Canon 50mm Lens wont match the EOS 500d ?

P

plainman007

Well-known member
Hi,

Based on some suggestions from members here i wanted to get a prime lens 50mm. But i found this lens online (CANON FD 50mm f/1.4 Lens) but the person says it wont match the canon eos500d. Why and if this is true, what sort of 50mm lens should i be looking for ?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Old mount. EF (for full frame or crop) or EF-S (crop only) are Canon's current lenses that will play nicely with your camera. You can also use manual Nikon lenses with a cheap adapter.
 
Hi Jordan,

The lens in question is an old mount type is it ? No wonder. So i must look out for EF or EFS lenses only ?

Thanks
 
So many lenses advertised as MD etc and which are meant for slr film cameras can also be used with an adapter ? Also which lenses are better in terms of value versus performance. Nikon or Canon. I am currently using the 18-55mm that came with my 500d. But ive found high contrast areas such as building edges against sky etc bearing chromatic abberations. Also no matter how perfect the focussing, the picture is always soft, it lacks the punchy shapr image i would like. Thats the reason im looking at getting the 50mm prime as members here suggested.

I also have an option of getting a 70-300mm sigma lens for about 40% more cost. How is the image sharpness on that lens please ? Im primarily looking for a lens which will give me more sharpness and i need 1 lens to be able to zoom in at least 3 to 4 times more than the 18-55 IS. If i get the sigma 70-300mm will it fill the sharpness and zoom requirements i have ?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Thanks. Ill read that. Also i wanted to ask some small doubts.

1. My pics seem to be exeptionally grainy with noise if seen at actual size. Some of the pic samples downloaded from dpreview.com are fabulous and even at actual size have no noise in them. Is there any menu tweaks i should do. 95% of my pics seem noisy but when fit to screen on my 1440x900 monitor they look sharp.

2. Also is it better to shoot RAW than JPEG L Fine ? Will RAW help me get rid of the noise in the image ?

3. Also i found that most of my images which have been copied from my cam to the PC are just 72 dpi. Im using the camera & scanner wizard of windows to import my images so far. I tried using the canon software to import images today and they show as 350dpi. Any ides whats the best way to get the images out from the camera at their highest quality ?

Regards
 
Last edited:
Noise is the result of underexposure. Examine the photos and your decisions regarding exposure to see what you can do differently. Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson is a great book if you are having any trouble with comprehending the concepts.

Shooting RAW will give you better control over your images in post. It's good to take that step when you're ready. Although shooting RAW may equip you to better manage noise in post than shooting JPEG, it's better to avoid it (noise) if possible. RAW gives you complete control over white balance. I usually shoot with the cloudy setting and if it's too warm, I change it in post.

Regarding image transfer, I can only say that if you open RAW images in Canon's software, Lightroom, or Photoshop, etc., and export once to your desired settings (and after editing), your images will suffer the least from compression. You never want to compress more than once. I simply insert the memory card into my computer (use an adapter if need be) and then drag and drop. I keep all original RAW files.
 
It might be overly obvious, but it can't hurt to start there...

It might be overly obvious, but it can't hurt to start there...

plainman007 said:
1. My pics seem to be exeptionally grainy with noise if seen at actual size. Some of the pic samples downloaded from dpreview.com are fabulous and even at actual size have no noise in them. Is there any menu tweaks i should do. 95% of my pics seem noisy but when fit to screen on my 1440x900 monitor they look sharp.
Click to expand...
What ISO?

plainman007 said:
2. Also is it better to shoot RAW than JPEG L Fine ? Will RAW help me get rid of the noise in the image ?
Click to expand...
RAW format is slower to write, has larger file sizes, and requires you to process your photos to share them with others (because most people don't have the software to read your camera's RAW format, that goes for all cameras, BTW, not just your 500D.) In return, you have a lot more information to work with during processing. For example, you can completely change the white balance and more easily recover under- and over-exposed parts of the image. It's a trade-off, but boils down to, the more depend on the photos you take for your livelihood, the more you should seriously consider RAW.

I shoot .jpg (for a variety of reasons that probably don't apply to you,) so I can't speak from experience, but my guess is that RAW may help a little with noise, but I wouldn't expect miracles.

plainman007 said:
3. Also i found that most of my images which have been copied from my cam to the PC are just 72 dpi. Im using the camera & scanner wizard of windows to import my images so far. I tried using the canon software to import images today and they show as 350dpi. Any ides whats the best way to get the images out from the camera at their highest quality ?
Click to expand...
Rant time.

For what you're talking about, DPI couldn't matter less.

