So much has changed in the world of photography over the years but whether you shoot film, DSLR or mirrorless, for me one thing still holds true. Everyone should own a 50mm lens.
Now I realise I’m making a generalisation here. I know that the perfect lens is the one that’s right for what you’re shooting (a landscape photographer isn’t likely to have the same needs as a portrait photographer or a wildlife photographer for example). I understand that if you’re shooting on a crop sensor then you might have different needs than if you were shooting full frame but humour me. For me, the 50mm prime lens is perfect. It’s the lens that lives on my camera. It’s my safe zone, my happy place.
What’s so special about 50mm?
50mm is about as close as we can get to our eyes field of view*. When you shoot at 50mm, the image feels natural and you can make the viewer feel like they’re inside the image looking on at the subject of your photograph. We feel at home in the image.
*It’s important to note here I’m talking about full frame sensors. If you’re shooting on a cropped APS-C sensor then the sensor is effectively cropping your image by a factor of approximately 1.6. That means your 50mm is giving you something much closer to 80mm in real terms which is in short telephoto territory. On a crop sensor you may wish to go for a 35mm which would give you similar results to a 50mm, but I digress…
Wait, my kit lens lets me shoot between 18-55 so that’s better right?
Good question! Like a lot of people, my first DSLR came with a kit lens. A general ‘all purpose’ zoom that aims to give you decent results and flexibility across most everyday shooting situations. They’re light, convenient and affordable (indeed most consumer cameras come bundled with them). They let you jump straight into capturing a good range of subject – it’s all good. That is until you start to get frustrated by the limitations of them. When you realise that a maximum aperture of f/4-5.6 is actually pretty limiting if you want to work in low light or if you’re looking to isolate a subject with shallow depth of field. Enter the prime lens.
Prime lens 101
Prime lenses are a fixed focal length. This means there’s no complex zoom mechanics to take up valuable space which means more room for glass and a wide aperture. Compared to zoom lenses they’re small, light, fast and sharp. That’s not to say there aren’t amazing quality zooms available (My Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM lens is hands down the sharpest lens I own) BUT as a general rule of thumb, for the absolute best optical quality, prime is the way to go.
Good news – There’s a 50mm for everyone!
‘Prime’ sounds expensive right? Well, it certainly can be, make no mistake BUT you can pick up a 50mm for surprisingly little money. Let’s take a minute to look at the current Canon 50mm prime line up and look at our price points and pros and cons of each.
All hail the ‘nifty fifty’
As this post is about getting started with 50mm and primes in general I’m going to focus on the entry point lens above – the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM. Like the majority of Canon users this was my first 50mm lens and it’s not known as the ‘nifty fifty’ (or ‘plastic fantastic’) for nothing. I’m adamant that it’s without doubt the best bang for your buck you can get. In photographic terms this lens is CHEAP (You can usually pick one up for around £100). I actually paid less than £40 for mine brand new from the States – the bargain of the century!
Why is this lens so special? Let’s run through some pros and cons:
Let’s get a couple of cons out of the way
- I’m not going to beat around the bush – the build quality of this lens is terrible. It’s light, plasticky and you really REALLY don’t want to drop it.
- The focus is pretty slow, especially if you’re shooting in low light.
Now for the pros
- It’s CHEAP. (I mean, REALLY cheap).
- While it might feel like a toy it’s crazy sharp for the price
- While the slowest of the line up, at f/1.8 it’s able to suck in 3-4 times as much light as your kit lens meaning you can shoot in a much wider range of conditions.
- That beautiful bokeh (the out of focus bits) you see everywhere? Well welcome to the party pal! You want to isolate that subject by blurring out the background? You got it!
- Did I mention how cheap this was? It’s a steal!
If you’re shooting with a kit lens, the nifty fifty will improve your technique
If you’re learning photography and trying to improve your technique then a 50mm will open up a whole world of creative options that you just can’t achieve with your kit lens. Trying to understand the exposure triangle (ISO, Aperture, Shutter), how to balance them to achieve a correct exposure and creative use of aperture with a maximum aperture of f/5.6 is like trying to bake a cake when you’re missing half the ingredients. A nice wide range of apertures will allow you to properly experiment with how these three components work together.
Not only that, if you’ve been shooting with a kit lens you won’t believe the difference in sharpness you get by attaching a prime. The range of creative options it gives you will improve your understanding and make you a better photographer.
