Battle for the first prime lens!

Hi ya'll
I have a 650D, with the 18-55 and 55-250. I was thinking about getting a small prime in a few weeks with a low aperture and just good for walking around. I was thinking a nifty fifty (the 1.8), but I was also looking the 40mm 2.8 STM because of the way it works with the video in my camera. I don't do a ton of video recording but it'd be handy to have if I needed it, but 40 and 50 are so close, it seems silly to have both when I'm just starting out. Any thoughts? D:

If you have access to a camera store that'll let you try out these lenses, then I'd say go try them out.

The 50mm has a plastic mount.
The 40mm has a metal mount.

That affect my friend's decision between those two lenses. It may or may not affect your decision.

Don't do the 40mm just for video. The whole auto-focus for video thing still has a lot of work needed. I personally feel that manually focusing with video is still the way to go.

I would go with a 50mm 1.4. Metal mount and partial USM focusing motor.

However, if money is tight the 50mm 1.8 is a good lens. They take good pictures, however they are very noisy when focusing and have a plastic mount.

i like the 50 1.8 and is a good bang for buck lens, the 40 stm is supposed to be sharper than the 50 i dont own a 40 so cant comment on it but i do own a 50 and love it my next on my list to get is a 10-20mm or a 8mm fisheye

i'd vote for the older 35mm f/2. wider than the 40 and 50, faster than the 40. for video, MF might still be better.

The 35 f/2 is a very nice lens on APS-c. You could get both the 40 & 50 for what it costs.

deanedward wrote in post #15697355
i'd vote for the older 35mm f/2. wider than the 40 and 50, faster than the 40. for video, MF might still be better.

+1 for this one

I never had fun with the 50/1.8 on a crop sensor. Too long for my one prime.

I definitely like TSchrief and FrostMonolith's suggestions for going with a 35mm prime. The 35/2 is an old design with 50/1.8 class AF --- except it makes an even higher pitch whine when autofocusing. I always have to make sure I flip the switch to MF to disengage the gearing so I don't accidentally back drive the focusing mechanism every time I store this lens.

But, aside from the AF, I like the 35/2. Corner sharpness isn't that good wide open, but, the times I shoot this wide open, I usually don't care for maximum corner sharpness (e.g., enviromental portraits with subject in center and background mostly blurred or in dark situations where the background is too dark to really care about corner softness). Stopped down it behaves nicely. That's on a 5D. On an APS-C, the corners will be noticeably better.

If you don't mind being limited to APS-C sensors, the Sigma 30mm/1.4 for $60 more than the 35/2 is a great choice.

+1 What the others said about the 40mm, AF never works for video, even in the big bucks pro world.

I'll suggest something completely different in the form of the 85mm 1.8 Not very general use on crop, but it will definitely get you lusting for more.

VCY wrote in post #15697330
The 50mm has a plastic mount.
The 40mm has a metal mount.

That affect my friend's decision between those two lenses. It may or may not affect your decision.

A plastic mount - wow!
My metal mounts wear out, and have to be replaced by CPS every couple years. I can't imagine how quickly a plastic mount would wear out . . . unless it's some space age plastic that's tougher & more durable than stainless steel.