Is this considered a good size (30mm) general purpose lens for medium wide shooting, both indoor and outdoor? i'll be using it on a GH@ I just got.
1552223
The crop factor for micro four thirds cameras (like your GH) is 2x. So the actual focal length will be 60mm which I would consider more for portraiture, not good for wide angle shots.
1552224
I use it this way on Sony E-mount (APS-C size sensor) but for micro 4/3 like Panasonic GH2 the field of view might be a little too narrow for what you describe. It would take excellent shots of people and probably faces, but typically not great for more than a couple people inside or entire buildings outside.
1552225
in a micro four thirds is very good for portrait, i also like it for some landscapes. is not very fast focusing for sports or moving subjects.
513849
For landscape and weddings you generally want a wider angle lens than this especially if you're shooting indoors. For kids and pets in an outdoor setting as well as portraits, this lens will work well.
1801933
This is a great lens, particularly at this price. It is tack sharp even at 500mm. You can compensate for the "smaller" aperture by either slower shutter speed (in which case a tripod may be required), or higher ISO. For tripod use I suggest a gimbal head that is designed to accept the built in arca swiss mounting plate on the lens collar. ISO up to 3200 should be OK on modern (last 5-7 years) DSLRs unless you're making really big prints.
1260706
This lens is only to be used with tripod (a very stable one) this is the only use for indoor sports I recommend to use a lens with stabilization or you will seriously struggle unless you can deal with cranking up the ISO and the shutter speed above 1/500 or even more and see how lucky you get you will seriously struggle for that kind of activity. as much as you can try to use a 70G200 or a 18 to 200 mm if you use Sony or above they will not be as cheap option as this one but to be honest this kind of lens is kind of going back to the 70`s and the definition you will get will not be as good and you will have to manually fine tune for each shot. I got it to experiment a bit though I feel like a paparazzi when I used it :-S I will only use this on daylight, outdoors, on a tripod and to a fix distance otherwise will do my head in. I hope you find it useful. P.S. This Opteka is the same cheap lens and Samyan, Rokinon, etc....so to me it is like a white label product cheaply manufactured in China with very simple design, not bat quality build but not a proper lens. Put your money on a piggy bank and get a proper lens for the desired activity. Cheers!
382374
I have both lenses and they are both pretty good. I probably like the 50mm a bit more than the 35mm. The real question for you to answer is what will I be my primary use for the lens ? Remember, we're shooting with a crop-sensor camera, so the lenses convert from a 35mm to a 52mm, and the 50mm converts to a 75mm lens. My recommendation for General Purpose Shooting would be to go with the 50mm ! A great bang for the buck and terrific bokeh !
143450
It wouldn't be my first pick for anything other than macro photography. f/3.5 is pretty slow for indoors (it's like looking into a cave), it isn't a zoom, it doesn't have stabilization, and focus is somewhat slow (comparatively speaking). For portraits, I would prefer the 70-200 f/2.8. It's a perfectly keen lens for macro, though; you can take pictures of the tiniest things!
1429330
I think it would work great for that. The optics are amazing...I took it on a safari and got some amazing photos. The only concern I could potentially see you having is the stop if you are shooting indoors. They make one that opens up further, however it is nearly double the price. I don't typically shoot low light, so I can't give you any advice here. I found it to be a pretty incredible lens.
1429331
Yes, I have used this lens for all of those purposes and it performs well. Although you might want the faster f2.8 lens if the indoor performances don't have adequate lighting. I have not regretted buying this lens at all.
2059968
It is an excellent lens for close ups and distances when there is good light environment, but not for low light situations, unless you have a flash. For indoors would be better a f/2.8 lens or less (f/1.2 or 1.4).
759740
Ana, I've had this lens for about a year now I think. I use it with my D3100 as an everyday-walk-in-the-park lens. I like just about everything about it-- the color is perfect, pictures are perfectly clear, the VR works perfectly. The only reason I might warn folks off it is the lens distortion at either end of its telephoto range. For that reason, I mostly stick to the center of that range and just use other lenses for wide angle or long range shots.
2256205
I use it on the North Shore of O'ahu for surfing pics. It is perhaps the most widely used lens there. Works great in sunny conditions, but tends to struggle when it's overcast as it is only an F5.6. If you plan on using it for indoor sports, it is not "good". It is OK at best.
1135872
I use a prime lens as my carry around lens all the time. I find the quality of the glass and the low light capability very useful. However you have to get used to not being able to zoom in and out. You have to get better at framing your subject. I'd say this is a good lens for some landscapes and small group photos as well a portraits. If you need to shoot in small rooms or in tight situations like a restaurant you may need the room to back up (to 8 feet) or so to take a photo of a group of 3. The best trial is to use the kit lens for a day on 50mm and see if that works for you.
1272577
For a general walk-around lens on a crop camera like the Rebels or 40D, etc, I find that 28mm is just too limited in terms of wide angle. Not very good for shooting a room full of people either. 28mm isn't too bad if you're ONLY shooting people. My recommendation would be to go for the 17-50 and get an image stabilized telephoto for longer shots like the Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS, Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM or Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS.
827133
It's a good lens for my needs. I have found the 18-300mm type lenses just don't do all that well, I think too much range to cover but this does well and being a f/2.8 it's better for darker shots. Heavier than a kit lens but worth it in my opinion.
565449
I'm in the same boat. I have a 40d as well and I just bought the Canon 50mm 1.8 but found that I was always "stepping back" to take a lot of indoor shots. I am leaning towards either the Sigma 30 1.4 or Canon 24 f2.8. The 24 got a good review at the photozone.de site. Here's a direct link if Amazon will let it through: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/153-canon-ef-24mm-f28-test-report--review?start=2. They review just about every lens. Check it out. Again, it's photozone (dot) de
160270
I'm not a G series owner "yet", but I think there are very few real choices for lenses. The 45-200 is the most likely choice for telephoto. And the 20mm/f1.7 "pancake" for indoors/low light. I'd think the lense you have is probably the better overall for average use, especially if the EZ zoom feature works as well as in the FZ series. I would think you could reach @150mm at 5EZ. The EZ zoom feature is supposed to be able to double the focal length, bringing the 14-45 (28-90) to 28-90 (56-180). And it is "free". Unless you need the long reach of the 45-200mm (90-400mm), which I can't do without, why spend the money?
143452
It is a really nice lens. Though if you want portrait or medium telephoto, the 135 f/2 or the 70-200 f/2.8 are both fantastic as well, and maybe better suited.