[Pat]

My 17-40 lense is a dream, however I am a bit mystified by the nifty 50. I bought it for closeup work such as taking portraits of my unwilling family etc. OK, it doesn't zoom, looked at sample photographs on another forum and it seems to be able to do a lot more than I thought. What sort of photography is it capable of, street photography? Anyone else got one?

[NT73]

No I haven't got one but I will soon.
Dont forget if you stop down, you increase the DOF.
Have a look at the reviews for it on <www.fredmiranda.com>
Press Review and then scroll to Canon prime and look for the lens.
Lots of hints as well.

[Wedding Shooter]

I have the 50 1.4. I guess the use would be almost the same as the 1.8.

I use mine for getting very narrow DOF. At 1.4 or even 1.8 you can really isolate the subject. Kombi had a thread on his 50 1.4 with some great pictures.

But you are using a crop sensor camera and the 50 is more like an 85 on that - so your use maybe different to mine. You should really think of it as a portrait lens and use it for that as well as for isolating subjects from their back ground.

To be honest the 17-40 is such a great lens I think you will hardly ever find it off your camera

[Toad]

Also for low-light, the 1.8 is ideal.

Father Time speaking now: I remember my first film SLR - the Olympus OM-1. All I had was a 50mm 1.4 - and I got some amazing shots from it...

[Petographer]

looked at sample photographs on another forum and it seems to be able to do a lot more than I thought.

Tack sharp images and great in low light stuations. Very decently priced. This is why this lens is so popular. Not really a walk around lens.

[patch17]

all my cameras have a 50 f1.8 or 1.4. it's sharp, fast and light. if i'm walking around town, it's probably the lens i'll be using. (however, i've been leaning towards 28mm f2.8 lately) i hardly use a zoom nowadays.