On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:26:50 -0000, "FotoTwister" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote/replied to:
>EF 50mm f/1.8 II is realy quite good and very affordable. I I were you I >would check the second hand market... I bought one for EUR 30.00 What bargain is something you must carry around, make room for in your bag, but never use? >EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro is even better! also worthwhile checking on the >second hand market. Likely his best choice. >I would go for the 1.4 only if you need the extra f-stop fraction or a >better focosing performance. Or much better bokeh than the 50/1.8 due to a greater number of aperture blades. You know the only thing about the 50/1.4 that was better or different (for me) was that it could be more easily MANUALLY focused. Realistically, the difference between f1.4 and f.4 is three stops and almost total loss of DOF. I usually shot the 50/1.4 at f5.6 in any case. YMMV I agree that the 20/2.8 is likely a much better lens for a DSLR shooter with 1.6x. Much more usable. -- Jim Davis, Nature Photography: http://easternbeaver.com/ * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
