50mm f1.4 not wide enough on 60D, ideas??

EF-S 18-55

EF-S 18-135

are two lenses that easily should cover your needs.

shani wrote:

Hi guys,

I fall in love with photography again every time I put my 50mm back on my camera, but it's just too cropped on my 60D body for general use, because it turns into something like an 80, and I'm feeling pretty bummed about it.

What is it about the 50mm f1.4 that you like? Do you like using it wide open, and notice the shallow DOF?

Is there anything with that low aperture, but wide enough for me to use, maybe similar equivalence to 35mm

What do you mean by this. Do you mean an equivalent on APS-C for a 35mm lens on FF?

If you actually just meant a 35mm lens, being kinda equivalent to a 50mm lens on FF, then you have these relatively affordable options:

• Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM. Lens with nice bokeh, comes closest to the big aperture but wider than 50mm wish.
• Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art. Improved version of the above lens.
• Canon EF 28mm f1.8 USM. Not the nicest bokeh.
• Sigma 28mm f1.8 macro. Nicer bokeh than the Canon above, bigger, heavier, slower AF.
• Canon EF 35mm f2. Compact and light, bokeh can be nice up close, a bit less nice at middle distances. I like it.
• Canon EF 35mm f2 IS USM. Bigger and better.
• Samyang 35mm f1.4. Manual focus.

If you meant equivalent to 35mm on FF:

• Canon EF-S 24mm f2.8. Very small, very affordable, lacks big aperture.
• Canon EF 24mm f2.8 IS USM. Great lens, lacks big aperture.
• Sigma 20mm f1.8. 
• Sigma 24mm f1.8.
• Samyang 24mm f1.4, manual focus only.

Keep in mind that the wider a lens is, the less shallow DOF will be, DOF is aperture size dependent.

(not that I've ever used one!), that is a reasonable price, e.g. hopefully lower than $500.

I don't think I could go higher than f2, unless you really convince me it's worth it.

Cheers!

shani wrote:

Hi guys,

I fall in love with photography again every time I put my 50mm back on my camera, but it's just too cropped on my 60D body for general use, because it turns into something like an 80, and I'm feeling pretty bummed about it.

Is there anything with that low aperture, but wide enough for me to use, maybe similar equivalence to 35mm (not that I've ever used one!), that is a reasonable price, e.g. hopefully lower than $500.

I don't think I could go higher than f2, unless you really convince me it's worth it.

I have the Sigma 30/1.4, the older model as it happens but old and new are very similar in performance. Great lens, compact, fast, HSM focusing, reasonably good wide open and properly sharp by f/2.

However if I were buying today I would possibly go for the canon 35/2 IS. Comparing both lenses at f/2 it's sharper than the Sigma especially towards the corners, and it has the huge advantage for low light shooting of four-stop IS. It's great having f/1.4 on the Sigma, but as soon as you have to stop down a little for sharpness or depth of field, the advantage is lost - but the 35/2 still has its image stabilisation. Don't let anybody tell you IS is for long lenses - as soon as you have less than ideal light it's a great thing to have on any lens.

The other one to consider is the Sigma 18-35/1.8. It's optically outstanding and of course it has the added flexibility of being a zoom. The two disadvantages are no IS, and it's *much* bulkier and heavier. It's also the most expensive of the three.

Powerdoc wrote:

the new 24 mm STM should be great

It's a 37 mm equivalent,

38 and something mm equivalent, actually

very light, quiet focusing, nice IQ, and pocket friendly price : http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-24mm-f-2.8-STM-Lens.aspx

-- hide signature --

It's all about photography