5 Reasons you Need a 50mm Prime

[davidedric]

I am trying to bang sense into a bunch of them on a Nikon FB group at this very moment but I'm being buried by shear numbers and stupidity.

Robin,

When faced with something like this, I remind myself of my favourite, indeed only, quotation from Schiller:

“Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.”

Or in English, "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain"

(also a novel by Isaac Asimov)

Dave

[loosecanon]

Ah those film days when a new camera came with a 50mm lens. I too have my FD 50 1.4, 50 1.8 and of course they were good lenses because they can be designed and made relatively easily. In practice I found that I used my FD 35mm f2 lens far more, big heavy beast that it is.

Now my primes are 20mm, 35mm, 50mm macro, 100mm macro. However I rarely take them out to play, unless specifically required, the wider ones for shooting panoramas, and macro for, err , macro.

The quality of modern zooms and digital correction of distortion has changed photography and the equipment we carry. Are the extra 1 or 2 stops worth the lens changing just to get more of the image out of focus?

[ajohnw]

This sort of focal length is popular in some quarters but usually with fairly serious users. Olympus make a 25mm pancake lens. I though Panasonic did too but can't find it. I did find some 20mm. On a Pen these finish up with a capable camera that will fit into a pocket or handbag. Anyone who has shot film and bought a camera with it's usual 50mm lens will know that rather a lot can be done with them. Many people only had that lens for varying often long periods of time. Some never bought anything else. Not ideal for everything but very flexible. The Olympus one will focus down to 20cm and at F2.8 is reasonably fast. Obviously not popular with the masses as they might then do something similar at the wide angle end. Actually they did do a fixed F8 15mm Lens Cap. Awful test results but the images are sort of usable as shown here

http://www.photozone.de/active/magic...LCv&format=43h

If they did a better coated glass version at say 12mm I reckon it could also be interesting at the right price.

John
-

[Shadowman]

This sort of focal length is popular in some quarters but usually with fairly serious users. Olympus make a 25mm pancake lens. I though Panasonic did too but can't find it. I did find some 20mm. On a Pen these finish up with a capable camera that will fit into a pocket or handbag. Anyone who has shot film and bought a camera with it's usual 50mm lens will know that rather a lot can be done with them. Many people only had that lens for varying often long periods of time. Some never bought anything else. Not ideal for everything but very flexible. The Olympus one will focus down to 20cm and at F2.8 is reasonably fast. Obviously not popular with the masses as they might then do something similar at the wide angle end. Actually they did do a fixed F8 15mm Lens Cap. Awful test results but the images are sort of usable as shown here

http://www.photozone.de/active/magic...LCv&format=43h

If they did a better coated glass version at say 12mm I reckon it could also be interesting at the right price.

John
-

Olympus has a 17mm pancake f/1.8 for its micro 4/3rds line.

[Colin Southern]

Surely the best way to add a lens to your kit bag it to work out what you want to shoot, work out if it can be done with what you have - then - and only then - add another bit of glass.

I agree.

I believe that what I shoot should be dictated by what I want to shoot; I shouldn't have to forego that because my equipment won't allow it.

Articles like that are like selling a home handyman a skillsaw because it's what every home handyman should own ... Problem is that the guy wants to work on plumbing and really needs a pipe wrench!

If you only have 1 size spanner then you'd better hope all your nuts are that size. Personally, I prefer an adjustable spanner!

[jcuknz]

I'm still an amateur when it comes to the world of social media, but I recently joined a Facebook group. To be fair it didn't claim or aim to be a group for serious photographers, but was about posting up images of Scotland.

In response to one person's statement about processing their images, I put up my "Clicking the button is only one part of the process of making an image, the 2nd part is post-processing" message that I've posted many times on here with the intention of helping people. Well, if I did!

I was told the group was sick fed up of people coming on saying that they should be photo-shopping their pictures. I, of course, defended myself. The thread was then removed.

I am no longer a member of that group!

ps - William: I hope you got the irony in my original statement re Colin's post. I thought he was actually very restrained in what he wrote.

Many years ago in the dim dark past of digital when it was an emerging process I was a firm believer in digital camera and post processing .... and said so on one site to the annoyance of the sites moderator/owner who was a firm believer in film and apparently charged many thousands to shoot weddings etc.
So he banned me
I worked out how to circumvent the ban and went back for a brief visit and was amused that in the short elapsed time he had discovered digital and was waxing elequent about it .... I didn't return as I knew my writing would quickly reveal my identity ... and shortly after Yahoo killed off the site anyway

[ajohnw]

Olympus has a 17mm pancake f/1.8 for its micro 4/3rds line.

I don't think 17 is far enough away from 25mm. I managed well on film with 28,55,100,200mm and think factors of 2 are ok. A lot of people stopped at 135mm for hand holding but I never had a problem with 200mm Bit like the net the press would have people think otherwise. People just must have a 135mm anything longer was just to difficult to handle without a tripod.

Seems I have started another thread via a miss understanding. I don't see any downside in moving from a crop of around 1.5 to one of 2. Have full frame with that and own the best of both world so might upgrade my 5D. Don't think I would need many lenses with that either.

John
-

[royphot]

The answer is in the Subject line.

Just as it was in the "7 essential apps YOU need ............................." thread.
These statements might well be correct, but only if their author had substituted "I" for his use of "YOU".

I get just a little bit pissed off when people tell me what I need, when I know that I don't need it. I don't intend to explain why I don't need it.

Roy

[kaneohebud]

I grew up in an age where "PC" stood for "Personal Computer". It seems these days that it stands for "Political Correctness".

Can't say that the world appears any better for the change. I prefer to just come right out and say it.

Colin:
Well said. You and I are from the old school. I weary of folks getting their feelings hurt.

[FootLoose]

Colin:
Well said. You and I are from the old school. I weary of folks getting their feelings hurt.

In my era it stood for Parents & Citizens - but you fellows are probably too young to remember that

[Colin Southern]

In my era it stood for Parents & Citizens - but you fellows are probably too young to remember that

Could well be by the sound of it!

[William W]

My beef (well one of my many beefs) is that the sort of post linked to goes at things from the wrong end.

Well . . . the real question is how can 1,238,989,344 posts (as at tonight) on internet forums, recommending a newbie get the "nifty-fifty" to put on their APS-C camera as a "really good Portrait lens". . .

be wrong?


WW

[ajohnw]

In my era it stood for Parents & Citizens - but you fellows are probably too young to remember that

I always thought it stands for Post Cibum, may be on medication to be taken after meals. But it can means all sorts of things

http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/PC

John
-

[ajohnw]

Well . . . the real question is how can 1,238,989,344 posts (as at tonight) on internet forums, recommending a newbie get the "nifty-fifty" to put on their APS-C camera as a "really good Portrait lens". . .

be wrong?


WW

They probably are correct especially if manual focus and relatively cheap or new and relatively cheap compared with alternatives.

The 50mm ones must ideally be F1.2 of course or F1.4 at a pinch but F1.8 or F2 would be decidedly dodgey and F2.8 unheard of. People just couldn't possibly get the background right without the higher F ratios.

That aspect really does cheese me off. It's completely and utterly stupid.

John
-

[Glenn NK]

What a complete load of bollocks.

I'm going to disagree with you - it's several loads.

G

[Black Pearl]

Well . . . the real question is how can 1,238,989,344 posts (as at tonight) on internet forums, recommending a newbie get the "nifty-fifty" to put on their APS-C camera as a "really good Portrait lens". . .

be wrong?


WW

Yes - but there are 47 million hits that talk about hoaxes committed by NASA - because the world is full of weird people and unfortunately the internet has become the place for them to sermonise.

[William W]

[Colin Southern]

Yes - but there are 47 million hits that talk about hoaxes committed by NASA - because the world is full of weird people and unfortunately the internet has become the place for them to sermonise.

Well I can say for sure that the moon landing wasn't a hoax because I WAS THERE!

[ajohnw]

Yes - but there are 47 million hits that talk about hoaxes committed by NASA - because the world is full of weird people and unfortunately the internet has become the place for them to sermonise.

That probably includes some on here.

John
-

[Colin Southern]

Yes - but there are 47 million hits that talk about hoaxes committed by NASA - because the world is full of weird people and unfortunately the internet has become the place for them to sermonise.

In Google we trust ...