Distroyed nifty fifty - What to buy?

Han5y

Han5y

Messages
60
Name
Hans
Edit My Images
No
545536_10151102897201083_768367358_n.jpg


My 5Dmk2 and my nifty fifty falled 6 inch and falled ontop of a shoe and the lens got broken in half, so i need a new lens.

Now i have:
- Canon 5Dmk2
- Canon 17-40F4L
- Canon 70-200F4L

I want a prime, so im unshure what i should get, so i have a couple of alternatives. I primary takes carshoots, and the 70-200 does a perfect job there, but i need a prime for low light situations and for "everyday"-use.

The alternatives:
- Canon 50mm 1.4 USM - Lot of these have AF problems
- Sigma 50mm 1.4 HSM - Again, some focusproblems
- Canon 85mm 1.8 USM - It could be to tight for my use, and i have the 70-200 to cover this area.
- Canon 35mm 2.0 - It could be to wide, and i have the 17-40 to cover it.
- Other?

So guys..please help me out here.
 
Looking on the bright side - and there's always a bright side - you are doubtless thankful that they didn't land 5DII downwards and $50 lens upwards.

I had a nifty mk1 (the metal one) and sold it to go to the Canon EF 50mm 1.4 and have to say that I've never had a focus issue with it (what focus issue?)


Your other lenses practically cover the shortage so from a lens length you don't actually NEED a 50mm. WANT/LUST/DESIRE ar a different issue.

Do you need AF? I ask because there's a whole world of cheap as chips (and some not so cheap) manual focus lenses which will do a beautiful job on your FF 5DII but you'll need an EBay special mount adapter. If you don't MF it's a cheap way to learn but if you need AF, as I sometimes do for street candids an MF lens isn't the right thing.

For me it's like this. I have the EF 50mm 1.4 and most of the time it sits on a Canon film camera. My 5DII usually has any one of six different 50mm MF lenses which cover a range of 1.2/1.4/1.7/1.8/2.0/2.8.

If I had to choose just one to take anywhere? It'd be the EF 1.4 for the convenience of AF when I need it.

If I had to choose one MF lens it'd be the 55mm FL 1.2 which I've had converted to EOS mount.

If I was mostly going to shoot static objects it'd be the 55mm 1.2

I don't think you'd be happy with either the 35mm or the 85mm primes as you've already got these lengths covered with fine lenses. The Sigma 50 is a big lump of glass compared to the nifty fifty you've just destroyed. I believe it to be a good lens but do you want a lightweight lens or do you want a good lens?
 
Last edited:
Han5y said:
Canon 50mm 1.4 USM - Lot of these have AF problems
Click to expand...

This is a case of "don't believe everything you read on the internet" ;)

The 50mm f/1.4 has a front element that protrudes a few mm as it's focused inwards. It's true that a heavy blow to this can damage the AF mechanism. It is a better lens than the f/1.8 with a more substantial build, but it's not an L and isn't designed to withstand rough treatment :nono:

I've owned a 50mm f/1.4 for four years and have been very happy with it. I'm sure you can find many other happy owners on these forums. Look after the lens and remember to set the focus ring to infinity just to be on the safe side before you pack it away, and it will serve you well.

If you want an alternative, how about the new 40mm f/2.8 pancake lens? It's as slim as they come, and has some very good reviews :)

A.
 
God kveld Hans

I'm a Nikon shooter so I guess I can't help too much. From the list you give I would go with the Canon 50 1.4.

If you have the money the Canon EF 50mm f1.2L USM would be ideal

Scott
 
tikkathreebarrel: Thanks for a good answer! I want a 50mm becouse i like the focallength and the fast apenture, i also want AF.
Maybe it is rumers that the 50s have some faults, and i guess as you said, that there are more satisfied customers then not satisfied ones.
The problem i have with the Canon 50 1.4 is that the buildquality isnt the best one, it is a lot better then the 1.8, but it isnt as rugged as the sigma. But the sigma is heavyer, higher buildquality, more weight (i dont care about the weight), and it is sharper.
I have to think...

Anorakus: You are totally correct, it could be rumors, or wrong use :) I have to deside what kind of lens i want. The pancake sound good, but it would redicules on a 5D :D

Digifrog: Thankyou :) The 50L would be perfect for me, but the wallet dont thinks it perfect :)
 
i would say claim insurance an get the same one
but there so cheap the exces might cost more that getting a new one
id say the usm version
 
Han5y said:
The problem i have with the Canon 50 1.4 is that the build quality isnt the best one, it is a lot better then the 1.8, but it isnt as rugged as the sigma. But the sigma is heavyer, higher buildquality, more weight (i dont care about the weight), and it is sharper.
I have to think...
Click to expand...

Yes, you have to think because and but.

Because other people's rumours (and I include my own) can mislead you very badly.

But, the world of 50mm lenses could take you a year to explore to the point of finding what suits you best.

I've never actually handled the sigma 50mm, the weight wouldn't bother me but I'd always be wondering about the Canon product.

The Canon 1.4 isn't built like our L lenses. Mine gets plenty of use, is silent in operation and has never caused me to follow rumours about build quality but - and here goes everything - I've never dropped a camera or a lens. And so tonight I'll be awoken by the sound of a shelf falling down with several cameras and L lenses in pieces on the floor.

Have you actually handled one or are you worried that you'll worry about the build quality?
 
Hi Han5y,
I too recently was deliberating between the canon and sigma 50mm 1.4 and the 85mm 1.8.

After lots of research i came to a similar conclusion that the Sigma had better build quality and was sharper than the canon, the more difficult choice was between the 85mm canon and the 50mm Sigma. I eventually settled on the sigma due to the slightly wider aperture and the fact that there was one for sale at my local camera shop for a decent price.

I use it on a 5d classic and a 40d and im very impressed with the results over my old nifty fifty.

I have now saved enough for the 85mm 1.8 so hopefully soon i shall be able to compare these two lenses side by side
 
I had the 50mm f1.4 and I used it on the 400D. It was awesome. I then sold it and it got lost in the post and man how I wish I still had it as it would have been awesome on the 5DM2. The 1.2 is just too expensive... and the 1.8 struggle to focus in low light. I was really surprised by the new 40mm f2.8 STM lens my friend got with his 650D. Its sharper than my 24-105mm f4.0. But then again the 50mm is like 30 pounds more than the 40mm

What I am looking to do is to get a 16-35 f2.8 as I rented the 17-40 on a trip and man what a nice range for walking about

Not much help but at least some feedback

LLS
 
The 85mm is a gorgeous portrait lens and though you have the focal length covered on the 70-200 F4 the 85mm F1.8 will give you better low light capabilities and gorgeous bokeh.
 
Han5y said:
tikkathreebarrel: But the sigma is heavyer, higher buildquality, more weight (i dont care about the weight), and it is sharper.
I have to think...
Click to expand...

Not sure if u have played around with the sigma or not and I loved the idea of it, the heavy duty build, hefty weight and huge size. I believed all the reviews that said its a great lens... Right up to the moment I played with 5 copies of the sigma yes that's right 5. And all of the were as bad as each other all miss focused, all we're slower than the canon 50 1.4 and all under exposed at 1.4 compared the the canon which performed superbly time after time and was sharp across the frame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top