October 22, 2014, 11:09:39 PM

Author Topic: L lens vs Full Frame  (Read 9613 times)

IIIHobbs

  • Guest
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #30 on: April 30, 2012, 12:48:36 PM »
I agree, buy the best lens first (lenses stay, bodies change). If your 50D is working fine, stick with that, and add the 50L, it will be a very nice addition to your 50D. It provides a 80mm focal length on a crop body and the images are wonderful. I used a 50L for my 40D for shooting Basketball in place of my 70-200 f2.8 for low lighting situations and it performed very well.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 06:49:15 AM by IIIHobbs »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #30 on: April 30, 2012, 12:48:36 PM »

EOBeav

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 405
    • View Profile
    • My Landscape Photoblog
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #31 on: April 30, 2012, 01:51:59 PM »
But, I wouldn't call it an incremental upgrade, either - in the case of the 50L, it's just that the 'upgrade' you're getting isn't something that is readily measured in a test and plotted on a graph, you're paying for the smooth, creamy bokeh that the 50/1.4 just cannot deliver.

I suppose if you make your living shooting wide open, and you need that creamy bokeh, then it probably makes sense to go with the 50mm f/1.2 at 3x the price of the 50mm f/1.4. But for the rest of us, that extra money could be better used elsewhere.  By all accounts, the 50mm f/1.4 is actually the sharper lens after about f/2.8. If that's where you shoot, and don't go for the wide open apertures, well it's your money.
In landscape photography, when you shoot is more important than where.

Gear: Canon 5DmkII, 17-40mm f/4 L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-200mm f/4.

ecka

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 663
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #32 on: April 30, 2012, 02:35:34 PM »
But, I wouldn't call it an incremental upgrade, either - in the case of the 50L, it's just that the 'upgrade' you're getting isn't something that is readily measured in a test and plotted on a graph, you're paying for the smooth, creamy bokeh that the 50/1.4 just cannot deliver.

I suppose if you make your living shooting wide open, and you need that creamy bokeh, then it probably makes sense to go with the 50mm f/1.2 at 3x the price of the 50mm f/1.4. But for the rest of us, that extra money could be better used elsewhere.  By all accounts, the 50mm f/1.4 is actually the sharper lens after about f/2.8. If that's where you shoot, and don't go for the wide open apertures, well it's your money.

And if you don't make your living shooting wide open, but you still need/want that creamy bokeh, then it makes more sense to go with the Sigma 50/1.4. I tried comparing some images from the 7D+Sigma50/1.4 (that I used to have) and 5D2+85/1.8 and I can't decide which combo produces cremier background blur ... probably Sigma, but 85/1.8 is sharper :).
FF + primes !


EOBeav

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 405
    • View Profile
    • My Landscape Photoblog
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #34 on: April 30, 2012, 04:24:31 PM »
And if you don't make your living shooting wide open, but you still need/want that creamy bokeh, then it makes more sense to go with the Sigma 50/1.4. I tried comparing some images from the 7D+Sigma50/1.4 (that I used to have) and 5D2+85/1.8 and I can't decide which combo produces cremier background blur ... probably Sigma, but 85/1.8 is sharper :).

I guess I'd need to see the difference between the Sigma 50/1.4 and the Canon 40/1.4 to make that call. I seem to spend a lot of time defending the 50/1.4. It's a great lens!
In landscape photography, when you shoot is more important than where.

Gear: Canon 5DmkII, 17-40mm f/4 L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-200mm f/4.

skozachuk

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 23
  • www.serhiykozachuk.org.ua
    • View Profile
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #35 on: May 01, 2012, 07:12:19 AM »
Thank you everyone for your help, seems like both ways are ok, so I'll try to make decision that fits best for me (:

Thanks again! You're great!

TexPhoto

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 951
    • View Profile
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #36 on: May 01, 2012, 08:49:55 AM »
I'd say 5DII, and then try to pick up a 24-105 when you can.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #36 on: May 01, 2012, 08:49:55 AM »

Neeneko

  • Guest
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #37 on: May 02, 2012, 08:52:32 AM »
I guess I'd need to see the difference between the Sigma 50/1.4 and the Canon 40/1.4 to make that call. I seem to spend a lot of time defending the 50/1.4. It's a great lens!

Yeah, but it is inexpensive and is missing that red ring, so it gets bashed a lot, thus it is worth defending.  For every photographer that is actually using the improved capabilities of the f1.2, there are probably at least a dozen who buy it more for social or image reasons.

EOBeav

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 405
    • View Profile
    • My Landscape Photoblog
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #38 on: May 02, 2012, 10:12:46 AM »
Yeah, but it is inexpensive and is missing that red ring, so it gets bashed a lot, thus it is worth defending.  For every photographer that is actually using the improved capabilities of the f1.2, there are probably at least a dozen who buy it more for social or image reasons.

+1

Or, who like to talk about how great their gear is, instead of just getting out and shooting.
In landscape photography, when you shoot is more important than where.

Gear: Canon 5DmkII, 17-40mm f/4 L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-200mm f/4.

dericcainphoto

  • Guest
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #39 on: May 02, 2012, 11:32:27 AM »
Go FF! I went from a 50D to a 7D and now the 5D Mark III and I will never go back crop. The image quality is a huge difference and I love my 50mm 1.4 on the 5D. It is very sharp! Go FF, you won't regret it!

cezargalang

  • Guest
Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #40 on: May 02, 2012, 12:48:55 PM »
Hi there! Just to share my thoughts:

I had a 500D a few years back(About 2009?), Went through a 7D(My sister's) and just bought a 5d2. On the time i was with a crop, i only had Non L Lenses to work with, 18-55,55-250, and a 50, then upgraded to a 70-200L II, then had the 7D. I was deciding on this also because i think that the 7D really suited the part of me that wanted to get fast action. But my heart still was on landscaping.

So i bought a 5d2 + a 17-40L( So now i have a 5D2, 17-40L, 50 1.8, and a 70-200L II, and a 7D that i can burrow anytime.) As a Amateur switching from crop to FF, I was shocked out of the very first snap i took out of the 5d2 with a 50mm 1.8, and i was at a loss for words. After that I've only been shooting with my 50 and 17-40 for landscapes. My 70-200 was ignored for a while. I love the 50 on the 5D. I've learned to love the nifty fifty more now than when i had a crop body. I haven't tried a 50 1.4 (But im very excited to, alot of people are defending it), but the 50 1.8 is just splendid.

Just experience from an amateur :) hope i helped. Good luck on your purchase!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: L lens vs Full Frame
« Reply #40 on: May 02, 2012, 12:48:55 PM »