it came with, I have a Canon 50mm f1.8 and a Sigma 30mm 1.4 that work with my Fotodiox EOS M adapter.
The EOS M goes through batteries kind of quick, so I bought a 2 pack third party Wasabi batteries and charger.
I also have an EOS M AC adapter which lets you plug the EOS M into a wall or to a large battery like this...
Here's a couple videos I shot with the EOS M.
It's a great starter camera.
I wish it had remote shooting, so I can use apps like DSLR Controller.
You might want to consider the Canon EOS M, which is an inexpensive mirrorless camera well-suited for microbudget videojournalism and documentary filmmaking, as seen here:
With a [$275 Canon EOS M body] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00B2A1KEC/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B00B2A1KEC&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=battleforthew-20), a [$115 Canon 50mm f1.8 lens] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00007E7JU/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B00007E7JU&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=battleforthew-20) and a [$45 Canon EF to EF-M adapter] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CJZDO1G/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B00CJZDO1G&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=battleforthew-20) [Referral Links] plus the free Magic Lantern RAW firmware modification, you can produce video that looks like this:
Fashion (shot in RAW): http://vimeo.com/72938179
Live music (shot in RAW): http://vimeo.com/75122636#t=38s
For sound, your iPhone will do a good job as a sound recorder as long as you have an external mic. You might want to consider recording to the [free Rode Rec LE app] (https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/r-de-rec-le/id590021166?mt=8) with a [$70 Aspen HQ-S for iPhone] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00MVK29BK/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B00MVK29BK&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=battleforthew-20) [Referral Link].
Here is how a lav/phone combo works (example is for the Rode SmartLav, but it makes the point for the entire lav/phone category):
This will give you high quality audio and video for less than $500.
Hope this is helpful and good luck with your documentary!
My god. They did it! This is exactly what I'm looking for. Ready for a quantum leap from my T3i!!!
Just to be sure, can someone confirm that I can still use my Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens if I have the adapter?
Canon EOS Rebel T5
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
You could get a GH3, however that wouldn't leave you much money left over for a lens, let alone all the other bits you need.
The camera is one of three parts that make up a quality production; you also need to consider sound and lighting.
If you're just experimenting, then you could go for this little combination:
That leaves you about $40 for media and spare batteries. The links are for illustrative purposes - shop around to find better prices and you can save even more!
Given your shooting constraints, you might be better off adding the s95 if you have the cash. I have a t2i and s100, and I think of them as complements more than substitutes.
Also: what lenses do you have on your t2i? If you're not using a nifty 50, you should at least be thinking about experimenting with it.
Here ya go! This is what will really give you those beautiful, cinematic, dof heavy shots. I have this lens, but if you can swing it, it may be worth it to grab a similar lens but an f/1.4 instead. It'll give you just that much shallower of dof.
Nifty Fifty, the 50mm f/1.8. Quite inexpensive.
Or if you wanna be Mister Big Shot, the 35mm f/1.4.
Seconding the kit 18mm as probably wide enough, but if you're wanting really wide at that price range - here's a Samyang 10mm 2.8 or if you don't mind not having as fast a lens (less DoF options and need more light) a Canon 10-18.
My advice since I own the same camera - if you don't have it already get magic lantern installed. If you have trouble PM me and I'll walk you through. It gives you new options with your camera. Second, if you don't have a fast lens, get the nifty fifty - canon 50mm 1.8 and consider getting the new canon 24mm 2.8. These are fast prime lenses that will 1, challenge you to work on framing your shots since you can't just adjust the zoom, and 2, let you open up for more light, practice things like pulling focus, get some 'cinematic' shots with subject in focus and the blurry background (bokeh). Then invest in audio. At the very least a dslr shotgun mic like the Rode VMP or if you have a smartphone you can use, something like a Rode Smartlav. Better yet, spend next to nothing and make one out of a headphone/microphone combo for cell phones like this one. Tons of DIY projects on the web. Buy a really cheap cam stabilizer or make one. Same for jibs. Make a skateboard dolly shot rig.
I would say this is a good list for those looking to take nice pictures on a budget.
But if you were going to be a photography student or really try to make a go at it i would stay skip the older lenses and just invest in a $125 or $400 50mm prime lens from your cameras manufacturer.
I also would say not to be scared to pick up a used one from a reputable dealer on ebay for a bigger discount
The sharpness, loca, ect will be better and all of the electronics (like autofocus) will work.
Or get a much better value for the 50mm f/1.8.
Wait, this lens? Cuz if its this, I am buying it right now.
You would be right -- a 5D won't take an EFS lens.
He may have been rocking an EF 50mm 1.8
Honestly, that lens is not worth it, because it's a very awkward lens for most things on a 1.6x crop body, such as the 60D. 300mm on a 60d is the equivilent to >450mm on a full frame sensor, and is not really necessary. Even if it was nicer glass, it's just not a lens I'd want to own as one of my first lenses.
If you wanted a cheap lens, it's not the one I'd buy -- The "Nifty Fifty" -- http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU is even cheaper, and I'd prefer it. As I'd also prefer the Canon 40mm fixed lens.
If you want a telephoto lens, the kit lens Canon 55-250 is a much better buy, http://www.amazon.com/Canon-55-250mm-4-0-5-6-Telephoto-Digital/dp/B0011NVMO8 and can be found MUCH cheaper used, because it's practically given away in many kits. Amazon has their refurbished price as within $30 of each other.
If you are just getting started and have absolutely no gear, then this would be a good way to get into DSLRs. It has everything you will need to get out and take photos and learn what you need to learn before you start throwing big money at lenses and full frame sensor cameras.
