I have a 28-75 Do I need a 50mm 1.4?

[nasriaz]

Please excuse my ignorance but why would I need a 50mm 1.4 if I already have a Tamron 28-75? please give me a brief understanding on what benefits the 50 would provide when I can already obtain that focal length with my other lens.
Thanks,

P.S I promise to get better and not ask so many nieve questions. :D

[elTwitcho]

Higher shutter speeds in low light, shallow depth of field.

It's up to you whether that warrants a new lense or not

[nasriaz]

Higher shutter speeds in low light, shallow depth of field.

It's up to you whether that warrants a new lense or not

So basically I can omit the 50mm if I use a flash or studio lighting with the Tamron?

[jfrancho]

You should look for some basic info on getting a proper exposure. Once you understand the relationship between aperture, shutter speed, and ISO, you'll see the value that a faster prime offers. Whether or not you need that lens, depends on what, how, and where you shoot. Another characteristic of a fast lens is the brighter view it provides when looking through the viewfinder.

[picture-this]

You tell me, do you need 4 times as much light flow? Will the distances of the things you will be shooting and the resulting dof be a good or a bad thing for ya?

I guess if your asking this question you don't know that last bit. I would buy a 50 1.8 @ 75 usd it's cheap to try it out, that should give ya a bit more of an idea.

[rabidcow]

Prime lenses (14mm, 24mm, 28mm, 50mm, 85mm....etc) are by far the best choice for color, contrast and sharpness. When it comes to studio work, I choose my 50mm for most shots, large families require the 28mm. My 24-70mmL is a great lens, don't get me wrong, but I really think that I get more color, contrast and sharpness out of my prime lenses. That being said, think about what you are going to use the 50mm for. If you do not need a very sturdy build,don't care about USM, and if you are not concerned with bokeh (if you will be shooting at higher f/ in studio than this is not really an issue) then you might consider the 50mm 1.8 Mk II. (or if you are lucky and find the 1.8 "Mk I" version then grab it!!)

[ed rader]

Please excuse my ignorance but why would I need a 50mm 1.4 if I already have a Tamron 28-75? please give me a brief understanding on what benefits the 50 would provide when I can already obtain that focal length with my other lens.
Thanks,

P.S I promise to get better and not ask so many nieve questions. :D

i have both lenses. when i bought my tamron i sold my 50 1.8 m1.

big mistake...i do a lot of animal pictures indoors and 2.8 is usually too slow and flash is too disruptive.

i ended up buying the 50 1.4 which is fast and about the perfect length.

for outdoor portraits i normally use the tamron or my canon 70-200 f4.

i think it's good to have at least one fast prime in whatever length works best for you.

ed rader

[NBEast]

The Tamron compares favorably against the 50mm f1.8. I have both (and a 50mm f1.4 as of last week).

Why do I have both?
- Well, I got the 50 f1.8 first (before the Tamron) and kept it because shooting with a prime is a different experience.
- offers greater DOF for creativity.
- It's also a lot lighter, smaller, and more subtle looking.
- Not deciding on a zoom length is a nice relief and allows more focusing on photography.
- Not switching focal lengths for a few hours is a little like not switching pool queues mid game.

Now; the 50 f1.4 is completly different from the Tamron at 50mm. The extra DOF possibilities, and more importantly, how nice (even beautiful) the bokeh (blur) looks compared with the very average bokeh on the Tamron.

[jjonsalt]

I have the 24-70L and the 50mm f/1.4 and I assure you that if you do a fair amount of photography that there will be times the 50mm will be just what you want/need.

[nasriaz]

Awesome! Thank you guys for making me realize a lot of the differences. I will definetly get the 50mm as it sounds like the perfect fit for a lot of the photographs I will be shooting. I just thought I could get away with using the Sigma ef-500 but there was apparently a lot more that I failed to realize.
I have some decisions to make now, nifty 50 or a wide angle. From what I read here, I'd say the Tokina looks like a prime canidate for a wide under $500.

Once again, I appreciate the help. Just so that you guys know, I am not here as a noob taking all the info and giving nothing back in return. I made a donation after my second post as I really want this forum to stick around. I know it's not a big deal but just wanted to play my part. http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y294/nasriaz/Smilied/clap.gif