Ive read the reviews, but I would love some opinions:
Amongst other interests, I produce Off-Off-Broadway theater in New York City. For important publicity shots, I usually bring in a pro, or at least a semi-pro photographer. But I can't afford to pay someone to shoot every rehearsal and staged reading, so I've decided to invest in the equipment to take at least passable photos on my own.
I presently have a T3i/600D with just the 18-135mm kit lens. I have shot a few rehearsals and performances with this lens, and this has confirmed my prior guesses that (a) I will need brighter lens(es) to shoot what I want to shoot, and (b) a 50mm prime is probably a good focal length for me to start with -- the stuff I produce generally performs on small, intimate stages, so the distances I need to shoot at are usually not very long and actors look good when shot at this length.
I was going to just get the 50mm f/1.8. It's cheap, and I'm sure it will serve my needs well enough. I can presently get one of these for $115 new, or as cheap as $75, gently used. However, I've also noticed that B&H is also selling the Canon 50mm f/1.4, very good condition used, for about $290, which seems like a very good price.
So Im wondering if I should consider upgrading my purchase to the f/1.4. From the reviews I have read, the technical differences in image quality are not likely to be significant to me for the kind of shooting I want to do (Ill probably be shooting mostly in the f2.0 2.8 range; it is unlikely I will actually want to shoot wider than this). But the somewhat quieter, faster focus of the f/1.4 would definitely be useful, and a lot of reviewers consider the manual focus ring and FTM focus of the f/1.4 to be substantially superior (I do find myself focusing manually at times). While not a must-have, smoother bokeh might be useful too, as I may want to use wider aperture to blur out a distracting background, especially when shooting rehearsals.
$290 is definitely within my budget; spending more money on the 50mm just means I wont be able to afford another lens, like a 28mm or an 85mm prime as a complement, quite as soon (or whatever other gizmo ends up next on my list).
So you know what they say about opinions. Love to hear yours!
Amongst other interests, I produce Off-Off-Broadway theater in New York City. For important publicity shots, I usually bring in a pro, or at least a semi-pro photographer. But I can't afford to pay someone to shoot every rehearsal and staged reading, so I've decided to invest in the equipment to take at least passable photos on my own.
I presently have a T3i/600D with just the 18-135mm kit lens. I have shot a few rehearsals and performances with this lens, and this has confirmed my prior guesses that (a) I will need brighter lens(es) to shoot what I want to shoot, and (b) a 50mm prime is probably a good focal length for me to start with -- the stuff I produce generally performs on small, intimate stages, so the distances I need to shoot at are usually not very long and actors look good when shot at this length.
I was going to just get the 50mm f/1.8. It's cheap, and I'm sure it will serve my needs well enough. I can presently get one of these for $115 new, or as cheap as $75, gently used. However, I've also noticed that B&H is also selling the Canon 50mm f/1.4, very good condition used, for about $290, which seems like a very good price.
So Im wondering if I should consider upgrading my purchase to the f/1.4. From the reviews I have read, the technical differences in image quality are not likely to be significant to me for the kind of shooting I want to do (Ill probably be shooting mostly in the f2.0 2.8 range; it is unlikely I will actually want to shoot wider than this). But the somewhat quieter, faster focus of the f/1.4 would definitely be useful, and a lot of reviewers consider the manual focus ring and FTM focus of the f/1.4 to be substantially superior (I do find myself focusing manually at times). While not a must-have, smoother bokeh might be useful too, as I may want to use wider aperture to blur out a distracting background, especially when shooting rehearsals.
$290 is definitely within my budget; spending more money on the 50mm just means I wont be able to afford another lens, like a 28mm or an 85mm prime as a complement, quite as soon (or whatever other gizmo ends up next on my list).
So you know what they say about opinions. Love to hear yours!