I have the same 2 kit lenses for mine, and I shoot all kinds of video and photos (for money and for fun). I also have some extra gear that I have collected for video gigs through the years, like lights, stabilizing rigs, etc that help, but, it's not always about having the best gear, it's finding a way to make what you have work. You could have a $10k camera rig, but if you have no idea how to frame a shot, set aperture/shutter speed, color balance, etc, you won't get good results.
I would recommend getting this lens as well if you have the extra money. It is a great little lens for the price.
/u/asad137 is completely right about camera choice. Go for the older model. (It has the exact same sensor in it!) And you should have money for this lens. It was the best $100 I ever spent. It's perfect for portraits of family and friends. Here are two examples. (one) (two)
I'll assume you're referring to how the closer part of the image is blurry and not directions on how to involve a puppy :) This is known as a shallow depth of field, which is common on lenses with large apertures. As a related example, when you see a portrait with the background all blurry but the subject in focus, it's known as bokeh. This was likely taken with a "prime lens", ie. one with a fixed length, and doesn't have a zoom feature. The cheapest way to get a shot like this would be to use an SLR and such a lens. For example, Canon has a 50mm f/1.8 lens for about $100 on Amazon.
I've got that lens too. It's a prime lens, so you can't change the focal length, i.e. zoom. 50mm is near the same as the max focal length on the stock T2i lens. In exchange for not being able to zoom, however, the aperture is wider and the lens is capable of letting in more light, allowing for less noisy/crisper shots in lower light (and also sexier bokeh). Moreover, it's a really affordable lens (assuming letrainfalldown is talking about the same Nifty Fifty Canon lens that I have.
Thanks! I use a Canon Rebel T3i with their "nifty fifty" lens. It can be annoying for anything large since it has a fixed zoom, but it's my favorite lens ever for dark forest macro shots.
I have some more fungi and moss photos on my tumblr.
Check out /r/PhotoClass2014 and start working through it. You'll be astonished by how quickly you'll learn how to figure this out on your own.
It's not impossible to get similar-ish photos with just the kit lens if you know what you're doing.
The quick answer you're probably looking for: Buy this. Stick it on your camera. Put your camera on Av mode, turn the dial until you're at f/1.8, set your ISO to Auto, and make sure you're shooting in good light (sunset/sunrise/or brighter) to avoid graininess.
Trust me, take a week to start on the photoclass lessons. You should know why you're buying something before you do, so that you know how to use it effectively. Otherwise you're very likely be disappointed and won't know how to get the results you want.
If you're totally starting out, go with the nifty fifty:
I really love this lens. It takes fantastically sharp pictures and has a wonderfully shallow DOF. You have to be rather far away though to capture entire cars within the frame so it can be a pain in the ass for shooting car meets or shows where lots of people are present and cars are packed in close together. For situations like that, I'd recommend this:
why not spend much less on the f 1.8 instead and save the extra 4 bills for a better lense
Hey all. Does anyone have any experience with this lens?
I've seen some decent pictures taken with it, and for only $125 (-20 if you get a rebate) it seems pretty good.
I would buy 7DII over a 6D in a heartbeat hands down more versatile. But I encourage you to buy an older camera since you're just starting out the
BUY THIS 7D with a low shutter count only $600. Still a hell of a camera to start with, lenses are more important.
Canon 10-18mm lens $300
Canon 50mm f/1.8 $120
Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 $650 OR buy a 70-200mm f/4 IS L lens USED off FredMiranda, or buy a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkI L USED off FredMiranda I got my f/2.8L mkI for $1,300 last year the MKII goes for $1,900 or so used but wasn't worth the $600 for me.
Card reader $18
Then get some Sandisk 16gb or 32gb cards
Other stuff to think about:
Canon 85mm f/1.8 $360
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Big purchases way down the road
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mkII L $2,200
A 300mm f/2.8 or even f/4 wouldn't be a bad thing to shoot for either if you really want to do wildlife but not spend over $6,000 on a lens
Canon 1.4 teleconverter $500 this only works with L lenses buy this way down the road if you need more reach.
Canon 16-35mm or 17-40mm L lens
I used a Canon 50mm prime lens and a macro lens adapter that came with a wide angle lens, like this one.
Your 550D has an APS-C sensor, which means it's smaller than a full frame sensor by a factor of 1.5
What that means is whatever focal length of lens you get, you're actually seeing a x1.5 zoom version of it. Example: When you use a 50mm lens, you're getting 75mm out of it.
This kind of set a base for what focal length of lenses you'd want to get. For a full frame camera in general, my go to range consist of 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 105mm, and 135mm.
So to get to your question, I'd probably go with a 35mm for you since it's the closest to 50mm for a full frame camera. That's generally a good medium shot, and you can get a fairly good DoF once you play around with it a little. If you do more videos and photos, then this is a good start.
If you are set on getting a 50mm first, I would definitely recommend you to visit your local camera shops, or pawn shops. Try to find a good nikon 50mm lens that's made in the earlier years. 70s, 80s, and get an adapter for it. The reason behind that is because at some point you're going to get a good enough lens that will cover that range, so spending a great deal of money for that range might not be your best option. Obviously, you can get the f1.8 canon, bang the hell out of it for $110 and call it a day and not worry. I'll be the first guy to tell you that's hands down one of the best deal you can get. I own one of those, and one of the nikon 50mm. They're both great in their pricing these days, I bought this almost 3 years ago, and I use it majority of every shoot on my 5Dmkii, all for $130 at the time. I found and bought this at a local camera shop for $150 like a week ago and couldn't be happier. The biggest difference and the reason I don't love the canon 50mm is that it's plastic. Over the years, the focus gear is losing precision and I'm having a tougher time focusing. Also the focus ring prevents you from using a follow focus on it, and on top of that, the glass element on that lens is just not a top quality glass, and so the picture color just doesn't give you that glow even in pre editing phase. Nikon 50mm is still selling this well, even though it's a full manual lens, because their older lenses are all in great quality, durable, and the glass elements are just incredible. Sadly, rokinon doesn't have a 50mm cine lens, their line up goes from 35mm to 85mm, mostly to serve cameras with smaller sensor sizes.
