Tips on nifty fifty.

Like the cat image, Nick, and I've just had a look at your website.
Do you take in b& w or do it in edit. I often wonder if one way will produce better images than the other.
 
I always take in colour as if you take in b&w you can't add the colour back in lol, cheers for having a look at my site, still a work in progress at the moment! I think my 50mm is sharpest at about f2.2/f2.8 and the glass is better than in the kit lens so I can bump the iso up to 1600 in lower light on my 550D and get perfectly reasonable results!
 
ernesto said:
My only tip is don't called it a nifty fifty.

(realise that is something that bugs me more than it should and it is my problem :) )
Click to expand...

Hoo bloody ray. Seeing the words "nifty fifty" makes me cringe.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
Hoo bloody ray. Seeing the words "nifty fifty" makes me cringe.
Click to expand...

Very helpful. Therapy?
Ricardo I'm disappointed.All your fantastic bullfighting photos...unless you're a different Ricardo:)
What would you call this lens? Perhaps a new thread for what to call this lens. There's the Welsh version the " iffytytnif ".
Anyway...back on topic.
 
ab2012 said:
Very helpful. Therapy?
Ricardo I'm disappointed.All your fantastic bullfighting photos...unless you're a different Ricardo:)
What would you call this lens? Perhaps a new thread for what to call this lens. There's the Welsh version the " iffytytnif ".
Anyway...back on topic.
Click to expand...

Well, I have a Sigma 50mm f1.4. I refer to it as a 50mm.
 
Why is it "Nifty"... I have a 50mm, I don't know what's "Nifty" about it....
 
well it ryhmes with fifty so seems to please some. I wonder if they have ryhming names for all of their other lenses?
 
The only lens on my camera is 50mm 1.8 :) My flickr stream is probably a good place for anyone interested in the lens... not that I'm the best at taking photos but I try :) I find 50mm on a cropped sensor great.
 
Flirty thirty?

Plenty twenty?

'Anything ending in five' - alive?

Shorty forty?

Sexy sixty? Ok, that doesn't even rhyme but sounds just as cheesy :D
 
Pleased with first images, having received lens yesterday. Just tried it out.

IMG_2991-2.jpg
 
I have a 50/1.8, still do somewhere collecting dust.

It's just not sharp at f2.8 or below, it is slow and noisy, it has plastic mount so don't pick up your camera via the lens.

You can either go for bokeh shots at f1.8, or go for sharp shots at f8. On a crop it's a good cheap portrait lens.



Personally, I prefer 35mm f2, it's a fantastic lens and centre is pin sharp even wide open at f2. It's my go-to low light lens. It's complimented by 85mm f1.8 for portraits, which is also pin sharp wide open with butter smooth bokeh.

50mm just isn't for me, too narrow indoors and too wide out doors.
 
It doesn't look particularly sharp but its shot a iso 3200 and a slowish shutter speed of 1/80 so its hard to tell with this one shot.
 
rjbell said:
It doesn't look particularly sharp but its shot a iso 3200 and a slowish shutter speed of 1/80 so its hard to tell with this one shot.
Click to expand...
Looks sharpish to me. Not saying it's ultra sharp but seems to show off the qualities of the NF. Nice bokeh and sharpish image.
( Then again, perhaps I haven't a clue what I'm doing)
 
Last edited:
Try shooting outside at iso 100 and a faster shutter will give you a better indication.
 
ab2012 said:
Scenario : aim to take a sharp portrait indoors, dimly-lit room, nice bokeh. Any tips? Apologies for asking perhaps silly questions. No accessories.Just my 50D and nifty.
Click to expand...

You bought it for 1.8 so get it on 1.8, get the iso right so you're achieving around 1/100th..

Some shots of mine on a lesser camera than yours + 50/1.8


Cold Ella by ^Joe, on Flickr


Marc1 by ^Joe, on Flickr


Happy Bench by ^Joe, on Flickr
 
If you buy a lens such as the 50mm f1.8 for it's low light abilities but you have to step it down to say f4 to get sharp images then surely that defeats the purpose? :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the tips.Nice shots, Joe.
Neil, I respect your greater knowledge. I'm a relative beginner so don't really understand.
So do most feel mine is not a sharp photo. I suppose it isn't really :(
Now is where I need to stay patient :)
 
ab2012 said:
Thanks for the tips.Nice shots, Joe.
Neil, I respect your greater knowledge. I'm a relative beginner so don't really understand.
So do most feel mine is not a sharp photo. I suppose it isn't really :(
Now is where I need to stay patient :)
Click to expand...

I think the NF is a sharp lens. even at 1.8. It's £80, :LOL:

Get yourself a family member / friend. Take them outside, iso100-200 and see how you get on.

Use Av for ease of use.
 
Jackwow said:
If you buy a lens such as the 50mm f1.8 for it's low light abilities but you have to step it down to say f4 to get sharp images then surely that defeats the purpose? :shrug:
Click to expand...

It would if that were the case but I happily used mine at f1.8. It may not have been as good as it was as f4 (I don't know I didn't test it) but it was good enough for me which is all that matters and it allowed me to get shots in low light or with low DoF that would not be possible on a lens with f4 minimum for example.
 
Jackwow said:
If you buy a lens such as the 50mm f1.8 for it's low light abilities but you have to step it down to say f4 to get sharp images then surely that defeats the purpose? :shrug:
Click to expand...

I've been using this lens for a few months and it's perfectly sharp at f1.8, in fact as cliched as it may be I've rarely strayed from that aperture, extreme DOF and all.

I'm sure it's sharper at f4 - as most lenses improve a few stops down - but there's nothing at all wrong with its performance wide open, and its capable of great things at that setting.

To the OP, my only tip with this lens is don't get hung up on everyone else's opinion - a lot of people look down on it because of the price and the plastic build (mostly the price), and others get upset that on a crop body (where it normally ends up) it's not the standard lens it was originally designed to be. The thing is, so what - for £80 what you're actually getting is a very sharp, very fast lens which makes an excellent portrait lens on a crop body, and as an affordable entry into the world of prime lenses it can teach you an awful lot about composition too, by forcing you to move around to frame your shot rather than simply twitch a zoom ring. I say everyone should have one, and I think most of us who have owned and used it would probably say the same.
 
Petri said:
I've been using this lens for a few months and it's perfectly sharp at f1.8, in fact as cliched as it may be I've rarely strayed from that aperture, extreme DOF and all.

I'm sure it's sharper at f4 - as most lenses improve a few stops down - but there's nothing at all wrong with its performance wide open, and its capable of great things at that setting.

To the OP, my only tip with this lens is don't get hung up on everyone else's opinion - a lot of people look down on it because of the price and the plastic build (mostly the price), and others get upset that on a crop body (where it normally ends up) it's not the standard lens it was originally designed to be. The thing is, so what - for £80 what you're actually getting is a very sharp, very fast lens which makes an excellent portrait lens on a crop body, and as an affordable entry into the world of prime lenses it can teach you an awful lot about composition too, by forcing you to move around to frame your shot rather than simply twitch a zoom ring. I say everyone should have one, and I think most of us who have owned and used it would probably say the same.
Click to expand...
Yes.Appreciate your comments.Haven't taken any more since yesterday, but it's obviously a value for money lens.Can't argue with £80. A lot of good advice has been given. Not sure about the putting lens on camera though.What next? Take camera out of bag?;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top