i used a 50mm for more than 10yr during film days. i sold my 50mm after i got the sigma18-50/2.8.
http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com
http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com
50mm 1.8 prime vs 17-40mm 4L
- Thread starter duhduh83
- Start date
- Status
LOL good for you bro... My sigma 18-50 f2.8 is also the reason why i personally think the 50mm f1.8 a waste of $$.. didn't know I wasn't the only one..
Personally for me, sharpness is just about the same (50mm just a tad sharper at the edges at f2.8).. Why use a prime when you have a zoom as sharp as the prime?
But oh well, the threadstarter is using FF so...
Personally for me, sharpness is just about the same (50mm just a tad sharper at the edges at f2.8).. Why use a prime when you have a zoom as sharp as the prime?
But oh well, the threadstarter is using FF so...
yeah mudsalleh is right, buy both...
mudsalleh said:if u have the budget to buy 17-40mm, then surely u can get a 50mm also cos the price is unbeatable. so my recommendation is to buy both. you will not go wrong. generally 17-40mm is used for wide angle purpose. i used 50mm mostly for potraits. great stuff. go get it.:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
ok im confused.....
first some people say that prime is definitely better than zoom.....
then some say third party zoom comparable to prime or even better....
so which is which?
if prime > zoom but thirdparty zoom > prime
then thrid party zoom is the best???!???
this is total contradiction.....
first some people say that prime is definitely better than zoom.....
then some say third party zoom comparable to prime or even better....
so which is which?
if prime > zoom but thirdparty zoom > prime
then thrid party zoom is the best???!???
this is total contradiction.....
duhduh83 said:
By right primes are better than zooms. Even with your uberuber sharp zoom lens, it may be sharp at a certain focal length but softer at another focal length. And you're talking about sharpness here, which is relative to the person that perceives it.
So in the end, does it really matter which one is better? Just buy one that suits your needs lah. :bsmilie:
duhduh83 said:
- 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC - (TKFoto $800 w/gst) (AP $810 w/gst) (MSC $755 w/o gst)
Unseen and Honda are using it, what else is there to know? BBB MTL.
Just test out a few copies and see which one gives you the best results I guess, even Canon produces some lemon copies.
"L" means nothing to me.
You can see here that both the L lenses are not as sharp as the 70-300is..
http://forum.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=188171
Sure the contrast is greater.. but... sharpness... I've this theory that all the F4 L lenses actually suck at sharpness..
As singapurasteve said, there are exceptions. Furthermore, the 50/1.8 is basically just a cheap consumer lens. If you compare with cheap consumer lenses, the cheap primes are most probably sharper. There are definitely good (read: expensive) zooms sharper than the 50/1.8.
I don't know about the the hard to get a good copy part. AFAIK There was a very vocal person earlier telling everyone that he didn't test a good copy of the lens (who had handshake evident in his "tests"). Subsequently EVERYONE says that it's not easy to get a good copy of the lens. I got an excellent copy (without testing btw), so did Honda.
Note though: The sigma 18-50 f2.8 is NOT for the full frame. Also, testing against the 50mm f1.8, i did notice that the sigma's 50mm end is slightly shorter than the 50mm (maybe like 47mm only?). No big hoohaa for me though. Even the 70-200 f4l is only about 190mm at the 200mm end,
You can see here that both the L lenses are not as sharp as the 70-300is..
http://forum.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=188171
Sure the contrast is greater.. but... sharpness... I've this theory that all the F4 L lenses actually suck at sharpness..
As singapurasteve said, there are exceptions. Furthermore, the 50/1.8 is basically just a cheap consumer lens. If you compare with cheap consumer lenses, the cheap primes are most probably sharper. There are definitely good (read: expensive) zooms sharper than the 50/1.8.
I don't know about the the hard to get a good copy part. AFAIK There was a very vocal person earlier telling everyone that he didn't test a good copy of the lens (who had handshake evident in his "tests"). Subsequently EVERYONE says that it's not easy to get a good copy of the lens. I got an excellent copy (without testing btw), so did Honda.
Note though: The sigma 18-50 f2.8 is NOT for the full frame. Also, testing against the 50mm f1.8, i did notice that the sigma's 50mm end is slightly shorter than the 50mm (maybe like 47mm only?). No big hoohaa for me though. Even the 70-200 f4l is only about 190mm at the 200mm end,
Sharpness is just one of the factors in choosing a lens. Some people choose based on color, contrast, size, appearance, build, handling, focal length range, price etc. Sometimes i prefer to take a small light lens to walk about. So different strokes for different folks.
http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com
http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com
duhduh83 said:
The variances of lenses among similar models can be great. That's why sometimes, you get quite conflicting reviews on the web. There is no guarantee that a L lens is sharp. However what you supposed to get is better built, better AF and smaller variance / better cpk when it comes to optical performance.
Test before you buy, or at least have a return policy. You can always call any shop if they allow testing.
- Status
Similar threads