That all sounds great but I like the convenience of my zoom lens
Time for some tough love. Stop being so bloody lazy. “Oh, I’m a bit too far away” *ZOOM, “Ah my composition isn’t quite right” *ZOOM. Here’s the truth – photography is an art form. Nothing good ever comes without a bit of hard work. If you want to make great images you need to work for it.
“The best zoom is your legs”
Ernst Haas
Get used to not being a lazy photographer – it’ll put you in good stead later.
Further reading
If you want to read more about the relative merits of the various 50mm options there are loads of articles, reviews and comparison videos available online. Most tell a similar tale showing the nifty fifty punching well above its weight. The SLR Lounge 50mm Prime Shootout and the DigitalRev article on the nifty fifty are good places to start.
Some examples
I’ll leave you with a few examples of shots I’ve taken with a 50mm prime. Enjoy!
JSH
8th June 2019 at 12:52 pm
The sample shots are awesome!
What lens(es) did you use for them?
Simon Wiffen
8th June 2019 at 12:58 pm
Ah thanks so much. Appreciate that. Majority were taken on the Canon 50mm f/1.4 but a few of them were taken on the f.1.2L which I’ve only had for a few weeks. As I said above, optically they’re not a world apart. Let me know if you can tell which was shot on which 😉
NP
16th January 2025 at 5:14 am
I’m guessing 4 9 and 7 are done with the 1.4
Simon Wiffen
16th January 2025 at 6:40 am
4 was shot on the 1.4. 7 and 9 both on the 1.2L.
Ruvio
30th December 2020 at 11:49 am
Agreed.
Albert lowes
12th October 2020 at 5:59 am
I have 50mm 1.8g wish I’d saved my money. My 24 to 85 is better at 50 mm for low light due to vr at 50mm also it’s just as sharp. If i want out of focus background i shoot at 85mm. A
Simon Wiffen
12th October 2020 at 6:52 am
Thanks for your comment Albert. Interesting to hear your thoughts – is that the Nikon 24-85 you’re talking about? I don’t have hands on experience with Nikon but even with the VR I’d be surprised if a f/3.5-4.5 could compete with an f1.8 in low light. Fully appreciate that real world use differs. It’s also ~4x the price of the 50mm and would lack any of the shallow focus characteristics the 50 brings you. I’m not suggesting the 1.8 is optically the best lens in the world BUT I do stand by my statement above that I think it’s the best bang for your buck you can get. The performance v price is incredible.
As you say, you can get beautiful shallow focus with an 85mm (or longer) but you’re into short telephoto range at this point and one of the main reasons I love 50 as a focal range is that it produces images so close to the human eye so you’re capturing really natural feeling images.
If you already have a 24-85 and an 85mm prime in your bag and you’re happy with the results you’re getting from the 24-85 then I can fully appreciate you might not see a need for a fixed 50. I guess we all shoot differently. I personally love a prime lens so I don’t think a 25-85 would ever come out of my bag if I had a 50 and an 85.
Daisy Duck
10th July 2024 at 12:26 pm
Hey Simon!
You’re right about the 50mm f/1.8’s capabilities, but don’t overlook zoom lenses with optical stabilization, especially in low light. Optical stabilization lets you use longer shutter speeds to compensate for its narrower aperture, capturing clear images even in dim settings. Also, an 85mm lens at f/5.6 can still blur the background beautifully, thanks to its longer focal length aiding in excellent subject separation. So, a stabilized zoom can sometimes be just as good as a f/1.8 prime!
Moreover, while a large aperture is helpful, it’s not the be-all and end-all. Effective composition and framing often have a more profound impact on the quality of your photos than aperture size alone, and you can capture much more compositions with a zoom lens. In the real world a slower zoom allows you to quickly adapt and capture multiple compositions for subjects that are only present for a fleeting moment, something a prime lens can’t match.
For a portrait shoot where you can control the subject and environment, the 50mm prime is great. However, in dynamic situations, the versatility of a zoom lens with stabilization can be invaluable. You can start with an establishing shot using a wide focal length and then zoom in for detailed shots with a tighter field of view, it’s not just about being lazy with feet. That’s why I always come home with more memories captured with a zoom than a prime.
It’s also worth noting that the field of view of the human eye is roughly equivalent to a wide angle lens on a full-frame camera. A 50mm lens is much tighter than what our eyes naturally see. This makes wide angle field of view even more versatile and practical for capturing a variety of scenes and perspectives that match the human eye.