And one more thing, when you get a chance, get your hands on one of these. It takes some learning curve, but if you have a 35mm, 50mm, or an 85mm, this is gonna get you an amazing close up shot with tons of shallow DoF. You're not going to use it a lot, but damn if you don't have it when you need it! Word of advise on it though: Throw a shit ton of lights and close your iris, cause when I said a shit ton of shallow DoF, I mean your focal distance could easily be a nose length!
Hope this helps!
I'm looking into getting a new lens for my Canon Rebel Xti. Mostly, I want it for portraits and to get the shallow DOF. I Found two choices on Amazon that I can't seem to decide on. The first one is the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 50mm link for around $100. The second is the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Medium Telephoto Lens 85mm link for $369. I know that the 85mm would be ideal for portrait photography because of the flattening but would there really be that big of a difference between 50mm and 85mm? And does anyone have any opinions on these lenses? TIA!
get yourself one of these. it works wonders
A great starter lens for astrophotography with Canon DSLRs is the 50mm f/1.8 "nifty fifty." Amazon link. Its short focal length is quite forgiving for iffy or no tracking, so if you're only working with a tripod, it'll do you well.
T5i body, 18-55 IS STM, Amazonbasics bag, Sandisk 32GB Class 10 - $749
EF 50mm f/1.8 - $125
Can get other lenses as she starts to get limited by the current ones.
Disclaimer: I might be slightly biased because I shoot with Canon :P
Not sure if you're gonna find any glass worth using that gives a cinematic feel under $75, unless its heavily used or you get lucky.
Since you're trying to keep it cheap, are you just looking to get a zoom lens? Or do you want to go with primes? Cheap primes will give you a better ability to create a "cinematic" look, rather than a cheap zoom.
I had some good results shooting on the GH2 with t/1.5 Rokinon Cine Prime Lenses. They run around $300 - $500 i believe, and you gotta buy a mount adapter for the GH2's C-Mount. The build of the lenses feel really fragile and easy to damage, but you'll get a solid look for the price. However, for the t/1.5's, they were going soft at around a 1.8, so take that "t/1.5" label with a grain of salt.
Other than those lenses, I'd try this canon 50mm f/1.8 for $125, and also grab an EF to C-Mount adapter.
Is this the guy?
For that price, the lens is probably worth adding to my bag even if I eventually end up upgrading my kit lens anyway.
Oh, actually, since you're spending company money (and so have no reason to try to save money) I'd suggest upgrading to a refurbished T2i (as /u/de1irium suggested) and spending the leftover $120 on a 50mm f/1.8.
my moneys on the canon thrifty 50 Laser sharp, great depth of field.
The "plastic fantastic" actually refers to this lens:
The casing is literally plastic. But at about 100 bucks, it is an amazing value.
On a crop sensor like the T3i 50mm. a 50mm f/2 is more like a 80mm f/2 on a full frame sensor. The quick and dirty way of calculating this would be to take the focal length and multiply it by 1.6. In practice all it really means if you have to stand a little further back than if you had a pricey full frame camera. 1.6 meters, instead of 1 meter, for a similar effect.
Overall not a big deal.
As for the grain deal, that was just my person opinion. It is a striking image as it is.
I own this lens and am thinking about getting a portrait lens to photograph my brother's wedding (I'm just taking pictures for fun).
Would you recommend not getting this lens here and just sticking to the macro for portraits? If so, why?
It's this. It's famous because of its versatility and its astonishingly high image quality for its price. A nifty fifty is often the first lens novices buy after a kid lens.
Sony and Nikon have equivalents for $100 – $200.
Oh very nice. I just got the [Canon EF 50mm f1.8] (http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1419986220&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=canon+50mm+lense) for my Canon T5i. Thing takes some awesome photo/videos, really liking it so far.
I highly recommend this $100 50mm lens:
It's probably the best $100 lens you can get.
This lens and a litany of filters, I'm really excited.
The texture on these should be awesome in person
I don't think that lens is compatible with Canon cameras (no mention of an EF mount). You might be able to use an adaptor, but that could get pricey.
If you're looking for a 50mm prime, get the Canon one: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU/
(Also, it's spelled lens.)
I was given a Canon Rebel XSI for my birthday and would like to maximize the camera with accessories. I already have this lens on my list of things to get:
>Googled it and it looks like a pretty great camera, I've got a Canon 650D but I've yet to take many photos around that part of London with it.
Yes, I love it, recently upgraded from a Pentax K-x starter model and it's been a blast taking pics with the K-5 IIs. I recommend you head on out to downtown and take some pics!
>Just noticed your lens is also pretty fancy, do you think it's worth investing in lenses like these? Still somewhat new to photography so just curious as you seem advanced
Absolutely. I had this lens before I had the K-5 IIs and truly the lens matters much more than the actual camera.
