Re: How much better is 50mm 1.8 over 22mm 2.0 in terms of taking portraits?
2
doraemon784 wrote:
Hi, I recently got my M10 and 22mm 2.0 but I have been quite disappointed with the amount of bokeh that I get when I am taking portraits. So I have been looking into some other lenses that may give better results and after extensive searching online, it seems like either 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 is a reasonable option for me. But seeing that 50mm 1.8 is only 0.2 different from my 22mm in terms of focal length, I was wondering if this would still make a whole difference in terms of bokeh.. or would 50mm 1.4 be a wiser choice for me?
Thanks!
I think you're talking about the amount of background separation, rather than bokeh. This is determined by the depth of field at a given focal length, aperture, and subject distance. The 50 is only 1/3 stop faster than the 22, but it is much longer. You will be able to get considerably thinner depth of field with the 50 F1.8 than with the 22. However, you could also experiment with different backgrounds in your portraits. If the background is far enough away, and relatively uncluttered, even the 22 can give a pleasing background separation shot wide open (at F2). The 50 F1.8 STM is definitely worth getting. It's small, light, and sharp. Even with the adapter, it's about the same size as some of the EF-M lenses. I use the 22, the 35 F2 IS, and the 50STM for portraits. Depending on what I'm looking for, they all work really well with the M cameras.
-- hide signature --
As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile