Close up stills (not macro)

[icelava]

I recently purchased an EOS 450D at IT Show, and obtained the EF 50mm f/1.8 lens as well, since I was advised that would be a better lens for nearby shots with wide-open aperture. That was a good recommendation, as I have been able to capture the type of shots (more freedom with depth of field) that the kit lens cannot.

However, being 50mm (or 80mm), I realise I have to back out often in order to encapsulate the full picture. I also cannot get close as the focal distance is a certain minimum. So for shots where i can stand right where i am can still capture the picture, it seems the general suggestion is to get a lens like the EF 35mm f/2.

Are there other options i should consider for this type of shots?

Update - taking shots of objects. Very often in a room.

[ahbian]

From your post, it's still not clear what kind of subjects you intend to shoot.

[icelava]

Objects in a room.

[ahbian]

Originally Posted by icelava Objects in a room.

Sounds like a riddle. In my room, can have as big as bed or as small as coins. You have to be more specific if you want inputs to your queries.

[icelava]

Originally Posted by ahbian can have as big as bed or as small as coins.

In fact that range is accurate; I would take photos of furniture, food, electronic devices. Indeed all sizes.

My past week's photos may give you an idea.

[calebk]

You may want something wider like a 28 f/1.8 (if you can find it, not sold so commonly here). You can also try shooting with your kit lens at a fixed focal length of 28mm or 35mm to see if you can live with shooting using just that focal length. Also consider the very affordable Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. This will give you a fair bit of versatility with a fast f/2.8 aperture.

Alternatively, you may choose to invest in a flash to shoot in general indoor situations. An external flash can illuminate the scene very differently from the illumination you get from the built in flash. Used correctly, a scene can be lit in such a way that a viewer cannot detect the usage of flash.

[icelava]

The limitation i observe with the kit lens is the aperture constraint (f/3.5-5.6). I find it difficult to achieve the depth of field i can with the prime lens EF 50mm f/1.8. I love the 50mm prime, but its shortest focal distance is 45cm, and even then i need to back out for shots that is not close-up.

From what I read in a guide book, perhaps the EF 35mm f/2 is an old generation? Looks like the current model is EF 24mm f/2.8 or EF 28mm f/1.8 USM. They have a stated shortest distance of 25cm.

Yes, i intend to get an external flash but that is separate from lens acquisition.

Originally Posted by calebk Also consider the very affordable Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. This will give you a fair bit of versatility with a fast f/2.8 aperture.

Can a f/2.8 lens blur out portions of the same finger-size object like my f/1.8 lens can? Thanks.

PS - I wanted to adjust the subject title to more specifically mention lenses but it seems this version of vBulletin forum application does not allow me to do so.

[koljaho]

Originally Posted by calebk You may want something wider like a 28 f/1.8 (if you can find it, not sold so commonly here). You can also try shooting with your kit lens at a fixed focal length of 28mm or 35mm to see if you can live with shooting using just that focal length. Also consider the very affordable Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. This will give you a fair bit of versatility with a fast f/2.8 aperture. Alternatively, you may choose to invest in a flash to shoot in general indoor situations. An external flash can illuminate the scene very differently from the illumination you get from the built in flash. Used correctly, a scene can be lit in such a way that a viewer cannot detect the usage of flash.

Hmm.... I faced the same problem! EF 50mm F/1.8 is too close up for indoor usage. But IQ is good. Thinking of getting EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 to replace my kit lens. What do you guys think?

[calebk]

Originally Posted by icelava The limitation i observe with the kit lens is the aperture constraint (f/3.5-5.6). I find it difficult to achieve the depth of field i can with the prime lens EF 50mm f/1.8. I love the 50mm prime, but its shortest focal distance is 45cm, and even then i need to back out for shots that is not close-up. From what I read in a guide book, perhaps the EF 35mm f/2 is an old generation? Looks like the current model is EF 24mm f/2.8 or EF 28mm f/1.8 USM. They have a stated shortest distance of 25cm. Yes, i intend to get an external flash but that is separate from lens acquisition. Can a f/2.8 lens blur out portions of the same finger-size object like my f/1.8 lens can? Thanks. PS - I wanted to adjust the subject title to more specifically mention lenses but it seems this version of vBulletin forum application does not allow me to do so.

Depth of field, fortunately or unfortunately, is not only dependent on the aperture setting, but also subject to image plane distance, focal length, and the size of the image recording medium (here not applicable, as you are sticking to just one camera with one sensor size).

With the 17-50, you have flexibility to go closer, as it has a closer minimum focusing distance. At 50mm, you will be able to get up much closer, thus narrowing the DOF.

The 35mm f/2 and the 28mm f/2.8 and f/1.8 are different lenses. They are not predecessors or successors of each other.

[maxheadroom]

Almost all Canon lens are what U mean "Old Generation" From time to time they modify certain part in the lens to adapt new generation Camera.

[icelava]

Originally Posted by calebk With the 17-50, you have flexibility to go closer, as it has a closer minimum focusing distance. At 50mm, you will be able to get up much closer, thus narrowing the DOF.

I think the Canon equivalent of this model is the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? I will have to check out the effects of each type of lens to see which is the one that best suits me. thanks.

[icelava]

Originally Posted by maxheadroom Almost all Canon lens are what U mean "Old Generation" From time to time they modify certain part in the lens to adapt new generation Camera.

I use "old generation" to mean lens models that Canon does not list any longer.

[ahbian]

Originally Posted by icelava I think the Canon equivalent of this model is the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? I will have to check out the effects of each type of lens to see which is the one that best suits me. thanks.

The 17-55mm is about 3x the cost of the 17-50. Anyway, from your shots, if you are going into product shots, maybe can consider a light tent.

[icelava]

Interesting concept. It would be nice if i wanted pure attention on the subject, but I have desire to capture objects in their real-world environment, albeit the distractions.

[calebk]

Originally Posted by icelava I use "old generation" to mean lens models that Canon does not list any longer.

Strangely enough, I just clicked on EF Lens World, then Wide Angle, and found listed, among other lenses, the 28mm f/2.8, 28mm f/1.8 USM and 35mm f/2.

[icelava]

You're right it's there! i'm tunnel visioned.

[icelava]

Walked into MS Color in the evening, and there are no stock for EF 35mm or 28mm lenses. What I was recommended was the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM. Kinda inbetween the other two focal lengths, i tried it on my 450D and found the field of view to be slightly broader than my eyeballs. So I need not step back a single bit; and capture the shot where i stood.

However I did not to buy it as I wanted to get a visual feel of the differences with the 35mm and 28mm lenses as well, before deciding what is the optimal focal length for me. I would have to wait, or hunt around other shops.

[nuthead]

Consider using the extersion tube to reduce your min. distance.

I've some samples taken using the EF12 & EF 25 using the lens cap.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/3161789...7613298740664/

[icelava]

Originally Posted by nuthead Consider using the extersion tube to reduce your min. distance.

would that not exacerbate my problem even more? wouldn't I have to step back even further with extension tubes?

[nuthead]

Originally Posted by icelava would that not exacerbate my problem even more? wouldn't I have to step back even further with extension tubes?

Nope, it reduce your min. focus distance. Take a look at my sample shot, I almost have to rest the lens very near to the lens cap

If you're using a tele-converter, than you'll have to step back as that did the opposite from the extension tube.