131–140 of 167 posts
Of course a good photographer will tell you great photographs have little to do with the camera/lens and everything to do with lighting, framing, subject etc but still...
I have an older Canon AE-1 that I picked up a 50mm however and it's my favourite "go outside and shoot" lenses. Beyond the benefits that the article is citing, it's missing one of the greatest advantages of these lower focal length lenses is being able to have the lens not extend too far from your body. It's a bit dramatic - but you're kind of part of the action instead of a million miles away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other side, the neutral way, the 50 renders szenes is the appeal and the challenge for the photographer. A wide-angle or strong tele lens add a lot to the picture themselves, by their extreme angles of view. The 50 does nothing like that, puts all the burdon on to the photographer. Yet, a lot of the most iconic pictures have been taken by a 50.
I'm not sure I'd call using a 50 a burden on the photographer, I think they're probably a lot more intuitive for most photographers. A 50 was the first lens I bought during school, and it was widely regarded as the preferred lens for photography classes from beginner to advanced. I love the 50, I just personally don't have much use for one currently.
The Nifty Fifty is a forgotten lens? Since when? It's a classic, super cheap and usually very fast prime that's a recommended starter prime on every photography website I've ever visited.
Tell that to Fujifilm's X-Mount 33mm (APS-C so 50mm equiv.) haha -- but man its fantastic glass even if it is $1400 AUD
Though they have their 35mm WR lens thats a third the price, which is super cheap for the glass quality in my opinion. And you can always slap some older 35mm glass on it with adapters, if you don't mind giving up autofocus.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If pointing someone to a single "normal" lens as a prime, I'd point them to a 40mm, not a 50. The article does have a section on exactly the issue (FOV) you note - it identifies that the 50mm lens is not the same with modern cameras (which have smaller sensors than 35mm film cameras), and recommends a 35mm lens for these cameras. Personally, I have a 35mm prime lens and quite like it, and I think it did help me imp…
> it identifies that the 50mm lens is not the same with modern cameras (which have smaller sensors than 35mm film cameras), and recommends a 35mm lens for these cameras That's a different thing, which is about the "crop factor". Modern APS-C digital cameras have smaller sesnors, with a 1.5 crop factor and will need a 35mm lens to get 50mm angle of view. This is not needed for modern full-frame digital cameras, which…
But it's also incredibly expensive. Fantastic glass though, I've rented it a couple times for some shoots
The Nifty Fifty is a forgotten lens? Since when? It's a classic, super cheap and usually very fast prime that's a recommended starter prime on every photography website I've ever visited.
> It's a classic, super cheap Tell that to Fujifilm's X-Mount 33mm (APS-C so 50mm equiv.) haha -- but man its fantastic glass even if it is $1400 AUD Though they have their 35mm WR lens thats a third the price, which is super cheap for the glass quality in my opinion. And you can always slap some older 35mm glass on it with adapters, if you don't mind giving up autofocus.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 50mm is easy to manual focus It's not. Especially at f/1.4.
Have you ever used a manual focus lens on a mirrorless camera with focus-peaking[1] on? It's so easy to focus, it feels like cheating. It makes a 50mm usable wide open. (This is assuming your subject is relatively static or at least cooperative. Small children and animals really benefit from autofocus or a smaller aperture.) 1. For those unfamiliar with the term, focus peaking is a feature of most mirrorless cameras…
When you stop down, more of the frame is in focus - and focus peaking will tell you something is in focus, when it will not be in focus at your desired aperture.
One way to check if your camera behaves this way is to make the aperture smaller and smaller - does the live display darken significantly? If not, then your camera is not adjusting the aperture until you take the shot.
Of course, if using a fully manual lens, this is not an issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a Sigma 30mm 1.4 in Fuji X-Mount ( https://www.sigmaphoto.com/30mm-f1-4-dc-dn-c ), which is ~45mm full-frame equivalent (FFE), and it's one of the most cost-effective lenses in existence, given its quality relative to its price. The downside around the "perfect framing" is that focal length will change perspective: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photog... (take a head a shoulders portrai…
> Almost all professional photographers who need to get the shot have moved to zooms for good reason. Nitpick: I imagine you mean telephotos, not zooms.
> Many of the world’s most evocative and best-known images were made under natural light with fast lenses and film. Creating such images is nearly impossible with “slow” zoom lenses, which are harder to focus and inadequate for use indoors without flash. When I started doing photography 40 years ago, 400 ISO was considered crazy fast. I used Velvia 50 ASA most of the time for its amazing colors and depth. Nowadays wi…
I'm happy up to iso 32k/50k with my m10 monochrom