Urgg... decision time again

As Halloween (and colorful leaves too) is quickly approaching, I am finding myself wanting a fast prime. I've done my internet research and came up with the 50mm 1.4. I'd rather spend the "few" extra bucks for the better sharpness, build quality, and speed over the 1.8.

I don't think the 85 1.8 would be of much use to me. I'm thinking it would be too long, but perhaps I am wrong. I added it to the poll in case someone recommends it.

My third option is to keep saving for a 100mm L macro. Odds are I wouldn't get it before late Jan/Feb next year regardless of this purchase.

If anyone can think of a different lens for around 400 bucks or less that would fit my needs, please feel free to post it. I'm hoping that whatever I purchase will let me experiment with composition more. With my kit zooms, it isn't ever something I worry or think about.

If I was going to buy a 50mm lens <1000, it would be the sigma 50 1.4.

50 is probably still too long on a crop for general shooting. For general shooting, maybe a sigma 30 1.4?

Get the non L version. I'm not sure why everyone is so hyped over it. People have been using the 100 macro for years with awesome results handheld.

_aravena wrote in post #8761348
Get the non L version. I'm not sure why everyone is so hyped over it. People have been using the 100 macro for years with awesome results handheld.

That's another debate for another time. It'll probably come up in a few months lol. :p

What about the Canon 28mm 1.8?

EDIT: The Sigma 30 1.4 looks very nice too... thanks for the suggestion!

_aravena wrote in post #8761348
Get the non L version. I'm not sure why everyone is so hyped over it. People have been using the 100 macro for years with awesome results handheld.

2 letters: IS. That's the sole reason I replaced mine with the L version.

When on a budget, get the 50/1.8. What you "lose" on it becomes irrelevent and you can afford other lenses sooner.

Fangs404 wrote in post #8761515
2 letters: IS. That's the sole reason I replaced mine with the L version.

Seconded, its worth the extra cash for someone whos tripod is too heavy and too much of a pain in the ass that it gets in the way of shooting rather than helping it..

ie, Me

Anyways, I'd get the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 if i were you But thats just me

Kiwikat wrote in post #8761374
What about the Canon 28mm 1.8?

EDIT: The Sigma 30 1.4 looks very nice too... thanks for the suggestion!

I had the canon 28 1.8 and thought it was a great lens, my favorite when i had it. On a crop i found 50 to be a very awkward FL, too long indoors, and usually either too long or too short outdoors. Just could never find a right time to use it. 28 was a very useable length both indoors and out, once i got it the 50 never left my bag.

As far as the sigma goes...too many bad focusing ones out there for my liking.

I also really like the 85 1.8 that you are thinking about and makes a great combo with the 28, but i would definitely get the 28 first...more useable

Get the 50/1.8 plastic fantastic. I'm not sure the 50/1.4 is worth five of the 1.8's. Another choice is the 28/2.8. A little slow to focus but gives me superb results.

I don't know... I used to use my 30d primarily (as it was my only camera) and I would use the 100 for my macro shots. I never really used it for anything else. I have to say that I loved my 50 1.8 on my 30d. Once I purchased that lens, it was on there all the time. I still think it is my favorite lens for my crop. I find that I never used my 85 my crop. Actually, its my least used lens. I haven't used my new 50 1.4 very much as I have recently bought a used 24-70 and have been nurturing that love affair. Either way, I vote 50.

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I am still not sure what I am going to get. In the next couple days I'm going to do some experimenting with my 18-55 at various FL's. It looks like its between the Canon 28, Sigma 30, and Canon 50.

If I get a 50mm it will be the 1.4. I absolutely abhor the build quality of my 18-55. It feels like it could fall apart any second. I'd rather get a lens that is decently built and will last a long time, even if it costs more in the short term. I won't spend a dime on a "toy" as it is called so many places.

I'll definitely be getting a 100mm macro further down the line. It will probably be the L IS version, as the majority of my photography is out on a trail where I don't want to haul a tripod.

If you're thinking about the 28 and 30 you should also consider the 35 f2. That was my first prime and I love it.

on a crop camera i'd get the 28 1.8 first, then 50 1.4, then 85 1.8

One lens you might want to consider is the Canon 60 mm macro. It's by far my favourite of all the lenses in my bag - there's just nothing about this lens that I don't like. It's an ideal length on a crop camera and the results it produces are just stunning. And it would fit into your budget.

I voted 85mm 1.8, because between 50 1.4 and 85 1.8, I think it's the better lens. However, I think you would need to pair it with a 28 F1.8, 30 F1.4, 35 F2 or even 24L/35L.