Lens advice

E

Elizabethchallis

Messages
13
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello everyone. I need to purchase a prime lens for very low light situations, concerts, parties etc. I was going to get a Nikon f1.4 but camer shop advised that the sigma 50mm 1.4 ex dg hsm for nikon would be better.

I have a Nikon D7000

Thanks.
 
I suppose the first thing you should ask yourself is.... Am I happy with the 50mm focal length?

If you are then the Siggy 50mm f1.4 is a lovely thing but if you want something wider perhaps you could look at a f1.4 around the 30mm or so focal length?
 
The Sigma is certainly more expensive, whether it's better is a moot point. And you need to be comfortable with the focal length, despite most people on here seemingly saying that 50mm is an essential lens to have, when I started a thread about it a few weeks back, you'd be surprised how many people in reality didn't like the focal length, especially on a dx format camera. Incidentally, I bought the Nikon 50mm 1.4g for use on fx, not used it much yet though.
 
Well before buying anything, what have you currently got? Have you had any experience shooting with a prime before?

Not questioning your abilities or experience before but what if its not the right lens for you?
 
Thanks for advice. I have not used a prime on an slr before but am going to want to use it for local gigs where I like to get in a little bit closer that if I had something like a 35mm. I dont have heaps to spend and my local camera shop have the sigma in store 2nd hand be in excellent condition for £290 which I thought was good considering its a Sigma. Its a question of the best and most versatile lens I can get for the price I can more or less afford.
 
Elizabethchallis said:
Hello everyone. I need to purchase a prime lens for very low light situations, concerts, parties etc. I was going to get a Nikon f1.4 but camer shop advised that the sigma 50mm 1.4 ex dg hsm for nikon would be better.

I have a Nikon D7000

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Why go for a prime lens would be my first question, you are restricting yourself to distance. if the light is that bad you would need a flashgun anyway.

Take a look at the Nikon 24-70mm f 2.8 lens , gives more flexabilityl

If thats a bit too much at £1200 then the Nikon AF 24-85mm f/2.8-4 at £500

I have the Nikon 50 mm f1.4G lens and the only reason I can think of why the shop person recommended the Sigma version over it is because he gets more commission/profit.

Yep just checked it out

Sigma version £350
Nikon version as mine £272

Thats on http://camerapricebuster.com/
 
Last edited:
Rebel t3i said:
I quick google shows the nikon to be better and cheaper that the sigma
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/nikon/af-s-50mm-f1-4g-75516/show.html
Click to expand...

I think it depends which review you read.

Several seem to be saying that the Siggy is the best mass market 50mm f1.4 you can buy but I suppose it depends what you want. The Siggy is designed for maximum centre sharpness at wide apertures whilst others are designed more for sharpness across the frame at smaller apertures. You can't have everything and must pick what you want.

Personally I wanted a good lens at wide apertures that gives good bokeh and so I have the Sigma and it really is a good lens IMVHO.
 
realspeed said:
Why go for a prime lens would be my first question, you are restricting yourself to distance. if the light is that bad you would need a flashgun anyway.

Take a look at the Nikon 24-70mm f 2.8 lens , gives more flexabilityl

If thats a bit too much at £1200 then the Nikon AF 24-85mm f/2.8-4 at £500

I have the Nikon 50 mm f1.4G lens and the only reason I can think of why the shop person recommended the Sigma version over it is because he gets more commission/profit.

Yep just checked it out

Sigma version £350
Nikon version as mine £272

Thats on http://camerapricebuster.com/
Click to expand...
 
ahhhh yes £1200 at tad too much LOL.... crikey i wish I earned that in a month LOL...... the siggy I have seen in a 2nd hand one from local camera shop and its £290 and so more or less same price as the new Nikon. I was after a prime to get the speed really and I think...unless Im wrong that a 1.4 is pretty quick
 
woof woof said:
I think it depends which review you read.

Several seem to be saying that the Siggy is the best mass market 50mm f1.4 you can buy but I suppose it depends what you want. The Siggy is designed for maximum centre sharpness at wide apertures whilst others are designed more for sharpness across the frame at smaller apertures. You can't have everything and must pick what you want.

Personally I wanted a good lens at wide apertures that gives good bokeh and so I have the Sigma and it really is a good lens IMVHO.
Click to expand...



Hummm yes I guess its down to personal pref in the end. I might rent one of each for a weekend and see what I like better.
 