Your camera creates a raster image of 4752 pixels by 3168 pixels (and can downsample that to 3456 x 2304 or 2353 x 1568 if you choose.) DPI is just a label the software throws in the file. Compare the "physical" sizes of the two different import methods. The one at 72dpi will be dramatically bigger because it's still the same number of dots, just fewer per inch.
 
If your looking for quality and value..the best overall lenses to get is Nikon AI/AIS manual lenses over Canon's. Get a quality adapter and your good to go. Try to stay away from zooms unless they are at least f2.8. But for the price of a good zoom, you could get a quality 50mm f1.4 and possibly with hard searching an 85mm F1.4 or F1.8. Just watch out for fungus or a very gummy focus ring.
 
Jordan > You mean i should have set a wider aperture ? Or a slower shutter speed ? How does one manage exposure ? In what order of priority would one adjust the exposure, aperture, shutter speed or a combination of both or does something else factor in ?

SquirellKiller > I will check the iso of the noisy shots and report back to you.

Smithy > I just heard some guys on dpreview stating that the 50mm isnt all that sharp compared to even the 18-55 kit lens. They claim that the 18-55 resolves the image much better. Im looking for a lens that would give me sharper edge definition than the 18-55. Any ideas please ? Also which is a nice lens to buy for some medium zooming like to shoot a bird thats about 50 meters away filling my entire frame with good image quality ? I think at the moment these are my 2 lens requirements.
 
I tend to shy away for zooms because they tend to be slow. I suppose the 18-55 might be better is some aspects, but that is one's opinion. I prefer a 50mm F1.4 over a F3.5 zoom because i can use low light. But then again i wouldn't shoot it at F1.4 but rather near F4. As for sharp images I prefer my 85m F1.4 AIS overall for clarity and response.
 
Smithy > The 50mm f1.8 is the affordable one. Apart from low light i wont see much of a sharper image is it ? Also i think on a 50mm prime theres no zoom so only a focus ring ? Can i get sharp focus on buildings (architectural photography) i feel the 18-55 tends to soften a bit at the 55 end.

Thanks
 
plainman007 said:
Smithy > The 50mm f1.8 is the affordable one. Apart from low light i wont see much of a sharper image is it ? Also i think on a 50mm prime theres no zoom so only a focus ring ? Can i get sharp focus on buildings (architectural photography) i feel the 18-55 tends to soften a bit at the 55 end.

Thanks
Click to expand...

The f1.8 is cheaper than the f1.4. There is no zoom because it is a prime lens. If you plan to shoot big buildings, then you would most likely need a wideangle lens like a 28mm f2.8. If your primary photography is for architectural photography, especially for magazines, then it is best to go into larger format overall like a 4x5. Check out kenrockwell site for some guidelines. But take it with a grain of salt because he uses his sponsors for endorsements. Also checkout Nikon lenses. I just shot some pic on a Canon 5dMk2 with my Nikon primes and it was so much superior than the 24-100 F4 zoom that came with the camera.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/index.htm
 
I have to disagree. You absolutely do not want to buy Nikon lenses or any other lenses that don't have an EF mount for your Canon SLR. You will loose all autofocus, focus point and auto aperture functionality by doing this.

My gear is full of Canon equipment but when someone asks me what camera they should buy I recommend either Nikon or Canon..why? Because when you are purchasing a camera you are buying into a lens manufacturer first and foremost. Both Canon and Nikon have equally good glass. Both of them make equavellent 50mm lenses for 1.8, 1.4 and 1.2.

50mm lenses are the cheapest lenses to manufacture. A 50mm 1.8 ($80 lens) is much faster and much sharper at 2.8 than almost any zoom lens you can buy (even spending upwards of $1,000). That being said the 18-55 stock lens is a great lens but it has it's limitation. It's not that fast and it's not great optically wide open. If you are shooting landscapes at f9 then the 18-55 will give you very sharp results and you were able to carry around a very lightweight lens.
 
Ive seen some pics posted on camera labs shot by an 18-55 IS lens and couldnt believe the sharpness in the pics. But what i need is to shoot some machinery and factories now. I dont know if the 50mm will help me in this area ? But i was hoping to buy it if it would give noticeably sharper images compared to my 18-55 kit lens. I thought i could do some onsite shots of closeups using the 50mm lens. Is the depth of field on this more shallow than what the 18-55mm could offer ? What id like to know is if its worth getting this inspite of me having a 18-55mm kit.

Thanks
 
yes, I would say a cheap 50mm is essential in almost lens kit. the F1.8 will give you about 3.5 more stops or 3.5x the amount of light gathering than the kit lens @ 50mm (not taking IS into account). So instead of shooting at 1600 ISO you woulod be able to shoot at around 150 ISO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top