Simon Wiffen
10th July 2024 at 12:33 pm
Appreciate your thoughts, thanks. Yep I’m not dismissing zooms at all, in fact I shoot a huge amount during family shoots on my 70-200mm (albeit that has a fixed f/2.8). There’s certainly a place for them for sure. There’s more to it than ability to draw in light though, I believe spending time shooting with prime lenses will always make you a better photographer, but that’s not to say I think anyone needs to exclusively shoot primes though. My 35mm prime has IS as well – best of both worlds!
Dillan
1st November 2020 at 2:34 am
I completely agree. 50mm is my favourite focal length. My EF 50mm f/1.4 my default lens. It’s not perfect for everything, of course, but it is a sharp, dependable lens.
Simon Wiffen
1st November 2020 at 7:42 am
Thanks Dillon – The 1.4 is great image-wise. I was always really happy with the images mine delivered, I just always felt the build quality was a bit flaky. I don’t see a significant difference with my 1.2. Build quality is miles ahead but for the most part sharpness is similar. When it really hits focus perfectly it’s amazing but I’d say I maybe have to work a fraction harder with it than I did with the 1.4.
Rush Bevans
27th November 2020 at 1:50 am
I have a 7dMii and a 6D. Have a Sigma 50mm f1.4. Is it a waste of money to get the Sigma 35mm f1.4 for my 7dMii Crop?
Simon Wiffen
27th November 2020 at 6:31 am
Hi Rush. I wouldn’t say it’s a waste of money at all. In fact I did pretty much the exact same thing. I had the 50mm 1.8 on a 7D body and while I loved the flexibility that the 1.8 gave me 50 always felt just a touch too long on the crop sensor – more a short telephoto than a natural eye focal length. I bought the Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM and I LOVED it on my 7D. On the crop sensor it gave a much more natural field of view than the 50. Then when I upgraded my body to a full frame 5 it was reborn as a wide angle prime. It depends on what you’re shooting of course but for me 35mm on the crop sensor was pretty much the perfect ‘everyday’ lens. EDIT – Just realised you said you also had a 6D. I think you’d love the 35 in that case as it’ll serve different purposes for each camera. 35mm is a fantastic focal length to have
Quazi Sanjeed
23rd December 2020 at 7:40 am
I’m an enthusiast nature, wildlife and lifestyle photographer. Always have a 50mm 1.8 in my arsenal. Use it for casual indoor portraits, products and flower photography. Sometimes night shots as well. Pair it both with FF and APS-C bodies. Needless to say, it’s a gem. I use premier primes for my wildlife shots.
Simon Wiffen
23rd December 2020 at 7:58 am
Yep it might not be well suited to wildlife photography but it’s certainly a versatile length (especially if you’re using on both FF and APS-C). For lifestyle-type shotds especially it’s one of may favourite lengths to work with.
Les
24th December 2020 at 10:15 am
I have Canon 650 Rebel and use the 50mm 1.8 on it.
Love both the camera and the lens
Rich Umfleet
29th December 2020 at 8:36 am
I’ve never understood the hype behind the nifty-fifty. My first film camera came with a nifty-fifty f/1.4. It’s the only one I’ve ever owned and it started collecting dust as soon as I was able to afford better lenses. I did dust it off and start using it, again, after I bought a 2x converter and liked the pictures it took at 100mm f/2.8. Even though my hair is grey, you can call me Goldilocks, 50mm is either too narrow or too wide, and never really just right.
Lisa Comaply
30th December 2020 at 11:54 am
I’ll bet you look cute in Goldie’s dress.
