Reading mode: Light Dark

Low light, cost-effective wider alternative to the nifty fifty

Go to last post
R

raymallon

Member
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
A big ask I know, but would be grateful for suggestions (Canon or 3rd party) as to cost-effective lenses that are wider than the Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II (which is markedly better than the 18-55 IS II kit lens that came with my 600D) and which can also cope better in low light.

By "cost-effective", I am thinking of maximum £250.

Thank you in advance.

Raymond
 
I think the only thing that comes close other than the Canon 40mm STM is the Canon 28mm f/1.8 USM, but even that's outside your price range.

You may be better off checking the used market.

Edit: Oops, I lied. There is also the Canon 35mm f/2.0 that falls within your pricerange.
 
Last edited:
Canon made 28mm f1.8 USM lens and at same time Sigma made same spec lens and back than Canon users like Sigma better I'm reffering to older Canon lens I don't know if canon made any new version. I did get that Sigma for Nikon and shot along side of Nikon AFD105f2 DC and AFS70-200mm f2.8 at a weddings and other ivents and I like that Sigma a lot but there are 2 versions of it secon version one with out DOF window scale is better and that what I have I did get first version just to see a differance ( it is small but it is there now my son use it) it is hard to found but shows up on eBay and mint like new will set you less than $180 British Pounds. New Sigma HSM 28mm f1.8 with 77mm filter size sucks big time. Version I reffer to is 58mm filter and it looks like this

http://www.ebay.com/itm/No-1698-Sig...53027375?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a7fd8f22f

you just need canon mount.
 
The Canon 35mm f2 is now an "older" lens since the release of the newer 35mm IS lens. First, if money is an issue, only purchase used but if you are paranoid like me, only purchase locally; you can examine the product, test it out, then hand over the money.

Here is a link to user reviews of this lens at FM, there is 130 responses so when the number is high like that, I tend to trust the "group" think, you'll see it gets a decent rating. I used one about a month and a half ago on a two week cruise, stayed on my camera 90% of the time, and was useful shooting in low light.

PS: I bought mine "used" but it was in immaculate condition; most people under use their equipment so I don't hesitate to buy used. And double PS: don't buy used from a pro.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=25&sort=7&cat=2&page=2
 
I'd recommend the Sigma 30 1.4 (old model) but you don't have a body that can do lens MA.

Wait until the new Sigma 30 1.4 ART drops and get that would be what I would have to suggest.

You can calibrate it from your PC.
 
Any idea of a ballpark price for the new Sigma?

Also, I'm looking for better lowlight capability than the nifty fifty. Is that necessarily going to cost a whole lot more than £250?
 
Thanks. Though I'm a bit put off by the reviews commenting on the noise of the AF motor.
If the new Sigma is a more refined lens I may splash out on that. (Although I'm not to keen on the likely need to calibrate the focus.)
 
I've been pretty happy with the 35 f/2. It works well for portraits/candids in tight spaces and with low light. The corners are soft wide open on FF, and even stopped down a few notches.

I've got some good results for architectural shots stopped way down.

I don't think I'd get close to the quality for a similar wide angle that suits my needs for anything approaching the price.

The AF motor does sound like a toy, which may or may not bother you.
 
raymallon said:
raymallon wrote:

A big ask I know, but would be grateful for suggestions (Canon or 3rd party) as to cost-effective lenses that are wider than the Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II (which is markedly better than the 18-55 IS II kit lens that came with my 600D) and which can also cope better in low light.

By "cost-effective", I am thinking of maximum £250.

Thank you in advance.

Raymond
Click to expand...
I recently picked up a 40mm stm and have been rather impressed. Inexpensive but solid performer. Tiny little thing as well. There were a few threads recently over on the XD forums where someone posted a bunch of examples. Might be worth checking out.

Cheers Mike
 
The (old) Sigma 30mm 1.4 was the lens that I settled on for the same requirement... low light, cost-effective, wide. It paired with the Canon 85mm 1.8 as budget primes to handle low light ends of the FL needs indoors on a crop sensor body (50D for me).
 
crazybadger said:
crazybadger wrote:
crazybadger said:
raymallon wrote:

A big ask I know, but would be grateful for suggestions (Canon or 3rd party) as to cost-effective lenses that are wider than the Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II (which is markedly better than the 18-55 IS II kit lens that came with my 600D) and which can also cope better in low light.

