50mm 1.8 too close?

I've read the 50mm 1.8/1.4 are fantastic portrait lenses and for indoor low light situations.

The 50mm becomes an 80mm on my rebel xti, right?

Isn't that a little too close for anything other than close up portraits?

I want to have something sharper and better in low light than a kit lens. I'm upgrading from a P&S and really crave sharp clear photos in less than bright light.

But with the 50mm (80mm on my XTi) I don't want to have to be 20 feet from my subject to get the subject(s) in the frame which is hard to do indoors.

I'm looking also at the Sigma 2.8 17-70 for all around but it's not nearly as sharp as the 50mm, of course.

Any help is greatly appreciated for this DSLR Noob.

it's fairly zoomed in lens on the XTi

I have the 50mm 1.4 on my camrea right now.

maybe look into the sigma 30mm 1.4?

blam wrote in post #2121263
it's fairly zoomed in lens on the XTi

I have the 50mm 1.4 on my camrea right now.

maybe look into the sigma 30mm 1.4?

How do you like the lens? Do any of the concerns I mentioned seem valid?

Just Be wrote in post #2121245
I've read the 50mm 1.8/1.4 are fantastic portrait lenses and for indoor low light situations.

The 50mm becomes an 80mm on my rebel xti, right?

Isn't that a little too close for anything other than close up portraits?

I want to have something sharper and better in low light than a kit lens. I'm upgrading from a P&S and really crave sharp clear photos in less than bright light.

But with the 50mm (80mm on my XTi) I don't want to have to be 20 feet from my subject to get the subject(s) in the frame which is hard to do indoors.

I'm looking also at the Sigma 2.8 17-70 for all around but it's not nearly as sharp as the 50mm, of course.

Any help is greatly appreciated for this DSLR Noob.

I just got a chance to play with a 50mm f/1.8 today. Yes, it is the equivalent of an 80mm on a 1.6 crop. I want this lens for portraits. I don't know what kind of space you have or waht your limitations are but honestly the 50mm is absolutely perfect for portraits in my opinion. If I had more room to spread out then an 80mm or 85mm would be great but the 50mm I think makes the most sense. A 30mm or 35mm would not be right for me in my space and the way I want to shoot but it seems that always has to be taken into consideration when thinking in terms of a portrait lens. I was able to do tight head shot portraits standing about 6 feet from the subject and when I pulled back to about 8 or 10 feet I had really nice upper body or full length portraits. If you have the opportunity to try or borrow a lens, or have a zoom that has 35mm, 50mm and 85mm in its focal range then give it a test and see what makes sense for you.
I highly recommend a 50mm f/1.8. It really shines when you stop down to 2.8 or better in my opinion, but wide open was very impressive as well, and tack sharp.

I've found the 50mm 1.8 is great for shooting people from about 10-12 feet for 3/4 and full length shot, for head shots or head and shoulder shots from the same distance I'll switch to the 85mm 1.8

after using a 28-105 2.8 Tamron for about 2.5 year I switched to the 50/85 comb and have not found it restrictive in the lest.

Mike

Just Be wrote in post #2121245
The 50mm becomes an 80mm on my rebel xti, right?

Nope.

A 50mm lens is always a 50mm lens regardless of the body you attach it to. NOTHING about a lens' focal length or aperture changes when you put it on different bodies.

A 50mm lens on the XTi does have the same field of view as an 80mm lens on a 35mm film camera, however. That is purely a function of how much of the image projected by the lens is captured by the film or sensor. The APS-C sensor captures a lot less of the subject than a 35mm film frame would.

Just Be wrote in post #2121245
Isn't that a little too close for anything other than close up portraits?

The most-often used focal length on 35mm film cameras for conventional portraits is approximately 80mm. Thus, the 50mm lens would be ideal for most conventional portrait work on the XTi. It is a short telephoto on APS-C cameras. Being a little further from the subject (than you would be with a shorter focal length lens) provides a better, more flattering, perspective.

Mcary wrote in post #2121293
I've found the 50mm 1.8 is great for shooting people from about 10-12 feet for 3/4 and full length shots. If I want head shots or head and shoulder shots from the same distance I'll switch to the 85mm 1.8

after using a 28-105 2.8 Tamron for about 2.5 year I switched to the 50/85 comb and have not found it restrictive in the lest.

Mike

Hey Mike,

If I could have the 2 lenses I would definitely have the 50mm and the 85mm. I think that if you could only get one then the 50mm makes the most sense because you can move the tripod close or far. If you only had the 85mm it might be tight. I agree that doing headshots from the same distance makes the 85mm a sweet choice.

just be: a little soft wide open... too zoomed for cars I will say. good for portraits, decent for low light, but as said...it's softer wide open. I am likling my 1.4 though,,,more than my 1.8

TMR Design wrote in post #2121304
Hey Mike,

If I could have the 2 lenses I would definitely have the 50mm and the 85mm. I think that if you could only get one then the 50mm makes the most sense because you can move the tripod close or far. If you only had the 85mm it might be tight. I agree that doing headshots from the same distance makes the 85mm a sweet choice.

Agree,

Which is why my first L will be the 50mm 1.2. Hell yes there a number of L-zooms that are more partical but what the hell I want this len

Was going to get a 5D but decide since my 20D still works great to get the 50 1.2 and 85 1.2 over the next year and just wait for the 5D replacement.
Mike

the L 1.2 is a tad pricey for what you're getting IMO.....nice glass for sure though...