Colleen
6th January 2021 at 6:25 am
I’ve just started my photography journey, mostly taking photos of my young children. I currently am using my 85mm at typically 1.8, but thinking of purchasing a 50mm for indoors and limited spaces. Is the 1.4 worth saving for? Or would I not notice enough of a difference to make it worth it, for the foreseeable future? (I shoot a canon rebel)
Simon Wiffen
6th January 2021 at 6:47 am
Hi Colleen, thanks for your message. So you’re shooting on a crop sensor then? In my experience I found 50mm a shade too long on my crop sensor when shooting my kids a lot of the time, especially when shooting in an enclosed space. You might also want to think about 35mm possibly – that gives a similar natural view as the 50 when used on a crop sensor. In terms of 1.4 vs 1.8 the 1.4 is still a relatively affordable lens and it is a much better all rounder than the cheaper 1.8 both in terms of image quality and focus ability. It’s worth jumping straight to the 1.4 if you can afford it but the 1.8 is so cheap you could grab one (second hand market is excellent as a lot of people upgrade) to play with to see how the focal length fits in with your needs) and you could always upgrade later if it becomes a key part of your camera bag. Hope that helps! S
Vic
10th March 2021 at 11:43 am
Hi Simon is the 50 mm lens good for doing close ups of flowers, bees etc
Simon Wiffen
10th March 2021 at 11:47 am
Hi Vic, it depends on the kind of shot you’re after I’d say. None of the 50mm lenses are macro and I believe the minimum focus distances range between around 14-18 inches depending on which version of the 50mm you have so you could get fairly close. If you’re looking for close up details you’d probably be better with a 100mm Macro or similar I’d have thought. Certainly if you’re looking to take shots of bees for instance. Hope that helps!
Vic
10th March 2021 at 2:54 pm
Hi Simon , I’ve taken some with my 18-55 lens, that came out good but my son said to look into a 50mm . Only problem with a macro lens is I’m not able to get on the floor due to a disability. I can lean over a decent amount. I’m only an amateur photographer doing it as a hobby so don’t want to spend a fortune. Regards
Vic
Simon Wiffen
10th March 2021 at 2:58 pm
Hi Vic, you might find a 50mm opens up some nice possibilities for you if you’re shooting the kind of shots you’ve been able to get with an 18-55 kit. Neither will get you particularly close but if it’s an area you’d like to explore more you can pick up macro lenses for reasonable money. If mobility is an option maybe consider using a tripod? Some tripods allow the legs to spread extra wide and have a movable central column so you can get the camera really low. If you do get into macro the focus range can get very low so probably better with a tripod and focus stacking anyway.
Vic
10th March 2021 at 3:16 pm
Thank you for that Simon, much appreciated. I’ll look into both , the 50mm and the macro lens
Regards
Vic
Ps I’m using a canon 4000D camera
Adam Brener
4th April 2021 at 10:34 pm
Just bought the 50 1.2L for my 5DsR. I usually shoot at 35 1.4, but I’m wanting a little more intimacy and a little less environment in my portraits and candid documentary photography without having to workaround the distortion of getting too close with a 35. Should have it in my hands in the next few days and I can’t wait! Your image samples are lovely.
Simon Wiffen
5th April 2021 at 6:55 am
Ah exciting – I hope you love it. I went from the 1.4 to the 1.2 and I do love it. I found I had to fine tune the AF on mine quite a bit for best results. There seems to be a bit more variation with this lens than others reading others comments. Enjoy it! It’s a beautiful piece of glass for sure.
Larry Miller
26th April 2022 at 3:21 pm
Very good article Simon. I’m a landscape photographer. I shoot for several magazines. When I’m on the road i have a three lens set up for the most part. A Nikkor 50 F1.4 AIS, a Nikkor 28 F2 AIS and a Nikkor 85 F1.8 . Occasionally I’ll bring along a Nikkor 20 F2.8 AIS lens. That lens can be addictive! I shoot with FF manual cameras only. Never really got in to digital. The 50mm is a happy medium between the 28 and the 85 for me. I put the film pictures on a CD and off they go to the editors. They seem to like the combination of lenses I use. As mentioned, the 50MM is a “happy medium”.
Simon Wiffen
26th April 2022 at 3:46 pm
Thanks Larry. I really do think a 50mm takes some beating for an all round everyday carry. 28, 50, 85 is a solid trio! Surprised you don’t find yourself craving something between the 20 and 28 as a landscape shooter? Would love to see your work if there’s a URL you can share?
Appreciate you taking the time to comment, thanks
S
Andy
8th June 2022 at 10:46 pm
Thanks for the article Simon, it’s got me thinking. Just bought my first DSLR, a basic second hand Canon 100D with the kit 18-55 lens. I loved my prime 50mm on my 40-odd year old Minolta 35mm, so if I’m looking to emulate the feel of that lens, am I right in supposing I’ll need a 50/1.6, i.e. around 30mm, lens to match the Canon’s APS-C? They seem harder to find than traditional 50s.
