50mm FOV lens for APS-C?

Tom Holly wrote:

I’ve used a 50 on APS many times, and yeah it’s a great portrait format. Much the same as my 85 on full frame.

Regarding 50mm equivalents, I think you’re right that a fast ~30 is the way to go. I had the cheap sigma 30 f1.4 which I used on APS, and it was equivalent to 50 on FF like you say.

The f1.4 gave plenty of subject isolation. That lens wasn’t especially sharp though, especially wide open, which I’m sure you’re aware of.

Personally I would buy one of:

Sigma 30mm f1.4

Sigma 30mm f1.4 ART

CANON 28mm f1.8

canon 35mm f2 IS

this tool is good for comparing lenses. You can see how far you need to stop down get it sharp, and clean up the colour aberration (if you care about that stuff).

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=405&Camera=402&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=253&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Thanks for those suggestions!

I was seriously considering Sigma 30mm f1.4 ART one. It looked good on the specs. Alas, I read about AF inconsistencies and not that great sharpness at f1.4. Being great at 1.8 or f2, as the-digital-picture showed too. It's only 1/4 less expensive than Canon 35 f2 IS. Not much.

However, one lens came to my mind, that I somehow totally omitted - Canon 40mm f2.8. Now, it's not 35mm nor f2 or brighter, but I have it in my home already. I totally forgot about that lens that I bought for my wife several years ago - talk about pancakes being tiny!

I will test it with my 90D and see how satisfied I am with that look. While being a full stop less bright, it's 5mm narrower in FOV so could offer slightly more or similar subject separation as 35mm on f2.

The serious advantage on 35mm f2 is IS. People are so satisfied how well it works, some call it a life-saver in low light situations and very low shutter speeds.

But still, Canon 40mm f2.8 costs me nothing but to experiment and see how good it is for my needs. So that's a win for now.