cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Good Prime Lens for Canon T5i (APS-C)

phkc070408
Enthusiast

Hi:  I've been concerned about my ability to take good photos with less than ideal light.  My concern was bumping the ISO up too high and having a bunch of noise.  In addition to learning about the grain-reduction feature, it was recommended that I purchase a Prime Lense.

 

I previously owned a Prime Lense but didn't understand the benefit of it and it's true capabiltiies and sold it, and I totally regret it.  I'm looking for a good replacement.

 

Most of my pictires are of family (the rugrats) around the house, family vacations, and train and plane spotting.  While I dream of a crisp shot of a high-speed train well into Astronomical Twilight, I am aware that this probably wouldn't happen without some extreme equipement upgrades, but would enjoy some good during sunrise and sunset.  Obviously, my other pictures don't involve objects moving as fast.

 

I read good reviews about the Tameron F045, a 35mm Di lense with an F1.4.  I realize that 35mm Di lense on an APSC camera will be closer to 50mm.  While I will need to check that this works for me, I'm pretty sure it will be fine.  I also might use one of the emron teleconverters to give me some more zoom if I need it.  And there is always the ability to crop if that isn't enough.

 

Some reasons I'm chosing this route ofer the others:

 

1. The Canon EF version of this lense is way out of my budget

2. Most of my shots involving reduced light are out-doors meaning I don't need such a wide of an angle.  All of my indoor pictures can be done with plenty of lights and a flash beaming off of the ceiling.

3. I can't find a EF-S / Dii mount lense that goes below F2.8.  In fact, Tamron doens't have any Prime Dii lenses.  Canon has the 24mm F2.8 EF-S mount mense that I might consider in the future if necessary.

4. I'd like to set the table for going to a Ful Frame body in the future.

 

I am looking for comments on this plan, and am open to other sugestions.  Please note that spending much more than the roughy $1,400 for these two items is not an option.

 

Some specific Questions:

 

1. Will an EF / Di elnse work on an APS-C Camera?  I know it won't work in the other direction, but my understanding is it's not the connection, but that parts of the Dii lense will protrude too far into the body of a full-frame camera.

2. Are there any issues with using a Di lense with a teleconverter on an APS-C body?

 

Thanks in advance

 

26 REPLIES 26

OK, I think I am on board.  Smiley Happy  If you are shooting in daylight the widest most open aperture of the lens has nothing to do with what you want. If you are in any reasonable daylight you should not ever need to be down to f1.4 or even f1.8.

 

Most daylight shots are going to be in the f4 to f16 range.  ISOs in the 200 to 800 range.  SS around 1/200 to 1/1000.  Somebody has steered you wrong or you aren't understanding lenses and photography thoroughly.   When I shoot birds in flight, BIF, my nominal setting on the lens might be f5.6, SS 1/1000 and ISO 800.  Trains or birds not much different. Now is that a fixed, etched in stone setting, absolutely not but it is general.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

However, the two lenses I recommended are still the finest you can get easily equaling most primes. I would strongly encourage you to buy one of thoes choices.  Since you cleared up the requirements I am leaning on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

Yes, I agree that shooting in daylight, I should have no problem achieving an F6.0 or even better.  I'm looking to expand my horizon and am looking for some pictures at/near dawn/dusk.

 

I appoligize, but I thought I mae this all clear upthread.

" I should have no problem achieving an F6.0 or even better."

 

It is statements like this that make me believe you don't understand exposure or photography.  There isn't an "even better" in f-stops.  There is what delivers the correct exposure. That could be any of the normal f-stops.  If that particular f-stop gives  that correct exposure it is the correct one or if you must "best" one.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

phkc070408
Enthusiast
Please pardon my typos. I hate typing on my iPhone.

phkc070408
Enthusiast
I think I chose the wrong word - “Or even HIGHER”

I don't think I am able to help you.  I don't understand where you are coming from. A faster lens which is what you originally asked for in a fast prime does not mean you can now use a higher f-stop.  The faster lens' main most function is to let more light in the camera in less than optimal light situations.  I know some other factors enter in but that is the main most thing.

 

Any lens is going to let you use any f-stop you want as long as you either change the SS or the ISO for proper exposure. In that sense there is no advantage of a faster prime or zoom lens.  Unless the light is insufficient and there is no more adjustment left in the camera.

 

IMHO, the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens is the best lens for you to buy. It is on a very good sale right now.  I would sell that Tamron and any kit lens you might have. That's my recommendation.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

phkc070408
Enthusiast
My desire was to be able to use a faster shutter speed for taking pictures of fast moving objects (trains and planes) in reduced light settings (dawn and dusk). My thinking was being able to lower the aperture by 1 stop (opening it wider) would get me another stop faster in shutter speed.

Anyway, I appreciate your help. Even though it doesn’t seem like it, you helped me a lot. Right now, it’s a toss-up between the Canon and the Sigma.

"My thinking was being able to lower the aperture by 1 stop (opening it wider) would get me another stop faster in shutter speed."

 

That is correct. However, along with more light a wider aperture brings a reduced depth of field. When I am photographing trains I am at f/5.6 or f/8.

 

By pursuing the objective of a wide aperture you are focusing Smiley Happy on only one of the three legs of the exposure triangle and possibly not considering your ultimate photography goal.

 

Certainly you don't have to shoot a lens wide open, but pursing the $$$ Canon 35mm f/1.4L because its a 1.4, or spending three times as much money on a Canon 50mm f/1.4 vs f/1.8 makes me think you may be missing the big picture.

John Hoffman
Conway, NH

1D X Mark III, Many lenses, Pixma PRO-100, Pixma TR8620a, LR Classic

I went with two separate lenses:

 

1. The EF-S 17-55 F2.8

2. The EF 50mm F1.8

 

I admit that an extremely low F stop (1.4), while enabling a faster shutter speed, will have an extremely slow depth of feild, probably much narrower than I want.

 

I chose the EF-S 17-55 2.8 becasue A. the flexibility of the zoom, and B. I agree that my chances of getting a good picture below 2.8 are greatly reduced.

I choise the EF 50MM 1.8 becasue A. I might want to zoom farther than the 55mm on the EF-S lense will give me, and a 50mmEF = 80mm on an APS-C.  2. If I ever do need to go lower than F2.8, I have the option.  Of course I'm not required to use it.  Also, for $125.00, why not??  I avoided the F1.4 because, as mentioend above, I probably will NEVER need to go that low for my purposes.

 

Thank's for your help everyone.  I really appreciate it.

Announcements