05-17-2011, 07:06 PM
[quote name='youpii' timestamp='1305657244' post='8449']
I know a few who bought a Canon 50/1.8 after being disappointed of not having the "SLR look" (blurred backgrounds) with the kit zoom.
[/quote]
I know many who really dislike the 50mm f1.8, for its neither fish nor meat "qualities" on APS-C... Not wide enough for indoors use, bokeh and blur not upto real portrait lens needs..
And I know few who dislike the 85mm f1.8 on their APS-C cameras, and none who see that lens as "expensive"....
One can think of all kinds of odd perspectives, but the 85mm f1.8's are very affordable little gems in their line ups, giving a reasonable 135mm f2.8 full frame equivalent.
The Sony is a 135mm f4 equivalent, not really a dream for people specifically looking for a portrait lens.
Of course, some might find the very low price more important, but that does not make the Canon and Nikon unaffordable by any means...
I know a few who bought a Canon 50/1.8 after being disappointed of not having the "SLR look" (blurred backgrounds) with the kit zoom.
[/quote]
I know many who really dislike the 50mm f1.8, for its neither fish nor meat "qualities" on APS-C... Not wide enough for indoors use, bokeh and blur not upto real portrait lens needs..
And I know few who dislike the 85mm f1.8 on their APS-C cameras, and none who see that lens as "expensive"....
One can think of all kinds of odd perspectives, but the 85mm f1.8's are very affordable little gems in their line ups, giving a reasonable 135mm f2.8 full frame equivalent.
The Sony is a 135mm f4 equivalent, not really a dream for people specifically looking for a portrait lens.
Of course, some might find the very low price more important, but that does not make the Canon and Nikon unaffordable by any means...