Elizabethchallis said:
ahhhh yes £1200 at tad too much LOL.... crikey i wish I earned that in a month LOL...... the siggy I have seen in a 2nd hand one from local camera shop and its £290 and so more or less same price as the new Nikon. I was after a prime to get the speed really and I think...unless Im wrong that a 1.4 is pretty quick
Click to expand...
When people are talking about fast prime lenses you know they are not referring to the speed it focuses and shoots right? Its referring to the fast shutter speeds you can achieve.

Shooting at apertures like f1.4 its incredible difficult to get a accurate focus of a subjects face and eyes, add to this low light and a moving subject on stage its mission impossible (for me it would be anyway). You will probably find yourself stopping down to f2.8 or something anyway. Maybe selling your kit lens and purchasing a tamron 17-50 f2.8 would be a more flexible choice. I sold my 50mm after getting the Tamron as it was so sharp.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I think it depends which review you read.

Several seem to be saying that the Siggy is the best mass market 50mm f1.4 you can buy but I suppose it depends what you want. The Siggy is designed for maximum centre sharpness at wide apertures whilst others are designed more for sharpness across the frame at smaller apertures. You can't have everything and must pick what you want.

Personally I wanted a good lens at wide apertures that gives good bokeh and so I have the Sigma and it really is a good lens IMVHO.
Click to expand...
I have both the sigma 30mm and 50mm f 1.4, the nikon would be of no use to me as I am a member of the canon club lol
 
rjbell said:
When people are talking about fast prime lenses you know they are not referring to the speed it focuses and shoots right? Its referring to the fast shutter speeds you can achieve.

Shooting at apertures like f1.4 its incredible difficult to get a accurate focus of a subjects face and eyes, add to this low light and a moving subject on stage its mission impossible (for me it would be anyway). You will probably find yourself stopping down to f2.8 or something anyway. Maybe selling your kit lens and purchasing a tamron 17-50 f2.8 would be a more flexible choice. I sold my 50mm after getting the Tamron as it was so sharp.
Click to expand...


NOT being funny... but of course I know is about shutter speed.. tssst!!!!!
I had thought about a tamron too
 
rjbell said:
Shooting at apertures like f1.4 its incredible difficult to get a accurate focus of a subjects face and eyes, add to this low light and a moving subject on stage its mission impossible...
Click to expand...

It's true that depth of field will be shallow at f1.4 if the camera is close to the subject but as distance increases so does the depth of field.

DoF tables will tell you that on APS-C at 20ft you'll get about 3ft of DoF, at 30ft you'll get about 6ft and once you get to 50ft from the subject DoF will be over 15ft and pre focusing or zone focusing will be possible somewhere along that distance scale. So, depending on camera to subject distance f1.4 might not be as impossible to use as some might think.

PS. Plus of course a wide aperture... as you know... will give you the option of using different shutter speed and ISO combinations.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
It's true that depth of field will be shallow at f1.4 if the camera is close to the subject but as distance increases so does the depth of field.

DoF tables will tell you that on APS-C at 20ft you'll get about 3ft of DoF, at 30ft you'll get about 6ft and once you get to 50ft from the subject DoF will be over 15ft and pre focusing or zone focusing will be possible somewhere along that distance scale. So, depending on camera to subject distance f1.4 might not be as impossible to use as some might think.

PS. Plus of course a wide aperture... as you know... will give you the option of using different shutter speed and ISO combinations.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this. Very helpful. Im now using a Nikon D7000 which I love :-) I think I have more or less made up my mind now. I have a couple of gigs to photograph soon which am using for practice and not being paid for.

I am also going to photograph a party in a hotel soon (I dont have a separate flash but was thinking I might try to get a small defuser for the cameras own flash or make my own ... im very inventive)

I terms of landscape, I dont do too much of that nowadays and if I do I tend to use a point of focus and kind of make a feature of it. To be honest, some of the best landscape shots I have taken in the past have been on my Lumix LX3 which might sound funny as its not a dslr but the sensor is awsome and it has a leica lens which is around 2.8. Pin sharp and I love it.

SO, given that I have considered all my options, I think I will being going for a 50mm 1.8 since it sounds like I shall be able to go down very low, get in quite tight where necessary and get good facial focus front to back.

Only decision now is...... Tamron, Sigma or Nikon :bonk:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top