Bill Pierce
Well-known
I recently went through one of those gadget-bag packing days and realized how many “normal” lenses I have. Three for the rangefinder bodies running from big superspeed through collapsable. Four for the DSLR’s from big and fast to slow and small plus a macro. (Of course, there are also the 50mm equivalents within the range of the zooms on not only the DSLR’s, but a bunch of small, pocketable digitals.)
Yet I don’t think of any of these 50’s as redundant. Each has its advantages and disadvantages that make it particularly useful for a certain kind of photography.
Take, for example, the 50/1.8 on my Canon DSLR’s. It’s a $90 lens, and it’s tiny. It’s so small that it turns my hefty DSLR into a relatively low profile camera good for street shooting.
Not suprisingly, stopped down to f/5.6 it’s as good as anything I’ve got for street shooting. Nonetheless, I was still surprised when DxOMark rated it slightly higher than my far more expensive f/1.2 in their broad usage tests. Fast, it isn’t. But central sharpness is good even at 2.8. So, when I’m shooting on the street, most of the time I have a $90 lens on camera that cost several thousand. Odd, two of my sharpest 50’s are the slow ones, this and the 50 position on the Leica Tri-Elmar.
I have a suspicion that many of you have more than one normal lens. What’s your favorite and why? Any surprises?
Yet I don’t think of any of these 50’s as redundant. Each has its advantages and disadvantages that make it particularly useful for a certain kind of photography.
Take, for example, the 50/1.8 on my Canon DSLR’s. It’s a $90 lens, and it’s tiny. It’s so small that it turns my hefty DSLR into a relatively low profile camera good for street shooting.
Not suprisingly, stopped down to f/5.6 it’s as good as anything I’ve got for street shooting. Nonetheless, I was still surprised when DxOMark rated it slightly higher than my far more expensive f/1.2 in their broad usage tests. Fast, it isn’t. But central sharpness is good even at 2.8. So, when I’m shooting on the street, most of the time I have a $90 lens on camera that cost several thousand. Odd, two of my sharpest 50’s are the slow ones, this and the 50 position on the Leica Tri-Elmar.
I have a suspicion that many of you have more than one normal lens. What’s your favorite and why? Any surprises?
