Deciding on a new lens: 50mm 2.5 macro or 50mm 1.4

Hello all,

I have a Rebel T1i and I have a couple of lenses, the started lens that came with the kit (EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) and the 50mm f1.8. I got the 50mm f.18 because I needed something that would work well on low light and someone recommended this lens and I didn't have a lot of cash to spend when I got it. However, I do a lot of close up photography and I wanted something else. I thought about getting either the 50mm 2.5 macro or upgrade to the 50mm 1.4. Basically I need it for pictures of food I eat at restaurants and I need something light and not too big that I can carry around with me. Someone had told me to get a 35mm but from everything I read, it seems like the 50mm is a good option. I still enjoy my 50mm 1.8, but it's too noisy when in autofocus and I have to move a bit far a way from my subject (my food) to get a good shot.

Can anyone recommend either one of these lens? Or are there any other options that I can look into?
Thanks

fridadc said:

Hello all,

I have a Rebel T1i and I have a couple of lenses, the started lens that came with the kit (EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) and the 50mm f1.8. I got the 50mm f.18 because I needed something that would work well on low light and someone recommended this lens and I didn't have a lot of cash to spend when I got it. However, I do a lot of close up photography and I wanted something else. I thought about getting either the 50mm 2.5 macro or upgrade to the 50mm 1.4. Basically I need it for pictures of food I eat at restaurants and I need something light and not too big that I can carry around with me. Someone had told me to get a 35mm but from everything I read, it seems like the 50mm is a good option. I still enjoy my 50mm 1.8, but it's too noisy when in autofocus and I have to move a bit far a way from my subject (my food) to get a good shot.

Can anyone recommend either one of these lens? Or are there any other options that I can look into?

Click to expand...

hmm, for food photography you don't necessarily need a macro. Your kit lens with it's 1:3 magnification should do very well. In fact, an important consideration for food photography is WHAT do you want to take the pictures for? Artistic, with limited DOF? Or do you want to document the food, so have preferably everything on the plate sharp? If the later, a fast lens may not be the answer, since the thin DOF will limit what you can get really sharp on the plate, unless you take a picture straight from the top of the plate.

Another issue is: Where will be when you take the picture. Sitting in front of the food/plate, or can you walk around freely. If the latter, a 50 or 60mm lens might be ok, but if you sit in front of the plate, your venerable 18-55 IS zoom would be better, because you can go to wide-angle.

I would suggest you try your 18-55 IS (since the food is not moving, the IS should actually give you the same amount of f-stop gain against hand-shake as a faster lens, perhaps even better). Then you see what focal length and possibly what shutter/aperture speeds you get. If you shoot in dark restaurants, a 50mm f1.4 prime may not help enough, and very little of your food will be sharp at f1.4.
Maybe if possible, you could consider an off camera flash together with the kit?

fridadc said:

Thanks

Click to expand...

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

Thank you for your reply. I do like to make the pictures a bit more artistic, I want people to look at the food and want to eat it. So a lot of the times, I focus on specific elements in the plate. However, sometimes, the entire dish needs to be captured and that's when the 50mm 1.8 is not so good. Half of my photos are shot in restaurants and the other half at home. I have noticed that the started kit, the 18-55mm works very well with some of the photos I take at restaurants, but I know a lot of people think the lenses that come with the camera kit are not very good.

Thanks again and if there are any other suggestions on other lenses that I might have overlooked, I will greatly appreciate it.

A 35 might be a good option. You can focus pretty close with the Canon 35f2. I have one and have used it for close work. It is not a macro lens, so you might consider a Tokina 35f2.8 macro.

If you need the faster aperture, then you are looking at the Canon 35f2 or f1.4. I am not sure what the close focusing ability of the f1.4L lens is, but the 35f2 gets close.

I have both the Sigma 50f2.8 macro and the Canon 50f1.4. If the Canon 50f1.8 is too long, you can expect the same from the f1.4 version. The Sigma is a sharp macro lens, but could be too long for your needs.

fridadc said:

Thank you for your reply. I do like to make the pictures a bit more artistic, I want people to look at the food and want to eat it. So a lot of the times, I focus on specific elements in the plate. However, sometimes, the entire dish needs to be captured and that's when the 50mm 1.8 is not so good. Half of my photos are shot in restaurants and the other half at home. I have noticed that the started kit, the 18-55mm works very well with some of the photos I take at restaurants, but I know a lot of people think the lenses that come with the camera kit are not very good.

Click to expand...

Just because it's not expensive, does not make the 18-55 IS kit lens bad. It's very good for the price, see for example the reviews at http://www.photozone.de

If you do want to go closer, and play with DOF,

there is the Tamron 60mm f2 macro (it's the fastest lens, others are f2.8). Again, focal length may be a bit limiting.
And there is the Tokina 35mm f2.8 macro.
But all these macros have no IS.

fridadc said:

Thanks again and if there are any other suggestions on other lenses that I might have overlooked, I will greatly appreciate it.

Click to expand...

--
Life is short, time to zoom in ©

fridadc said:

I still enjoy my 50mm 1.8, but it's too noisy when in autofocus and I have to move a bit far a way from my subject (my food) to get a good shot.

Click to expand...

Then another 50 mm lens is obviously not a good idea!

-- You need a zoom lens to allow you to go wider and to give you some flexibility.
-- You need f/2.8 for selective focusing

-- You need IS - perfect for static subjects in (often) poor light where you can't use a tripod.

So it's the 17-55/2.8 IS, or the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS. Both are more expensive than the 50/1.4 and the 50 compact macro, but if that means you need to wait a bit longer your 18-55 will do a good job in the meantime apart from being less good for selective focus. It punches well above its weight for a cheap kit lens.

fridadc said:

Hello all,

I have a Rebel T1i and I have a couple of lenses, the started lens that came with the kit (EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) and the 50mm f1.8. I got the 50mm f.18 because I needed something that would work well on low light and someone recommended this lens and I didn't have a lot of cash to spend when I got it. However, I do a lot of close up photography and I wanted something else. I thought about getting either the 50mm 2.5 macro or upgrade to the 50mm 1.4. Basically I need it for pictures of food I eat at restaurants and I need something light and not too big that I can carry around with me. Someone had told me to get a 35mm but from everything I read, it seems like the 50mm is a good option. I still enjoy my 50mm 1.8, but it's too noisy when in autofocus and I have to move a bit far a way from my subject (my food) to get a good shot.

Can anyone recommend either one of these lens? Or are there any other options that I can look into?
Thanks

Click to expand...

You've had some good advice already and I'd agree that the 18-55 is actually much better than many give it credit for - and is probably ideal in many respects for food photography due to its flexibility.

A faster aperture (e.g. 50/1.4) might sound good in theory but at or near maximum aperture your depth of focus at close distances will be so narrow that your shots may be become more abstract than representative of the dish which perhaps may not be what you want to achieve ?

The 50/2.5 macro is very sharp but again for moderate close ups (dishes of food) I'm not sure it will give you a massive advantage over the 50/1.8 or 18-55 that you already have.

I've done a fair bit of food photography (ice cream actually but that's another story) and for that on a FF body I mainly used the TS-E 45mm f/2.8. It's certainly not a cheap option though, nor is it particularly quick to use and really needs a tripod. But for control over depth of focus and correction of perspective it is unsurpassed for for the task.

Thank you so much for all the replies. I will definitely look into the options mentioned here and also use my starter lens a little more. Everyone has been so helpful, thanks again.