Originally Posted by Rick
By the way, Trek, Little Tiger just purchased a 50mm 1.4 for her new rebel. It's a great lens, but costs over $300. I got a 50mm 1.8 for my canon 40d as a learning lens, and am very pleased with it. At only $100 I think you'd find the 1.8 a very useful addition to your bag.
Also, the beauty of a 50mm lens, on an APS-frame camera (such as yours, Trek), is that its 35mm, full-frame equivalent is equal to about an 80mm lens for Canon systems (75mm for Nikons). That's just a few millimeters shy of perhaps my favorite (full-frame) focal length of all time: the 85mm. Considered a "short-telephoto," it's great for people shots because it has a hint of compression (foreshortening), which tends to be more flattering for faces, and its wide-open maximum aperture makes generating fuzzy, abstracted backgrounds a breeze. Slap an "80mm-equivalent," 50mm, f/1.8 lens on your favorite Canon body and get ready to take some gorgeous people pictures!
As Rick pointed out, most manufacturers' f/1.8, 50mm lenses are pretty reasonably priced. You can gain another half-stop with an f/1.4 lens . . . and yet another, with an f/1.2 lens. But, that extra bit of speed costs, and costs dearly--Canon's 50mm f/1.2 is $1,500--yikes! Plus, fast lenses weigh a lot. But for most, the venerable, affordable, f/1.8, 50mm is a great choice! Considering that a "real" 85mm, f/1.8 Nikkor AF lens costs about $450, getting the "same" results for only about $100, is a real bargain.
[Note: I wasn't actually aware of this until I wrote this post--Canon APS-frame cameras actually have a crop factor of x1.6, as opposed to Nikon's slightly smaller crop factor of x1.5. In previous posts, I wrote in the context of thinking both were x1.5]Edited by studio460 - 4/12/10 at 11:53pm