How/when to use 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 and vice versa

[heb112]

So I was looking for an 85 1.8 to add to my bag and ended up buying a 50 1.4 as well in a package deal. Are there certain situations where one is better than the other? Aside from the obvious difference in focal length, why should I mount one over the other in any given situation? Or will I find that I don't need both?

I already own a 50 1.8 (nifty) so I understand the benefits and limitations of a prime, but have loved this lens and thought the 1.4 would be a nice upgrade. I will probably sell my 1.8, but need to convince myself that the 1.4 will not sit unused in my bag. I'd love to hear from others with both lenses whether they find the 50 or 85 more useful and how to get the best from both.

Thanks!

[Boucher]

I'd tend to use the 85 for headshots more then the 50. Just use them both and get a feel for them and you may feel like you need both or you may feel as if having just one of them is fine.

[Nathan]

for me, it's mostly about focal length. I also tend to use the 50 more when shoot people, unless I need some reach. I like to the bokeh from the 85 more when shooting still subjects

[form]

Shoot in enough low light situations or learn to really appreciate narrow DoF and you'll probably find a use for the 50 f/1.4. I know I would if I had one - I've borrowed the 50 f/1.4 a few times. However, I often feel that to take full advantage of an ultra wide aperture I should get a full frame camera...and I've been thinking about doing that.

[Brikwall]

I have both. For me, it's focal length more than aperture that decides which one I'll use in any given situation.

[heb112]

Originally Posted by Brikwall

I have both. For me, it's focal length more than aperture that decides which one I'll use in any given situation.

I'm hoping to find uses for both focal lengths, but wondering if I'll just use my legs to compensate and end up with the same shot regardless of which lens is on the camera.

[n1as]

I have both. I use the 50 for under the basket shots and the 85 when I shoot from the corner of the court. (Basketball).

For other general shooting, just let FL decide which lens to use. I don't consider either lens to be that great wide open. Instead, I consider them to be f/2.5 lenses unless I'm willing to trade sharpness and CA for shallow DOF.

[AlanU]

You will love the 85 f/1.8 when your outside taking portraits. The sharpness of that prime wideopen is a true joy to use. For couple portraits outdoors I'll grab the 85mm and my 70-200L and get phenominal shots with my xti.

On a crop camera the 50mm prime is a tad long indoors and tad short for outdoors. I guess if your doing headshots thats a great lens to use indoors. The 50mm will work outdoors because you'll have all the room to foot zoom.

Throw a Sigma 30mm in your gearbag and you'll find great uses of that focal length and more than likely your 50mm will sit in your gearbag more often. Indoors step forward or step back and you'll have a great range to play with your feet. Unlikely you'll feel that you'll back into a wall indoors to compose your shot.

[form]

I personally feel that the 50 is too short for head shots and tends to make the nose bigger on a crop sensor camera.

[bob_r]

I think you could get lots of ideas by going through the archive threads for each lens.

I use them both indoors and out. Today was my grandson's birthday and I used the 50 for indoor and outdoor shots although I probably could have used the 85 (or the 35).

Bob R

[xarqi]

Originally Posted by heb112

Aside from the obvious difference in focal length, why should I mount one over the other in any given situation?

Aside from focal length, there's not much in it. Both have very good optics; the 85 might have the slight edge.

Originally Posted by heb112

I'm hoping to find uses for both focal lengths, but wondering if I'll just use my legs to compensate and end up with the same shot regardless of which lens is on the camera.

Ah, but if you change position, you won't get the same shot. It's about perspective, and that is dictated by distance. Find the spot where you get the perspective you want, then choose the longest lens you have that encompasses all of the field you want to capture. In practical terms though, unless you are planning to make large prints, cropping an image taken with the 50 to the same framing as one taken with the 85 should still be OK.

[xarqi]

Originally Posted by form

I personally feel that the 50 is too short for head shots and tends to make the nose bigger on a crop sensor camera.

That's not an issue with the lens, but with your shooting distance. Back up some. Then either use a longer lens, or crop.

[angryhampster]

I think they're way too close in FL to justify owning both of them. You'd be much better suited to own the 50 f/1.4 and 100 f/2, or the 28 f/1.8 and 85 f/1.8. ...At least in my opinion.

[form]

xarqi: no kidding? The point of a head shot is to get the head in the frame and not much else beyond the upper chest. In order to do that, I have to be fairly close to the subject with the 50mm lens, which results in the aforementioned distortion caused by the combination of focal length and subject distance needed to compose a head shot with the 50mm lens.

If I back up, I reduce the amount of the sensor used to capture the subject. That's why the 85 is better for me: I can fit just the head and shoulders in without detrimental distortion.

I think they're complementary lenses, 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8: The 85 is more useful for single person candids and other shots, and the 50 is more useful for getting small groups.

[xarqi]

Originally Posted by form

xarqi: no kidding? The point of a head shot is to get the head in the frame and not much else beyond the upper chest. In order to do that, I have to be fairly close to the subject with the 50mm lens, which results in the aforementioned distortion caused by the combination of focal length and subject distance needed to compose a head shot with the 50mm lens.

If I back up, I reduce the amount of the sensor used to capture the subject. That's why the 85 is better for me: I can fit just the head and shoulders in without detrimental distortion.

I think they're complementary lenses, 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8: The 85 is more useful for single person candids and other shots, and the 50 is more useful for getting small groups.

Nope - no kidding. I guess you just put a higher priority on filling the frame at the expense of composition than I do. Why fill the frame with an ugly image instead of stepping back and cropping (or using a longer lens) to get a pleasing one?

My only point was that it is not the use of a 50 for a headshot that causes big nose syndrome per se, it is the shooting distance. We both arrive at the same optimal solution though: right distance for perspective; right focal length for framing.