You can take a top line camera and slap on a starter lens, and you will take pictures that are barely better than the starter camera would with the same lens. If you take a starter camera and compare a top quality lens to a start lens, you'll notice a big difference is easy to achieve.
It's definitely $300 well spent for this lens. Its main advantage over the starter lens is its wide f/1.8 aperture which allows you to take much better night shots without being forced to prolong your exposure (shutter speed), because it lets in much more light in a short time. It's also lovely for depth of field.
If I can recommend a lens for you, I would say get a 50mm f/1.8 first of all. They're cheap and very useful for portraits and street photos, and there's a reason they're nicknamed 'nifty fifty'. On a cropped sensor like your 650D's, you might prefer a wider angle lens if you want to do landscape photos or city skyline shots like mine. In that case, look at lenses with focal length of 30mm and less. Conversely, if you're interested in doing sports photos, wild animal photos and bird spotting, or airshows and the like, look at lenses of 200mm and more, since those will let you zoom in real close.
What's your budget? If it's at all possible, spending the extra cash on an entry-level dslr body will be worth it. The sensors in point-and-shoot cameras are generally much smaller than those in dslrs, which means that a p&s sensor can't gather as much data, and this yields poorer-quality images by comparison. And dslrs afford the user a lot more control (in terms of settings) and versatility (using different lenses)—both of which will be very important down the road as your photography skills improve. I'd suggest looking on eBay for a used Canon T1i or T2i (body only); you should be able to find a decent one somewhere in the range of $200–300. And then get the Canon 50mm f/1.8. This is one of the best bang-for-your-buck lenses, and it will serve you far better for food/macro photography than the standard 18–55mm kit lens. So if you can swing it, $400–500 will get you a perfectly good beginner dslr set-up. Not that much more than a decent point and shoot, for something waay better.
Additionally, look into purchasing/obtaining a post-processing program like Adobe Lightroom for color correction and other image editing. If you'd like to avoid spending money on software, there's an open-source image editor called GIMP. I haven't used it myself, but I've heard some fellow food bloggers say that it works relatively fine-ish (especially for being free).
If you can swing it, don't overlook the 550d. It does very well as at widefield shots, DSOs, and has the added benefit of Movie Crop Mode which you can use for planetary imaging. The 18-55-IS lens is a nice little lens, and despite being a little slow, it's definitely enough to get you going.
The cool part is, if you end up upgrading your mount and getting a scope, it's versatile enough to where you don't need another camera to learn the basics of a different type of AP.
It also does HD movies and is a nice daytime cam.
There are a lot of lenses worth buying. The 50mm 1.8 is cheap, fast, and tack-sharp. I'd definitely recommend that one. All the other lenses I want are pretty expensive. For widefield/milky way shots, a lot of people seem to be using the Rokinon 14mm which seems like a lot of lens for the money. Haven't tried it out personally, but it gets good reviews.
As many others stated its more about the lens than the camera. I personally use Canon with the nifty 50 to achieve similar results.
Pro tip to achieve that effect, there must be distance between the subject (girl) and the background (tree). The more distance, the more the background is out of focus. Lower F-stop helps but you can achieve similar results at F4 if your close enough to the subject.
Also if you have an IPhone 6(idk if others do it) you can achieve similar photos with the blurred backgrounds.
There's no Canon 50mm f/1.5, there are only f/1.8, f/1.4, and f/1.2.
You DEFINITELY need to get a new lens.
The first lens you should get is the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, which sells for about $100 at Best Buy or Mike's Camera. It is a prime lens, meaning there is no zoom function. But it is much simpler than a telephoto lens with fewer moving parts, but you can get higher quality optics relatively inexpensively. This will allow you to play around with aperture & depth of field.
If you don't mind buying used, the photo/video section of the Denver Craigslist is pretty robust. you can find all sorts of used gear for great prices!
The very first thing you should do is go and get one of these: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1313923967&amp;sr=8-1
Out of the box it will take better pictures than your kit lens and once you learn to use it properly, your pics will be even better :)
Your lenses are slow, but I wouldn't bother buying new lenses. Buy the 430EX, and learn how to bounce it, sync it, adjust it, etc. You're going to need an off camera flash eventually.
Don't bother with that package, just buy the straight flash from Amazon for cheaper and pick up batteries locally.
Eventually, I'd pick up the 50 1.8 lens. It's a very sharp, decently fast lens for $100. I have $1400 lenses and I still love this lens.
Please don't go buy $300 lenses right now. Your situation will be best served by getting a flash and learning to use it.
> Only thing you lacked was a $50,000 camera and lighting kit.
Or a $500 camera, $106 lens, and $516 worth of lighting equipment.
I have one but I use it :P
Most people buy lenses to personally use, not as inventory to sell off. Try /r/photomarket maybe.
Amazon has that lens for $107:
I like the T3i and for the price I find it pretty awesome. The T4i's higher FPS is nice though, but the touch screen to me is more of a gimmick. I like the idea of the SL1, but if you start getting some larger lenses you'll find the weight a bit unbalanced.
If those are your choices, I'd go with a T4i. Now for some options. If you opt for the 18-55, you'll find your zoom somewhat limited, but you'll be under your budget of $800, and you can easily grab the 55-250mm for ~$300 later. However, if you spend a bit extra and get the T4i with the 18-135mm for ~$1,100, I think you'll be much happier.
Now for a few tips:
Couple thoughts for you. Firstly, looking through your other shots, I think this one fits the bill here a lot better. I'll give you credit for trying to go your own way with choice in focus, and it could be an interesting idea, but the shot you selected seems to fall somewhere in the middle. I think to accomplish what you're hinting at would require a closer focal point, which is limited by your gear in this case.
