01-16-2020 02:05 AM
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
01-16-2020 06:45 AM
Canon has a series of lenses called EF-S mount. They can only be installed on Canon APS-C cameras.
Canon EF lenses, and third party lenses with EF mounts, can be installed on crop sensor and full frame Canon cameras.
Third party lenses that are designated as APS-C project a smaller image circle, so if they are installed on a non-APS-C camera the image may not fill the screen so if you want to be able to go full frame in the future you don't want to purchase any lenses that say APS-C.
A 1.4X teleconverters lose one stop of light, generally focus slower and degrade image quality. If you are talking about adding a T/C to a 35mm lens you would spend less money and get better results by purchasing a Canon EF 50mm/f1.8 STM prime lens.
01-16-2020 08:05 AM
Hi John, thanks for the response.
You brought up a good point:
A 1.4X teleconverters lose one stop of light, generally focus slower and degrade image quality.
That in itself is an issue, since my purpose of of the extremely low F was to be able to reduce the shutter speed in low light. I liked the idea of being able to uae it as both a 35mm and a 49mm lense, but the cost of quality and AF speed at the 49mm level, which is probably were I would use it more, makes me think there are better options.
I chose the F1.4 becasue of the ability to use the fastest shutter speed possible. How much would I have to adjust my shutter speed to get the same image when going from F1.4 to F1.8?
I see Canon has a 50mm F1.4 lens for $350.00, which is about the same price as the teleconverter. My other option, while 5x the cost, is the 85mm F1.4 lens. I need to figure out which one I would use more. Or, I get them both, knowing that my wife won't know one from the other. >:-) As I said, I'll be using them on an APS-C camera for now, so I'm really looking at 49mm, 70mm, and 119mm, something I need to check out on my current camera.
01-16-2020 09:14 AM
f/1.4 to f/1.8 is about 2/3 of a stop; i.e. 1/1000 down to 1/640.
What is your intended end use for your photos? 40 inch wallprints or digital files for sharing/use in a digital frame?
Are you sure you aren't overthinking this because of what you are reading on the Internet?
Sure, noise can be an issue, but for your camera ISO 1600 is certainly acceptable. Low light sunrise and sunset you can/should use a tripod for scenics.
01-16-2020 10:43 AM
"I've been concerned about my ability to take good photos with less than ideal light."
This does not mean "prime lens" And, a prime lens is not the only answer. It is an answer but certainly not the single answer. It is not even a good answer because prime lenses are so much more difficult to use. They are limited in what they can be used for.
A better choice might be the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art Lens. A very fast very high IQ zoom lens. Or, if you prefer, staying in the Canon family is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. These are both constant fast aperture zoom lenses that will rival the IQ of most primes. The Sigma will likely out perform most primes in IQ. Yeah, they cost more but they do more and you will not need your kit lens any longer so you can sell it. Also both are on sale right now!
Either is a better choice than a prime and a kit lens to do what the prime won't do.
01-16-2020 10:46 AM
Why not start with the 50mm f/1.8. It is relatively inexpensive, and might be a good way to see if the extra stop will meet your needs.
You can get one for $100 on the Canon refurbished lens store.
01-16-2020 10:59 AM
" I liked the idea of being able to uae it as both a 35mm and a 49mm lense, ..."
I am not folowing what you are talking about or trying to do here? If I read you correctly, you want to buy a 1.4 tel-con and use it on a 35mm lens? This is not just a bad idea it is a horribile idea. Forget it.
"I'm really looking at 49mm, 70mm, and 119mm, something I need to check out on my current camera."
These focal lengths are going to be very difficult to impossible to use on your T5i. If you are inside a normal living room you will not have enough space to frame children easily. 35mm should be the high side of FL you are considering. 24mm is a more idea FL for a T5i especially if it is inside a normal home. Notice the FL Canon sees as general all around FL, EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. On a T5i the equivalent FL of that Canon zoom is 27 to 88mm. If you are looking at a 35mm prime or the 85mm prime your equivalent FL is almost 60mm and 135mm respectively. So you can see they are way too long for typical indoor general photography.
01-16-2020 02:55 PM
Hi everyone and thank you for the wealth of responses and sugestions.
Biggs: While I would love to stick with my current family, I don't see where Tamron offers anything that is suits my needs. Your idea of the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 is a possibility. I like the range of the Canon 17-55 2.8, I think I value the larger F-stop, since low light is my issue.
Barkley: I saw the 50mm 1.8. If I did this, I would probably end up with the F1.4. Of course, if I did the Sigma mentioned above, this wouldn't be necessary.
Why is using a 1.4X Tel-con on a 35mm lense a bad idea? Please explain. I understand that you would need to lower the shutter speed another notch to compensate for the light loss, and the AF issues. Are there any others?
Indoors isn't the issue. I have a Tamron 10-24 3.5-4.5 that works perfectly indoors, since I very very seldom have light issues in doors. I plan on using this outdoors, mainly for taking pictures of family vacations, and plane and train spotting.
01-16-2020 04:01 PM
"Why is using a 1.4X Tel-con on a 35mm lense a bad idea?"
Well for starters Canon says, "This lens is only compatible with fixed focal length L-series lenses 135mm and over, as well as the EF 70-200/2.8L, EF 70-200/2.8L IS, EF 70-200/4L, and EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L." I think that is clear enough but there are more reasons to not do it, also.
"I saw the 50mm 1.8. If I did this, I would probably end up with the F1.4"
The difference between f1.8 anf f1.4 is negligible. It will make no difference at all. None!
"I very very seldom have light issues in doors. I plan on using this outdoors, ..."
Huh! One of the two of us is not understanding what is going on? I think it might be me. OK, why the push for a fast prime? Why quibble over fractions of a stop? Even the difference between the Siggy and the fast Canon zoom is just over a stop. Again not a deal breaker or deal maker. Are you sure you understand f-stops? How they work?
Your Tamron 10-24mm is essentially an f4-f4.5 lens. WHich is pretty slow compared to the ones I suggested. You will see great improvement with either one. With these inexpensive zooms you really need to be at f8 to rid your self distortion and vignetting faults. Lens correction in software like Photoshop can help.
01-16-2020 04:36 PM