By "cost-effective", I am thinking of maximum £250.

Thank you in advance.

Raymond
Click to expand...
I recently picked up a 40mm stm and have been rather impressed. Inexpensive but solid performer. Tiny little thing as well. There were a few threads recently over on the XD forums where someone posted a bunch of examples. Might be worth checking out.

Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Do you also have the nifty fifty? I had looked briefly at the 40mm but think it might still be too tight.
 
Warren Van Camp said:
Warren Van Camp wrote:

The (old) Sigma 30mm 1.4 was the lens that I settled on for the same requirement... low light, cost-effective, wide. It paired with the Canon 85mm 1.8 as budget primes to handle low light ends of the FL needs indoors on a crop sensor body (50D for me).
Click to expand...
Thanks. No trouble with calibration? What camera are you using?
 
Get a current Sigma 30/1.4, it is a great lens and should be within your price range even if you buy it brand new.
 
There may have been some focusing issues on early runs but in the past few years the only complaints I've heard were from people who don't own the lens, like Sovern in this very thread. Mine has been nothing but joy to use.
 
raymallon said:
raymallon wrote:
raymallon said:
crazybadger wrote:
raymallon said:
raymallon wrote:

A big ask I know, but would be grateful for suggestions (Canon or 3rd party) as to cost-effective lenses that are wider than the Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II (which is markedly better than the 18-55 IS II kit lens that came with my 600D) and which can also cope better in low light.

By "cost-effective", I am thinking of maximum £250.

Thank you in advance.

Raymond
Click to expand...
I recently picked up a 40mm stm and have been rather impressed. Inexpensive but solid performer. Tiny little thing as well. There were a few threads recently over on the XD forums where someone posted a bunch of examples. Might be worth checking out.

Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Do you also have the nifty fifty? I had looked briefly at the 40mm but think it might still be too tight.
Click to expand...

No never had the 50 so can't make a comparison sorry. I wanted something inexpensive and compact (for travel), but with good IQ. The 40 was the best fit for me. If canon made a similar pancake lens in 28 or 24mm I would have gone for that but alas couldn't find anything.
 
raymallon said:
raymallon wrote:
raymallon said:
crazybadger wrote:
raymallon said:
raymallon wrote:

A big ask I know, but would be grateful for suggestions (Canon or 3rd party) as to cost-effective lenses that are wider than the Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II (which is markedly better than the 18-55 IS II kit lens that came with my 600D) and which can also cope better in low light.

By "cost-effective", I am thinking of maximum £250.

Thank you in advance.

Raymond
Click to expand...
I recently picked up a 40mm stm and have been rather impressed. Inexpensive but solid performer. Tiny little thing as well. There were a few threads recently over on the XD forums where someone posted a bunch of examples. Might be worth checking out.

Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Do you also have the nifty fifty? I had looked briefly at the 40mm but think it might still be too tight.
Click to expand...
live with the 50, until the reviews on the new sigma 30 art are out
 
b06a3ec28018413d8cd5e975c611841c.jpg

21956cc9f65e4c568d1746562aa34dfc.jpg

c3b6c6c1334c46639ad070f29467f33b.jpg





--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/94301219@N03/
 
Last edited:
Sorry... I lost my text and couldn't edit any more.

The first shot shows a major limitation of this lens, which may or may not be a concern, depending on your purposes. This shot of a flat granite wall was taken at f/2.8 facing dead-on. Fully open this would look atrocious. I'm not sure how this compares to the other lenses included in your analysis. For pictures of a flat artwork in a gallery in very low light this could be a critical issue. Or for taking pictures of the night sky.

The second two shots show a more typical use for this lens (stopped way down to f/8 or so), and under these conditions it has performed admirably for its cost.

Another application where softness wide open has been less of an issue is when taking portraits from very close up (like a person sitting across a table from you). In this situation the person's face is generally in the center of the frame and is in sharp focus, while the surrounding back/foreground is OOF anyway and doesn't reveal the soft corners as badly.

Some things to consider!

Yours, etc.,

Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top