If you want to try taking some macro shots, there are some cheap ways to get your foot in the door. Mind you, cheap is cheap, so don't expect the world from something like this, but at the same time, it can get you playing with the compositions you want relatively painlessly. I got one of this exact set when I got my first camera, and still use them on my 600D from time to time. I'm assuming yours came with the EF-s 18-55mm kit, like mine did, for which this should work:
They'll bring your focal point from around a foot to a matter of centimeters, depending on which you use.
Here are some examples that I've taken, using those exact attachments with the same lens.
You can see the optics aren't fantastic, but you can't expect them to be for such cheap accessories. Also, here are a couple examples using the same attachments on a bit nicer EF 28mm 1.8 USM, same camera (1),(2).
Mind you, I'm far from a professional, so take this as you will. Just trying to give you something helpful based on my own experience.
One final thing, completely unrelated to any of the previous discussion, but the Canon EF 50mm 1.8 lens is a crazy good lens for what it costs. I mean, it's loud, and it has no image stabilization, but the difference between it and the kit at the same focal length is worth mentioning, and being able to crank it wide open at times will let you shoot faster at lower ISO (which is nice, because fighting noise is a constant battle with that camera). Also, opening all the way to 1.8, that lens will let you absolutely soak a shot in bokeh should you decide to (eg).
The Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 is a nice choice, and lots of people like the nifty 50. The kit lens (18-55) isn't terrible, but it definitely is not ideal. Always invest in nice glass, because you can use it forever.
It's a straight-up Canon Nifty Fifty. http://amzn.com/B00007E7JU
I only own two lenses at this point: the aforementioned 50mm and a kit 18-200mm.
I have the Canon XSi, and I would recommend buying it without the kit lens, and instead getting a 50mm 1.8 and a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5.
I recenty bought that lens but, before I did I read the reviews on
Amazon. There are a number of people that say that the lense got stuck on their camera as well. It seems they had to send it to Canon to have fixed. It doesn't sound good for you. Sorry.
While this isn't exactly wide angle, the Canon 50mm lens is great for wide-field astrophotography and it's cheap. I have it and have gotten great results with it so far.
Here is a link for it on Amazon
Canon EOS Rebel T2i with a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 lens.
I know nearly nothing about photography but this body and lens make it look like I'm competent. It's great!
Get a t2i with ML, 50mm 1.8 lens, zoom h1, or if your budget can afford it, zoom h4n. Check eBay for cheapest prices. That's everything you need and in your budget. Good luck.
This was my first purchase after I got tired of the kit 18-55 lens on my Canon T3i:
It will take you a long way.
I was thinking about getting this lens. Would that make a good lens? Relatively cheap?
To me it's a tie between this one and the Canon Nifty Fifty. I've seen so many good shots and amazing video from the Canon and it has a 4.5 star rating on over 1,700 reviews.
The Sigma only gets 4 stars.
I believe the only new lens that falls in that price range is the 50/1.8; although, you might find used lenses or non-Canon lenses in your price range.
Hey, I've got a Cannon Rebel XS (here http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001CBKJGG). I live in Oklahoma, have a tripod. Can I take a picture like this with my camera? Do I need a special lens? Any advice would be so awesome, thanks!
Oh, I also have this lens, but it's more for portraits. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00007E7JU
I'm in the market for my first prime lens. I'm an Ecologist, so I am constantly encountering wildlife and awesome plants. I really want a lens that will allow me to get crisp pictures of animals that are typically spooked easily but also get macros of plants, insects, and amphibians. It is also worth mentioning that I handle a lot of animals at night.
I'm currently using a T3i and have a budget of $400. The two lenses I have been considering are:Canon 85mm F/1.8 and Canon 50mm 1.8. Any advice would be helpful!
As a quick rule, 1/48 shutter speed, ISO as low as you can keep it while maintaining correct exposure though try not to go over 640/800 as it'll get real noisy real fast, and keep your aperture as wide as possible, with that stock lens as the widest end you should get f3.5 if I'm not mistaken and at the telephoto end you should get f5.6, if you find you need something with a wider aperture, the standard recommendation is the Canon 50mm f1.8, with the wider aperture you'll get a deeper depth of field and a lot more light onto the sensor and it's pretty damn cheap, here is the lens. Good luck.
I am envious of your ability to record video in the first place :P
If you want a good, cheap lens, the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II is a ton of fun, really good, and surprisingly inexpensive. It's pretty much a must have IMO. I also have a 55-250 that I don't use much but like to keep around for when I go to the zoo and whatnot.
Thats okaaaay. Not too good, but Im not sure if its 1080p HD. Probably only 720.
If youve got more money;
With this lens: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU
This is fantastic. Thanks for all your help.
If you don't mind me asking more questions, since you seem so knowledgeable, how would you compare the Pentax (SMC) primes to those of Canon?
For instance, is the Pentax SMC 50mm f/1.8 really that much better than the Canon 50mm f/1.8? Or is this mainly a case of supply vs. demand?
Just to compare, here is a selection from the Canon side of things with Amazon used prices:
Canon 7d - $990
Tamron 17-50 2.8 - $340
These two are a great basis to work off off and get you to $1330.
If you want to spend some more you could add the following:
Canon 50mm f/1.8 - 100
Canon Speedlite 430EX - 235
But to be honest, if your wife is just starting out and money is a bit tight, don't go out spending $900 or more on a body. As most people will tell you, picture quality is mostly due to lenses. Canon t3i, Canon t4i or 60D as well as Nikon 3200 and 5100 are all excellent bodies and have more than enough features to keep her happy. If you get either of those bodies and a decent 17-50mm lens as well as a 50mm prime she will have great tools to learn on with space to grow.
