Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 - for fish pics?

[Treg]

I've had my D Rebel for almost 2 years now and have been using the kit lens since. I would like to get something faster for shooting Fish pics.

The EF 50mm f/1.8 seems to get decent comments when ever it is mentioned, would it be good lens specifically for shooting fish?

 

[Blazer88]

It is a good lens for shooting fish. I generally use my 100mm F/2.8 but the 50mm focal length is good for getting the whole fish. And the F/1.8 is plenty fast to stop any motion. My only complaint is the focus is a bit slow (no USM) and sounds like a lawnmower Still really tough to beat considering the price of the 50mm.

 

[opie]

Yeah $70 just can't be beat.
I was offered a steal on a 50/1.4 otherwise I'd still have mine.

 

[Treg]

Blazer88,
Other than width, How does the 50mm compare to the 100mm macro? For fish pics.

opie,
Is the USM and better build on the 50mm F 1.4 worth the upgrade for retail price?


I'm not sure exactly what I need... More speed and shapness is what I think I need. My pics dont look to bad with the kit lens, just not great... I'm up for suggestions.

 

[Blazer88]

I still use my 100mm for 90% of my reef shots. And when it comes to shooting fish w/out the 100mm, I generally use my Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 as I rarely need anything larger than F/2.8 and I like the faster focusing of the Sigma over the 50mm prime. I don't mine shooting at ISO 800 as Neat Image does a fantasic job of removing ISO noise. Here are a few different examples with the focal lengths:

100mm F/2.8 (shot at ISO 800, generally around F/3.2)

Shot at 50mm with my Sigma (~F/3.2 or F/4)

 

[jeffbrig]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8831362#post8831362 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Blazer88
I still use my 100mm for 90% of my reef shots. And when it comes to shooting fish w/out the 100mm, I generally use my Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 as I rarely need anything larger than F/2.8 and I like the faster focusing of the Sigma over the 50mm prime.

Same here, 100mm almost exclusively when shooting in the tank. Other times, I like to use my 70-200 F/4, as I feel it has even better color reproduction. I use my 50mm prime for indoor low-light shooting, but generally not anywhere near the aquarium.

I don't mine shooting at ISO 800 as Neat Image does a fantasic job of removing ISO noise.

Agreed...Neat Image is awesome.

 

[perpetual98]

Zoinks. I just downloaded the demo of Neat Image. What settings do you guys usually use for that program? It seems like it either cleans up all the noise and therefore makes the image really "cloudy" or it doesn't do much at all. Maybe I just need to play with it some more.

 

[jeffbrig]

Nothing too fancy....the auto fix is usually quite good, occasionally I play around with the sliders to tweak.

 

[Treg]

I grabbed a 50mm F/1.8 at Cord Camera tonight.

By the time I made it home, I only had a few minutes to play with it before the lights went out. Its ok.
From what I can tell from the few pics I took at the store then again when I got home, I personally dont have any problems with the motor noise or focus speed.
Maybe its because I have been using the kit lens for so long...

However when shooting the fish I did find the focus distance to be somewhat of a pain. I had to keep backing myself up.

They didn't have the Canon 100mm Macro but they did have the Canon 60mm and Sigma 50mm macro lenses. I might go back and play around with them.

What do you guys think? Improvement?

Kit Lens:

New 50mm F/1.8

 

[opie]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8840043#post8840043 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Treg
I grabbed a 50mm F/1.8 at Cord Camera tonight.

By the time I made it home, I only had a few minutes to play with it before the lights went out. Its ok.
From what I can tell from the few pics I took at the store then again when I got home, I personally dont have any problems with the motor noise or focus speed.
Maybe its because I have been using the kit lens for so long...

However when shooting the fish I did find the focus distance to be somewhat of a pain. I had to keep backing myself up.

They didn't have the Canon 100mm Macro but they did have the Canon 60mm and Sigma 50mm macro lenses. I might go back and play around with them.

What do you guys think? Improvement?

I dont know about you but I see a definate improvement in the shot.
I really do not think the 50/1.4 justifies its price differential over the 50/1.8 - but I think it is more of the fact that the 50/1.8 is just so good at any price that the fact that it's ~$70 just makes it even sweeter. The USM in the 50 is NOT the ring USM found in other Canon premium lenses - this one is not as fast and it "grindier" if that qualifies it.

I think you will have fun with that lens - I found it taught me a lot about foot-zooming .

Cheers and happy shooting!

 

[bamann345]

I too think the 50mm is better than the kit lens. I got the 50mm and didnt like it a lot until I figured out that at 1.8, you dont have a lot of depth in the shots. If you stop the 50mm down a little, it become just as good as a lot of expenseive pieces of glass.

I think you might find the 50mm macro a little limiting with your reef tank. I have the 100mm canon macro and I love it. The barrel doesnt extend while focusing, so you can get right up next to the glass (sometimes I even rest the lens hood on the glass).

Here are some reviews of different macros, and you can see how far some extends while focusing.

Canon 50.
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_50_25/index.htm

Canon 60
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_60_28/index.htm

Canon 100
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_50_28/index.htm

Canon 180L
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_180_35/index.htm

Sigma 50
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_50_28/index.htm

Sigma 100
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_105_28/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_50_28/index.htm


But you have the right idea on trying out the lens you want to get. See if you could leave a credit card number or rent the glass to see how it does with your tank.

HTH,

William

 

[Treg]

Thanks Opie!

I really do not think the 50/1.4 justifies its price differential over the 50/1.8 - but I think it is more of the fact that the 50/1.8 is just so good at any price

The guy at Cord Camera said the same thing.




bamann345, Great post. I will read them all.

 

[BlueCorn]

The only complaint that I've heard about the 1.8 is that it's build quality isn't very good (for the price it'd be a surprise if it were). As long as you take care of it, it'll serve you well.

 

[jeffbrig]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8842431#post8842431 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by beerguy
The only complaint that I've heard about the 1.8 is that it's build quality isn't very good

It really isn't very good. The lens mount is literally made out of plastic, and the focus ring is tiny. Because it's not USM, you can't adjust focus manually unless you switch to full MF. The other complaint you'll hear is the 5 blade aperture - out of focus points of light take on a rough pentagon shape, esp. at narrow apertures.

Still, great optics, especially considering the price. They HAD to cut corners somewhere. I've occasionally debated trading up to a 1.4 for the improved build quality, USM, and 7 blade aperture, but there are other things I'd rather spend the money on first.

 

[Treg]

Like the other issues, The build quality doesnt really bother me at all.
I usually try to baby all of my equipment. That is something I am somewhat anal about.

#1 I paid $79 for it.
#2 Again, I've been using the kit lens for 2 years... Not really much difference. Both are plastic.

When I pay $500 for a lens, I would expect it to feel better.
For now, I'm happy with what I got considering what I spent (Or didn't spend!). :lol:

Anyone else have fish pics with their 50mms?

 

[opie]

I'll take some pics of my powder blue tonight with my 50/1.4

Just so you know, stopped down beyond f/4 - f/8 the two lenses are almost identical.

 

[Treg]

I'm shooting at F/2.8 right now. I'm going to go try some at 4.0

 

[jeffbrig]

I dog around and found a handful of fish shots that were taken with my 50mm. The QT was dimly lit, so these are wide open at f/1.8.

And this one was in the main tank, but I still had the aperture at 1.8:

All of these are from the first day I had the lens. I don't think I've used it on the fish tank since.