First pics with my 50MM 1.8

[BEEEsH]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v21/beeesh/Digital%20Rebel/IMG_2666.jpg



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v21/beeesh/Digital%20Rebel/IMG_2702.jpg



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v21/beeesh/Digital%20Rebel/IMG_2527.jpg

[goldstrikn]

Aesome sharpness, good bokeh, I love the cat one, I can almost hear him/her purrr. I will definately will buy a USM 50mm in my near future.

[BEEEsH]

Yeah lol. I call him "the big easy" because he is. He'll lounge around all day and try to sleep with anyone who is laying down. He's a big lug.


I took these with my 300D btw.

[cmM]

Nice cat shot!
You're lucky it was asleep :D

[kb244]

They're nice shots, but I think most of them are underexposed. Oh also you may notice that when you have that nifty 50 1.8, at f/3.5 (or is it 3.2) it reveals it's sharpest qualities.

[BEEEsH]

hmm

I'll have to test that out.

thanks for the advice.

[khtwo]

Nice shot. What's the nearest range for 50mm/f1.8?

[khtwo]

Ah, got it, Closest Focusing Distance (m): 0.45

[RAitch]

They're nice shots, but I think most of them are underexposed. Oh also you may notice that when you have that nifty 50 1.8, at f/3.5 (or is it 3.2) it reveals it's sharpest qualities.

I thought it was 2.8... or at least that's what I read elsewhere.

[OceanRider]

damb thats cats awesome, well done, what kind of lighting on him??

[mrclark321]

OK....Thats it...I'm going out tomorrow to buy a 50mm 1.8


***Nice pics, the cat is my fav. too***

Dan

[vinnyveez]

these shots would be better if there was a larger depth of field. j/k...I did the same thing when i got my lens yesterday, abused the hell out of the 1.8 aperture. Love the cat shot, the other sre nice too, as the show off the quality of teh lens, though the subject matter isn't the best.

[BEEEsH]

"what kind of lighting on him??"

To tell you the truth, i'm not too sure. The room was pretty dark, all we had were some potlights in the ceiling. He was on the couch.

[vinnyveez]

"what kind of lighting on him??"

To tell you the truth, i'm not too sure. The room was pretty dark, all we had were some potlights in the ceiling. He was on the couch.

dude are potlights illegal?

[BEEEsH]

pot lights?

are we thinking of the same thing?

My definition of potLight is a circle in the ceiling with a light in it.

not pot as in marajuana.lol.



If we are talking about the same thing, no potlights are not illegal.

[mr.photoguy]

They're nice shots, but I think most of them are underexposed. Oh also you may notice that when you have that nifty 50 1.8, at f/3.5 (or is it 3.2) it reveals it's sharpest qualities.
3.2, and your dead on.... I found this out after messing around for a few months.

---------------------------

Nice shots btw...
they look like f1.8's.

[vinnyveez]

3.2, and your dead on.... I found this out after messing around for a few months.

---------------------------

Nice shots btw...
they look like f1.8's.

how much bokeh is there at 3.2?

[roanjohn]

So now we know that you smell good and you own a cat........

..........and a proud owner of the nifty fifty.

Great shot on that cat..........not too sure about the 1st 2.

Experiment with this lens..........when I got it, I used to only shoot it at 1.8 :-)

Ro1

[*MOMOFAIRFORCEBRATS*]

dunno i am kinda partial to 2.5 i use it often and my images a tact sharp

[BEEEsH]

So can it be agreed upon that 3.2 is the best setting to have this lens on for sharpness?

[mrclark321]

How much did you pay for it and did you buy it in Canada?


Thanks Dan

[BEEEsH]

I originally ordered it from thecamerastore.com.
They're based in Calgary, and were pretty good for prices and support.
They responded to my orders and emails, communicated any delays or shipping questions.

I didn't get it from them because they didn't have any instock.

so i went to http://www.henrys.ca

They weren't very communicative, but I got the order within a week or so. (Henry's is very trustable and official. no shady business) After tax and shipping and everything, I spent 146$ canadian. It ended up being cheaper by three dollars from camerastore.com.

Go with Henry's. Just because you can return it in store, which will save you on shipping it back to them. (assuming your not happy)

[byso]

I just got my 1.8 last week and i've been doing all my photos at 1.8....(because I can) but I will try the other settings now.