Just like daegon I would recommend to buy used. Most Photographers look out for their things quite well and most of these lenses and bodies are made at quite good quality levels. I hope this helps.
In the meantime you should pick up a Plastic Fantastic.
Dat lock function. I previously had a 55-250 that I got bundled with my camera and being able to run everywhere with the barrel locked is fantastic.
If you like the blurry background/large aperture things, have you looked at a 50/1.8? Dirt cheap (I got mine NZ$150, Amazon has it $125 new or $80 or so used), fantastic quality and oh! the blurriness! I try not to just run around at f/1.8 but usually I fail. (Its downsides are slow, jerky AF and the shoddy build quality, but for a generally sub-US$100 lens it's so worth it).
Here's a comparison (crop only, no other post processing) between the 55-250 and the 50/1.8 and here's some sample pics - warning, it's not so great for fast-moving stuff, as the AF isn't quite up to scratch.
Yeah, I don't know. I don't really compete much or even ride much now, just a bit of hacking out. Western looks weird imo (sorry! English family :)
Get a fast enough lens, like a cheapie prime, and that light kit should be plenty sufficient.
Get the 50mm 1.8, its only like $100, or the 40mm pancake, $150, much better glass, IMO
Wow, the price jumped on that 40mm.. I got mine at Best Buy last year for $149..
Still good glass though.
I recently went on a once in a lifetime trip to France for two weeks, so hopefully I can provide some helpful advice/insight.
First, and I cannot stress this enough, have enough memory! I'd recommend bringing at least 16GB, if not more.
I brought two 8GB cards to France and transfered them to my computer each night. I never used the second card, however, if I wouldn't have had the luxury of transferring to a laptop each night, I would have quickly exceeded this.
If you are able to bring a computer or other means by which to back up your photos, I'd STRONGLY recommend it. It's great peace of mind to not have to worry about losing pictures or running out of room.
Second, DO NOT use the Auto mode, that just makes your DSLR a big point and shoot. A lot of people recommend using M(anual), but it can be a little overwhelming if you're not used to your camera. The Av (Aperture Priority) mode is great because it allows you to select the aperture value you want (which will effect what's in focus and Depth of Field) while automatically determining the rest. Constipated_Help gave you some very sound advice on exposure, so follow that if you're able.
Third, make sure you have the right accessories. A tripod would be great for landscape shots. The Dolica Proline is a great value at 40$. At least one extra battery would be good to have, especially if you will not be able to recharge during the trip. An Opteka t2i battery can be had for 12$, and works with your Canon charger.
If you can swing it, a new lens would be good to have since the lens is the determining factor of image quality. If you like to "zoom" and isolate subjects, you'll want a telephoto. The Canon 55-250 IS is a great deal at 240$. If you like wide angle, you'll need an ultra wide. These will typically run above 400$. I have a Tokina 11-16 and I am very pleased. As others have recommended, the Canon 50 1.8 is an incredible deal at 100$ and provides creative options with it's wide aperture.
A nice bag is also a good thing to have. You can buy either a messenger style, a holster or a backpack. Filters would also be nice, but they're not a necessity.
I hope this can help. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. I'd be glad to (try to) help! :)
the t4i and t5i will look almost exactly the same as your t3i. Take your $1300 and get a nice lens or two. This is a great low cost lens: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU
This is one of my favorite lenses, maybe consider getting it used: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-16-35mm-2-8L-Ultra-Angle/dp/B000NP46K2/ref=sr_sp-atf_image_1_1?s=electronics&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1381557947&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=canon16-35mm
This is a better version of the first lens, i love this lens: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Standard-Medium-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B00009XVCZ/ref=sr_sp-atf_image_1_1?s=electronics&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1381558003&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=canon50+1.4
Going forward shoot with an inexpensive Nifty Fifty and open that aperture up.
Yes. Link for reference.
that's exactly it. Paid over 900 new for everything over 6 months ago.
The linked post is only the body and the 18-55 lens for $479.99.
Add in two filters at 30 bucks each. add in the 50 mm lens at $166.99, add in the extra battery, two memory cards, case and tripod and it's no longer a rip off.
Kit lenses usually just aren't that great. They're built for cheap versatility, so they do nothing particularly well. You would be surprised, though, at how little you have to spend for a decent prime lense. For instance, this is quite a good lens from Canon for under $400 USD. It even has a cheaper counter part for around $120.
Both are good lenses, IMO, and in the opinion of quite a few others around here.
I second picking up the 50mm f/1.8. It's about $100, and stupidly good for the money.
Just for fun, here are some photos from Flickr with the kit lens, and here are some with the 50mm. The ones with the kit lens look pretty great, but you can't get the beautiful soft backgrounds like you can with the 50mm.
well the t3i is $579.95 for the body only on amazon, the t2i is $599.00 (but you can definitely get it cheaper somewhere else other than amazon or if you buy used)
here's the 50 mm lens
magic lantern is free. its basically a different firmware that you can place onto your canon dslr.
Yeah I shot with two guys that did all their video with T3i's and that thing does some damn good video. you should get a 50mm 1.8 lens if you're strapped for cash, it's an awesome lens for super cheap in comparison to the rest of canon's line.
For portraits I just use the 50mm 1.8. it's pretty cheap and I actually used it with my old camera. Here's a link to it: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00007E7JU/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_w9wRAbAYR8CHR
Here's a sample of a shot I took with it: https://www.instagram.com/p/BgMtD0HHPN5/
You might want to spend the extra money for the 50mm 1.4, but honestly I don't think it's necessary unless you're really picky about your bokeh.
