Is a nifty fifty embarrassing to use on a 5d3?

Is it?

reason i ask is because i can now afford to finally grab a 5d3 but i do not have a general purpose/wide kind of lens for it.

i only have a nifty fifty and a 70-200 that can be used on a 5d3.

am i crazy to use a nifty fifty on this camera?

To anyone that has used this setup. does it improve the AF of the nifty fifty in low light? the nifity fifty with my 400d was practically usable in low light

Why would it be embarrassing to use on a 5d3? (or any camera?)

Let the photos do the talking, not the gear.

No who cares what other people think. Most people would be thrilled to walk around with one of the best cameras on the planet.

Embarrassing no, but for the same money as a 5d3 body, you could have a 5d2 with 24-105 kit lens and a 17-40. Or a 7D with a bunch more glass.

FEChariot wrote in post #14908376
Embarrassing no, but for the same money as a 5d3 body, you could have a 5d2 with 24-105 kit lens and a 17-40. Or a 7D with a bunch more glass.

5d2 AF is ancient and the 7d noise performance is not great.

Please do not go off topic please though this is not another debate on 5d2/7d vs 5d3

Nifty fifty is a good lens, so why be embarrased? The apeture? f/1.8 compared to f/1.4 or f/1.2? Who cares.

If you're that worred, but grab a red bubber band and wrap it around the end of the fifty

Cheers,

Just buy a 1.4. They don't cost much, it will look better on the camera, and f/1.4 will be even more fun on full frame. Then sell the 1.8 and get $100 back. It's like a rebate.

jonneymendoza wrote in post #14908380
5d2 AF is ancient and the 7d noise performance is not great.

Please do not go off topic please though this is not another debate on 5d2/7d vs 5d3

Then save more and get some glass worthy of that camera.

FEChariot wrote in post #14908394
Then save more and get some glass worthy of that camera.

the 50mm F1.8 is one of the best lenses that canon makes.


it craps all over the 50L.... and yes, i love my 50L.

pyrojim wrote in post #14908406
the 50mm F1.8 is one of the best lenses that canon makes.


it craps all over the 50L.... and yes, i love my 50L.

It's got crap bokeh, unreliable loud focus, no bayonet hood mount, cheap build, and a tiny focus ring. It's the crappiest lens I own and I would not have bought it if I knew what I know about it now when I purchased it.

the 50 1.8 and 24 2.8 (older non usm), regardless of body, are my favorite lenses to take when i want an ultra-light bag. that's a very favorable IQ/weight ratio as far as i'm concerned.

I recently read that a nifty 50 focus faster when on 5D III

On potn the answer is 'yes', otherwise its 'no', let your photo's embarrass you.

Its fine. who cares what others think.

It just upgraded to a 5dII and up until yesterday i had the 50 1.8 on it. (just upgraded to the 1.4)

Sure from a pure "let the photos talk" perspective nothing wrong with it, but why have a $3500+ body with a $100 lens? Unless your 70-200 II is your bread winner, I would sell that and get some solid primes. I dont know what you shoot, but you could sell your lenses and grab a 35L and 135L and be set. Thats just me thinking aloud.