SAL 50mm F1.4 only for portraits??

[kenxo]

Hi guys again, its newbie kenxo, thought of starting another thread. Bought this lens (dunno why also, just tot of getting another lens), but wanted to know if the 50 1.4 is used soley for portraits?

Understand that it could be used in "low light" condition(s), meaning for night landscape also can?

do advise..!!

Appreicate it.!

[Octarine]

My advice: only buy what you need because you understand WHY you need it.
Now that you have spent the money make sure it's not wasted, so learn. Otherwise you got a nice paper weight with some optical features.
Of course you can use 50mm for a night landscape. But I'm wondering what the result will be. At f/1.4 you'll get a very shallow DOF which is quite contradicting to what most landscape photographers want. They prefer deep DOF. To achieve this you'll need to stop down and the advantage of f/1.4 is gone. In return your exposure time becomes very long and a tripod becomes your best friend.
Shallow DOF is commonly used for portraits. Using a wide open aperture gives you this effect. Whether you need f/1.4 is a different question. Depending on distance to subject the DOF might be very shallow and you might gonna miss the focus. It's the balance of several factors that make a good picture. F/1.4 can be an option, but it's not a must.

[mysilentkaopei]

well basically, why that lens is said to be good for low lights is bcuz it can go to very wide apertures, thus allowing more light to enter lo...

landscapes require you to go for big DOFs, so you gotta go for like f13 minimum.

all in all i'd say it's more for indoor low lights than actually going out low light. explains your night safari adventure as well...

[synapseman]

Especially on a crop sensor, the 50mm becomes a very specialist lens with quite limited applications. It was meant as a general purpose lens on 35mm format, but with APS-C sensor, it becomes 75mm, which someone in CS described it to be "neither here nor there" - Not wide enough to capture scenery properly, not long enough to be a true portrait lens.

Yes, you must decide on your needs FIRST and THEN get the necessary equipment to meet those needs. Buy-first-then-think-later is a sure way to waste money. And of course, asking for advice after you have bought the item is also a bit too late. You're not seeking advice; you are hoping for words of encouragement to justify your purchase.

Of course, no lens is built specifically to shoot one type of subject only. The 50/1.4 is a good lens; how you want to use it is entirely up to you.

[Agetan]

50mm f1.4 is just another lens.

You could use any lens to do any type of images and the limitation is your imagination.

Sure if you want to use it as portrait, yes... landscape, why not?

If you stitch a series of photos taken with 50mm lens, it will give you a very nice pano.... if you stand far enough, it gives you a good general purpose lens, if you stand close enough it becomes a portrait lens.

Hart

[hellwalker]

i just bought this lens
it a good lens
giving me very nice bokeh.
bro kenxo, u will love this len

[bianzi]

was wondering whether i shd upgrade this lens for 50mm2.8 marco?

[bryantee]

just use as u wish...

there is no "one" rule to any lens... if u feel that u wanna use it for landscape, by all means, the difference is the coverage... or how wide the lens enable u to see or take...

i am using CZ 85mm f1.4 with A300... i took all sorts of pictures with tt lens... who cares... just shoot and shoot... practice makes perfect... dun let the "mm" limits ya imagination bro...

The only limits are your own imaginations...

[sherchoo]

Originally Posted by bianzi was wondering whether i shd upgrade this lens for 50mm2.8 marco?

Why do you think that the F2.8 macro is an upgrade from a F1.4?

[bianzi]

yes. though it is at 1.4 it normally will be F2. cos at 1.4 i experience hand shake...as in blur pics.. i quite like having the idea of getting a marco lens..

[Galdor]

Usually at f1.4 and with SSS the pictures will not have any hand shake effect unless you're shooting in really low light situations. It could be the shallow DOF instead.

[pipo999]

I have the Minolta version, you can't go wrong with this lens. Great to mount if you want to carry your camera around for the unexpected since weight is not an issue.

Extreme shallow DOF on the 1.4 so not recommended for the faint hearted while shooting portraits, apart from that, a bit soft wide open.

For portraits I use 2 above and you will be pleasantly surprised with the bokeh. The Minolta one is not 'round', giving you a nice vintage look and feel. A nice example here below.

[steel]

I had tried the SONY 50mm f1.4, and I fell in love with it. However, the DOF is very narrow and I miss my focus most of the time when shooting moving subject i.e; babies.
But the end effect is worth it. I dun own this lens though

[Rashkae]

Originally Posted by steel I had tried the SONY 50mm f1.4, and I fell in love with it. However, the DOF is very narrow and I miss my focus most of the time when shooting moving subject i.e; babies. But the end effect is worth it. I dun own this lens though

That's why you should step down to 2.2 or 2.8

[TME]

Originally Posted by Rashkae That's why you should step down to 2.2 or 2.8

I would even stop down to f/4 just to ensure enough DOF...

[kenxo]

ok, heres another noob question, if 1.4 causes so much problem as mentioned above, why would i bother getting a full 1.4? i might as well get the 2.8 or 1.7 ?

when do i actually require operning up to 1.4? in what kinda senarios do u all reckong?

[pipo999]

Three reasons: sharpness, color rendition, bokeh

[Rashkae]

Originally Posted by kenxo ok, heres another noob question, if 1.4 causes so much problem as mentioned above, why would i bother getting a full 1.4? i might as well get the 2.8 or 1.7 ? when do i actually require operning up to 1.4? in what kinda senarios do u all reckong?

Though it may be a bit soft at 1.4, it's very very sharp once you hit f/2.0.

If you get the 2.8, it'll be sharp at f/4, etc.

[ninelives]

most lens( cheap one) are like that, very soft at wide open. check these 2 test shots I taken at cathay , the first one is tokina, the 2nd one is Calss zeiss, you get what you pay for.

compare the word " joyful moments"

tokina


cz

[ernpoh]

I think when you buy a lens, you must have some intended use for it already. You would have to be very rich to buy the lens first and then try to find a use for it.

IMHO, the 50mm would be really good for portraits because of its wide aperture. It would be very sharp at around f2.0. At f2.0, it would still give very shallow DOF and that is what most portrait photographers want. if you use it for landscape, you would have to use higher f-stops to ensure maximum DOF and that defeats the purpose of the buying the 50mm f1.4. Also, it does have any range as it is a prime lens.