> Canon nifty 50 f1.8
This one, yeah?
Does the current 18-55mm range seem enough for you? If so, at what focal range are most of your photos taken? I would suggest getting a prime close to the focal length you use the most/like shooting at.
Why a prime lens? It will give you great quality without breaking the bank, while being faster (lower f-stop) and teaching you more about composition, DOF and making you think about your shots. A couple of good options are the 40mm f/2.8 or the good old 50mm f/1.8.
Yep, I've found it very capable, both on a tripod (a nifty-fifty is an inexpensive way to capture a lot of light), and through my 8" SCT. Here is an album of images I've submitted to this subreddit, all were taken with my unmodded T3i with exposures no longer than a minute, stacked in DSS of course!
Another option is getting the Canon 50mm 1.8 apature prime lense $125 on Amazon
For such a cheap lense pictures are pin sharp and with the 1.8 u can take great low light pictures I use one with my 70D best 130$ I ever spent
Cool, well it will certainly allow her to zoom in a lot more than her kit lens does!
To be honest it's not the usual recommendation around here because we tend to like lenses that do one thing and do it extremely well instead of a jack of all trades lens, but if you want one lens to do it all it's not a bad choice for the money. Also it's the simplest choice if she's the type of person who just wants to take pictures with a minimum of fussing with gear.
Just for your future information (maybe Christmas next year?), a common low-budget recommendation for someone who shoots Canon and only has the kit lens is the 50 mm f/1.8 II lens. It's a prime lens (which means you can't zoom in or out, it's just set permanently at a certain angle of view), but you can use it in lower light situations and also you can get that effect where the background is super blurry like this random example I found online. But that lens is definitely the kind of lens that you have to do a bit of learning and experimentation to use to its full potential.
For way less you can get the old "Nifty 50" - http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU
The key to great shots is shallow depth of field, and that will get you there.
The nifty fifty is always a safe bet:
Awesome, yeah just play around and experiment! I learned a ton that way. I highly recommend this lens, it's a fantastic lens and let's you shoot at 1.8, and is nice for portraits and stuff.
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00007E7JU/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_G4-Dub1M1PYPR
Pm me if you ever have any questions, I'm happy to help! Btw your eye photo on Flickr is really cool!
Sorry. This is my lens http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU
>Anything in particular you like about the look produced by that lens?
I was told by a friend that it separates the subject from the background more drastically, so that's what I found most appealing. I looked at some pictures taken with the 85mm and really liked what I saw.
I suppose my next big step is learning the correct way to edit the pictures.
Can't beat this cheap 50mm, link. With this bad boy you should be able to open your aperture way up allowing you to shoot amazing footage in low-light as well as get that depth of field effect that drives all the girls crazy.
And when researching lenses Youtube can be a fun place to check other people's videos. Here's a video with the 50mm.
This is the prime lens I have. I'm looking for something no more than $250 (because I'm a broke college student :/) and I'm not sure for what purpose really...I recently got into photography in the summer, so maybe something a newbie might need? I really enjoy taking nature shots. So maybe a telephoto/zoom or a macro? I was thinking about this lens. But I would like opinions about others. Thanks the comment!
I would get the T2i unless you really want the flip out screen. Spend 325 for the kit, 20 for a SD card, and 125 on a 50mm 1.8. You'll end up right around the 450 mark with three lenses instead of one. You could also wait for the new 24mm 2.8 pancake thats coming out instead of the 50mm. I find the 50mm a little bit tight on my T3i but it's still a fantastic lens.
There isn't much difference between the two unless you want the flippy screen like I said before. I wouldn't think you'd really want the battery grip anyways as it just adds weight and bulk, but thats my opinion.
Hard to beat the nifty fifty especially given the price.
I have this version of the 50mm 1.8. I don't think it's worth me upgrading to the new one unless there's a huge difference?
Hi guys, I am not sure whether this is a good place to post this, so please feel free to delete if it violates the rules.
I am looking to upgrade from a Canon T3 to a smaller, potentially mirrorless, camera. I would like to sell my T3 + gear and use that cash toward the new camera.
What is a reasonable price to ask for this stuff:
Canon EOS Rebel T3 Digital SLR Camera DS126291
Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS II
Tiffen 58mm UV Protection Filter
Case Logic SLRC-201 SLR Zoom Holster (Black)
AmazonBasics Backpack for SLR/DSLR Cameras and Accessories - Black
Generic 58mm Hood
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens - Fixed
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS II Telephoto Zoom Lens
Personally speaking, I avoid all kit lenses. They are competent, but they do not wow and do not let in enough light.
The bundles you listed are a waste of money and full of filler goods. If you're willing to challenge yourself a bit, get your self the T3i, get the Canon 50mm f/1.8. You will step back a lot with that lens, but you will also learn a lot. Shoot with that lens in December and most of January, then move on to the next lens you should buy.
My recommendation for your second lens would be the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-VC. It's sharp, good value and has a decent working range.
An alternative to the first lens that just came on the market is the Canon 24mm 2.8. It's not quite as fast as the 50mm 1.8, but it's more all-purpose. Better for landscape, not as good for portraiture.
I'd go ahead and get the 600D. If you wanted to save some money, I've got the 500D which works just fine for a starter, then you could probably grab the 50mm 1.8 which once you outgrow the kit lens, is generally the next step.
Can anyone tell if there is a difference in these two lenses besides the price?