Also is it true that the 1.8f is multiplied by 1.6 for the digital camera which would make it 2.9f ?

[smittymike19]

I just got my 1.8 last week and i've been doing all my photos at 1.8....(because I can) but I will try the other settings now.

Also is it true that the 1.8f is multiplied by 1.6 for the digital camera which would make it 2.9f ?
i dont think you multiply the aperture value, just the length. i may be wrong. So in the case of the 50mm/1.8 it is actually an 80mm lens, but teh aperture remains the same.. i may be wrong though....

[alinsyed]

Aperture is not multiplied.

I got my nifty fifty today as well. Brilliant. This is my first lens purchase since buying the 300D with the kit lens and I especially like the ability to take pictures indoors in pretty ordinary light without flash.

Nice pictures btw.

Best,

[BEEEsH]

^^ the exact reason i got it. Indoor portraits without a flash. :D

[guitarman3]

Great pics! What should I expect to pay for the 50mm 1.8 lens in a camera store? Thanks

[jfrancho]

I just got my 1.8 last week and i've been doing all my photos at 1.8....(because I can) but I will try the other settings now.

Also is it true that the 1.8f is multiplied by 1.6 for the digital camera which would make it 2.9f ?The 1.6 factor is a crop factor used to approximate a 35mm film equivilent on certain digital cameras. Since the aperture setting is actually the divisor in an inverse relation to the focal length, you would not apply that (EDIT: crop factor) to the aperture. In other words, if it is set to f/5 is on a 35mm film camera, then it is still f/5 on a digital. If I'm wrong, someone bail me out...

[mrclark321]

A suggestion to one of my posts recomended Leo's camera in Vancouver.
Price was $105 plus shipping.

Dan

[PatrickZ]

got my 50mm last week. Didn't have enough time to experiment a lot. But apart from the nice pictures I had some dificulty focusing closer than 1 -1.5meters, which surprised me as I thought the min focus range was 0.45m.

Any suggestions?

[smittymike19]

A suggestion to one of my posts recomended Leo's camera in Vancouver.
Price was $105 plus shipping.

Dan

ouch, thats alot. i paid 93$ for the lens, uv filter and rubber hood at B&H. (includes shipping too)

[smittymike19]

The 1.6 factor is a crop factor used to approximate a 35mm film equivilent on certain digital cameras. Since the aperture setting is actually the divisor in an inverse relation to the focal length, you would not apply that (EDIT: crop factor) to the aperture. In other words, if it is set to f/5 is on a 35mm film camera, then it is still f/5 on a digital. If I'm wrong, someone bail me out...

Since the aperture setting is actually the divisor in an inverse relation to the focal length, you would not apply that (EDIT: crop factor) to the aperture
Yeah, see you might be wrong but you lost me here so i cant prove it...lol

[RAitch]

ouch, thats alot. i paid 93$ for the lens, uv filter and rubber hood at B&H. (includes shipping too)

Vancouver is in Canada... B&H is an American site... isn't it? Was that $93US (which is probably close to $115CAD)? If so, you still got a better price, but not bad.

[RAitch]

got my 50mm last week. Didn't have enough time to experiment a lot. But apart from the nice pictures I had some dificulty focusing closer than 1 -1.5meters, which surprised me as I thought the min focus range was 0.45m.

Any suggestions?

I've had similar problems. Manual focus is just un-doable at close ranges with 1.8. It seemed better at 3.2 or smaller but I haven't tested that out enough yet.
I'll have to try 1.8 some more from farther back too.

[jfrancho]

Since the aperture setting is actually the divisor in an inverse relation to the focal length, you would not apply that (EDIT: crop factor) to the aperture
Yeah, see you might be wrong but you lost me here so i cant prove it...lolCommunicating isn't my strong suit. Sorry, that was horribly composed. f/(insert a value) on a any lens would mean that the diameter of the aperture is 1/(that value you inserted) times the focal length, or f/4 on a 50mm lens means the diameter is 12.5mm, no matter what camera to which the lens is attached.

[BEEEsH]

^^^
Me + Communication = Picasso. lol.

Everyone looks at me sideways when I talk. lol.