50mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.8
- Thread starter Ah_K
- Start date
- Status
Indoor or outdoor and on what camera?
If it is a 1.6x crop camera then 85 will likely be too long for indoors.
I agree with Jedi, get both - I did....
If it is a 1.6x crop camera then 85 will likely be too long for indoors.
I agree with Jedi, get both - I did....
hmm... would like to use for indoors
so i guess 85mm is not the best choice for me then.
sadly only have budget for one of them.
so I have to choose
so i guess 85mm is not the best choice for me then.
sadly only have budget for one of them.
so I have to choose
Ah_K said:
Hi
Maybe I was not very clear. What I meant was that the 50mm f1.4 (about $600) is not worth the huge premium over its cheaper sibling, the 50mm f1.8 ($100+).
The 85mm is actually quite good for indoors, esp when you want to take candid shots of people, who tend to look away when they feel that a camera is being pointed at them. In fact, I think an even longer lens would be preferred, something like the 135 f2 L. Great for those indoor sniper shots, where you can shoot without people knowing from long range. :thumbsup:
You should seriously look at getting a used 85mm + a used 50mm f1.8. Will set you back about $600 for both. ie. $500 for the 85mm and $100 for the 50mm.
Hope this helps.
for my 50mm 1.8, it is usable for 4R prints at 1.8 wide open. 6R prob still can. but once stopped down to 2.8, it becomes very usable. at 3.5 is where the brilliance starts. at 5.6 on a 1.6x camera, the sharpness is quite amazing.
im not sure abt the 50mm 1.4 though. is it super sharp wide open at 1.4?
but if i were u, get the 85mm + 35mm f/2. both sharp wide open with stunning bokeh
im not sure abt the 50mm 1.4 though. is it super sharp wide open at 1.4?
but if i were u, get the 85mm + 35mm f/2. both sharp wide open with stunning bokeh
Both 85mm and 50mm are good to have.
If you can afford the 50mm f1.4 get it or you wanna save up and get later, otherwise 50mm f1.8 should be good enough.
For indoor, 50mm should be better as some indoor space doesn't allow us to move back enough.
F1.4 has better build, colour and bokeh as compared to F1.8. It depends how deep your wallet is, if you choose the F1.8, then don't look back, if you choose F1.4, you never need to look back.
If you can afford the 50mm f1.4 get it or you wanna save up and get later, otherwise 50mm f1.8 should be good enough.
For indoor, 50mm should be better as some indoor space doesn't allow us to move back enough.
F1.4 has better build, colour and bokeh as compared to F1.8. It depends how deep your wallet is, if you choose the F1.8, then don't look back, if you choose F1.4, you never need to look back.
What Light say is true about indoor not enough space.
But Snoweagle say 85mm is better :think:
this is really a tough choice:sweat:
ok.. how different is colour/contrast/build/bokeh between 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.8?
focus speed which is faster?
anyone who has both can shed some light on this?
But Snoweagle say 85mm is better :think:
this is really a tough choice:sweat:
ok.. how different is colour/contrast/build/bokeh between 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.8?
focus speed which is faster?
anyone who has both can shed some light on this?
Ah_K said:
I tried both and sold away 50/1.4 and kept 85/1.8. 85/1.8 focus much faster than 50/1.4, as 50/1.4 is not using ring USM. Sharp wise, 85/1.8 also wins hands down.
I think like someone else said, get 85/1.8 & 50/1.8, very good pair. If you have extra money, then replace 50/1.8 with 35/1.4. Currently, I am using combination of 85/1.8 & 35/1.4 on 1.6x DSLR, never miss 50mm lens at all.
85mm is most practical for portraits but 50mm can be used as well, except you just have to stand a bit nearer to your subject.
seems like I am leaning towards a 85mm now :bsmilie:
will get one when I am in HK... seems like the price is cheaper over there
will get one when I am in HK... seems like the price is cheaper over there
OT abit... do you guys have any idea if Sigma APO 70-300 4-5.6 DG Macro is any good?
I know not 'L' or 'EX' lens but image sharp anot for the above mentioned?
thinking of getting one too
or do you guys think I should just save up and get better lens instead
I know not 'L' or 'EX' lens but image sharp anot for the above mentioned?
thinking of getting one too
or do you guys think I should just save up and get better lens instead
Ah_K said:
This has more or less been discussed to death. The Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 DG Macro is a very good lens for it's price point. It gives sufficiently good quality images, though soft from 200-300mm. Had the non-DG version and I found it good.
It is a good lens to start with, it's cheap (~$320 new) and so your loss when you sell it won't be too big. You can look at B&S for one as well, though you've got to be careful, some crazies are selling the non-DG version for $300 (non-DG should only be $210-$230 IMO)!!! Spend $20 more, get the DG one and the warranty.
What's the difference between the DG and non-DG ones? Well, besides some additional coating for Digital (not much diff IMO), the DG one can be calibrated by Sigma electronically, otherwise you need to change the board, which costs in excess of $120 (this is true for the 70-200 f/2.8)
So should you get it? It really depends on you.
Are you infected by the upgrade bug (or buy buy buy virus as it's known here)? Do you take a lot of shot in low light without flash? Do you need to see the red ring round your lenses(though if you get the Sigma 18-200 DC, there is a red ring as well - haha!) etc etc.
If your budget is tight and if you need this range now, get it, use it and sell it off later (remember to keep the box - CSers [size=+1]LOVE[/size] the box - god knows what they do with the box, but no box, be prepared for lower prices - haha!).
- Status
Similar threads