Obviously you'll want a flatter lens for this like a nifty fiifty
Then put it in a cage like this or this
If you want to use a longer lens then get something more expensive and rigid like this or this
I found this that is glide cam compatible but it's all up to your opinion really. Just look around for DSLR cages and you'll find a ton.
My Canon 600D arrives on Wednesday with the 18-55mm kit lens. I was originally going to buy the 50mm f/1.8 lens from Amazon, but I have seen some complains about it being too "tight". Since I'm a beginner, I was hoping if someone would guide my purchase. I would love to take pictures of landscape & scenery in the future, but I don't know if the 50mm will fit the bill.
Most swear by primes. The majority recommend going for a nifty fifty to start then renting lenses, this one in particular: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU
The GH2 uses an MFT mount though, so you will need to also get an MFT EF adapter.
Awesome, thanks for this. Wasn't quite aware of what focusing screens were, but that looks exactly like what I want.
As for the feel of the lens, I figured that they wouldn't really design the stock lenses for manual focus. I've been looking at getting a fixed 50mm for the T2i, and I'm debating between Canon's f1.8 and f1.4. I like the price of the f1.8, but it looks like it has a similar focusing system to the stock lens. I need to get to a store where I can handle them side by side so I can decide myself, but has anyone out there had experience with these two lenses who has anything to say about them? I've looked up comparisons online and the 1.4 seems to produce better images, but does anyone know if it has a smoother focus?
I have the xsi and started off with the two lenses you (OP) mentioned and often found myself wanting to switch back and forth between them. I bought the canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6. For over a year I used that lens almost exclusively as it covered most of the range I would want. About six months ago I got the canon 50mm f/1.8. This lens has been great for portraits as you can have a really nice shallow depth of field with it. Not to mention you can't get an f-stop that low for that kind of price.
This stuff is pretty nice, but she is limited by the equipment. Get her a decent dslr body, but invest in a good lens. My girlfriend started shooting with phones and point and shoots. We saved up and bought a Canon T2i at a great price. We were then able to save up and add to our lens collection. Here is a very good lens for a great price. Remember though it's not the camera that makes the photo, but the director who shoots it. With these cameras you have so much more potential, but you have to set it up. It's a great learning experience. It's like playing games on a pc. An entry level computer will still let you play great games, but a gaming computer will let you play great games at a much higher quality. You just have to know how to build it and set it up. Best of luck to you and your mom.
For the photogs out there here's my equipment:
I shot in fine JPEG and only used Picasa to adjust white balance, highlights, shadows, and saturation.
Oh, got it backwards. Thanks!
Edit: that's a bit out of budget unless I don't get a new body. I think this is the 50mm that was recommended? I know you suggested wider, but I want to keep everything under 1k so if I get a 60d for 870, I can't do the 35
There are 2 things you need: A DSLR and a fast 50 mm lens. That's the starting point. You will be going used for the body and probably new for the lens. I shoot from the Canon camp but other brands are every bit as good. Here's what I would start with:
Once you master these, and really know what you are doing, you will be on your way. Here's the rule that I've always used: Never buy another piece of equipment until you master what you already have. The exception is, you have to have an SLR to learn control.
What makes for good depth of field is a lens with a larger aperture (ie. a lower f/ number). For low light situations you'll, again, want a larger aperture because this lets more light in and lets you use a faster shutter speed which reduces the chance of motion blur.
I am always a vocal supporter of the 50mm f/1.8 (http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU) for those on a budget. Its relatively cheap and a decent lens. If you have the cash to spend then look up the 50mm f/1.4.
Once again, awesome deal, will be gone soon. Amazon PMed with a free filter for a little while but they are sold out now. It might be worth watching this page and see if the Amazon deal comes back.
50mm Lens: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-1-8-Camera-Lens/dp/B00007E7JU
Here are some links for the product in the above comment for different countries:
Amazon Smile Link: nifty 50
To help donate money to charity, please have a look at this thread.
This bot is currently in testing so let me know what you think by voting (or commenting). The thread for feature requests can be found here.
the canon 50mm 1.8 is INCREDIBLE for $100. I had it for about a year. The only bummer is the focus ring is on the very far end of the lens - not the easiest or most comfortable focus ring to use while shooting video (especially live events and the like when you have to change focus frequently
this is the must have. canon 50mm 1.4. the extra 200+ is well worth it. this is without a doubt my favorite lens to use for ALMOST everything. truly, this is not breaking the bank. GET IT!
Re: Eos M... I'll go and Google, but thought I'd get your thoughts too if that's OK :)
What's the difference between these two lenses? Would the f/1.4 be worth it?
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Also, should I be concerned about buying refurbished from Canon or purchasing a used lens - is there anything I should look out for?
Canon EOS 600D+ 18-55mm lenses for the wide shots+50mm prime for a narrow field of view and shallow depth of field.
If she doesn't already have one, get her a 50mm f1.8, but you've given us very little information, and "not very expensive" is very subjective, different people have different budgets.
You should also consider buying her a photobook.
That does seem like a solid lens for the money and the pics are great! Nice job.
I was shooting with a Nikon the other night, but I'm in the Canon camp. But I did check to see if there was a Canon equivalent (sort of - an f/2). I did more checking and I think I've decided to go with the 50mm f/1.8 and the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8. If I budget right, I'll be able to get both instead of just the one.
And seriously, that Orion pic is awesome.
Edit: this is the same lens I used to take this shot.
Buy the cheapest Canon DSLR, used is fine. If it does not come with this lens, buy it, put it on your camera and your done.