Absolutely love this video! The 50mm prime lens is such a fantastic choice. Your passion for it really shines through, and I couldn't agree more with everything you said. It's my go-to lens for capturing stunning portraits and everyday moments with such clarity and beautiful depth of field. Thanks for sharing your love for this amazing lens!
I had the 24mm for a few months, and found it was too wide for portraits, but not wide enough for landscapes. I ended up selling it, and getting a 20mm. I do wonder if having a wider zoom would be a good idea, but I hate the weight of a the 14-24 and just don't have a need that often for it, so it is a 35/50 combo for me . . .for the moment. Thank you for watching.
I think so, but again, how much of the gym needs to be seen? I think because you want a blurry background, the 50mm is better because it also shows less of the gym. Honestly, if you are trying to drop out the background, look at the 85mm as well. Might be too tight and too shallow of a depth of field, but it is worth a look.
I think you should be fine@@Lydiaelkobi, you will be just closer to a 85mm focal length with the 50mm, but I think you will like it. I would rent to be sure. If you plan on buying a full frame in the near future, invest in full frame glass.
I am going to try to NOT sound like an arrogant photo snob when I say this, but I am not a crop sensor shooter, so I am not sure. The definition of crop sensor varies, but you might take the crop factor of your sensor and then find the 35 and 50mm equivalent. Sorry I can be of more help. Thank you for watching.
There are some good technical notes about crop sensors on the web. I shot a 1.5x Nikon APC for a few years. A 24 becomes a 36... A 35 becomes a 52.5. For depth of field, they are not as shallow as on a full sized sensor. Meaning, a 1.4 lens on a crop sensor performs about like a 2.0. Therefore, if you want to separate the background, you have to get a really large aperture lens. But, because often a crop sensor camera is a lower priced camera, they don't make really big 1.0 aperture lenses to give you the 1.4 equivalent. I shot 4x5 back in the 70's. A 4.5 f number on that lens was super shallow. Google depth-of-field articles vs. sensor size and focal length. Aside from depth of field difference, all of the perspective discussion from the video work. Just do the math and use a 24 vs 35 for your photography. You'll have the same "perspective." Great video discussion.
I've always felt the 50 is MEH. So, I bought one (Sony 50 1.2) and used it for almost a year (last year) to see if that opinion changed. The beginning of this year, I sold it. I still feel it MEH. It's a jack of all trades and master of none.
Not going to disagree with that at all. I am 50/50 on the 50mm, but there are times where it really shines. I just found a image from a shooter 4 years ago that I shot on a 55mm and I really loved it. I can see how there is love and meh on the 50. Thank you for watching.
A small note about the 35 being close to a 40 field of view but a little wider.... If you ever make prints in the old formats, 5x7, 8x10, the 35mm excels. The side cropping means the 35 performs like a 40 does in the 2x3 format of the sensor. Please don't take my 35mm away! You already took my Kodachrome!
@@PhotoKitchen425 LOL! Great comparison. Thanks. It was so good that I ordered the 35mm Z 1.8 for my Nikon Z8! My old F-Mount 35mm f/2.0 manual lens just didn't make sense.