Simon Wiffen
9th June 2022 at 6:39 am
Hi Andy. Yep the crop factor on your 100D is approx 1.6 so if you’re looking for the ’50mm’ feel the closest approximation on your body would be a 35mm. I have an EF 35mm f/2 IS USM and I can highly recommend it if you’re looking for one. It’s the only non L lens in my kit and I’m constantly impressed with the sharpness and build quality of it. It’s far, far better than any of the other non L lenses I’ve owned and is reasonably affordable. You could of course get the same focal length with your kit lens if you’re not quite ready to upgrade to a prime but 35mm is a great shout for a crop sensor body. Plus side is of course if you ever upgrade to full frame then you can continue to use it as a true 35mm prime so it’s win win!
Andy
9th June 2022 at 2:00 pm
Thanks Simon!
Toby
14th November 2022 at 9:00 pm
A very long time ago I was lucky enough to go to Cuba for a month. An eager young photographer at the time but not blessed with a surplus of cash I took a standard zoom and a canon nifty fifty with me. A few days into the trip disaster struck and my zoom broke. Thanks to the embargo there was nowhere to fix my lens, so I was stuck with a 50mm on my EOS 5 film camera and 20 rolls of Provia 100 slide film (bulk rolled no less). Even after 25 years later, I feel took some of my favourite photos on that trip and I think the simplicity of using that one lens had a lot to do with it.
Simon Wiffen
15th November 2022 at 6:33 am
Ah that’s great Toby (broken lens aside). I’m curious – did that experience change your shooting habits at all? Are you a zoom or a prime guy nowadays?
Toby
15th November 2022 at 8:03 am
Yes it did for a long time, but I have to use zooms now for some of my professional work where I can’t move around freely. Personal work tends to be on large format cameras so primes are the only option . I use a 125mm and a 210mm, so just either side of a standard lens in that format.
Simon Wiffen
15th November 2022 at 8:16 am
I always prefer to have a prime on my camera in an ideal world but must admit for family shoots especially my 70-200 is my best friend. Place for everything but there’s something I like about the purity of a prime lens.
Casss
13th September 2024 at 5:22 pm
Thank you for writing this! I am new to photography and filmmaking so this helped so much!
All the best
– Cass
Simon Wiffen
13th September 2024 at 6:24 pm
Thanks Cass, glad you found it useful!
LN
25th April 2025 at 4:18 pm
I’m new to photography and really enjoy it. I recently added a camera to my belt my grandpas camera a Canon EOS 5D (mark i I think). I have two lenses with it not sure what kind but they are big. One has a long zoom and one is more wide angle I’ve been wondering if I should get a 50mm for it for more of a smaller simpler lens. Do you think I should? Also I’m young so price being low is important.
Thanks:)
Simon Wiffen
26th April 2025 at 8:26 am
Hi Luke. That’s great to hear. While the Mk I is pretty old that’s a fantastic camera to learn on. Hard to advise without knowing what lenses you have. It’ll say the focal length on the top of the lens and you’ll be able to see the aperture on the front of the lens. If you’re wanting to learn about photography then a fast lens (f1.8-2.8) is invaluable for helping to understand the effect of aperture so if the lenses you have are a bit slower (for example kit lenses often have a maximum aperture of 4-5.6) I’d say it’s definitely worth picking up the nifty fifty – EF 50mm f/1.8. They’re super cheap (even more so now the RF lenses have taken over) and it’ll really help to understand the core principals of photography. Like I say though, it depends what the two lenses are you’ve inherited really. Feel free to add the details here and I’d be happy to advise?
LN
26th April 2025 at 9:42 pm
Thanks, the first lens Canon zoom lens EF 70-300mm 1: 4 – 5.6 IS USM and ø58mm. And the other says canon zoom lens EF 24-105mm 1 : 4 L IS USM.
Simon Wiffen
26th April 2025 at 9:48 pm
Ah well you’ve got a really good range of focal lengths across those two lenses, that’s great. Plenty there to experiment with. While f4 isn’t particularly shallow you’ll still be able to get nice soft backgrounds at the longer end of your range. I’d maybe see how you get on. Thats a great kit you’ve inherited though!
Calvin
2nd December 2025 at 3:12 am
Good day Simon, I specialize in lifestyle/ event photography. I care and thrive on providing the best images one can provide for their clients during delivery. However (there is a however), one thing that has been bugging me a shit tone about my photos is how distorted (fat) my clients’ faces and body look; I have mostly been shooting with zoomed lenses Ie: 16-35mm, 24-105mm, and 70-200mm. Since you are a subject matter expert/ avid promoter of the nifty fifty, I am wondering if one zooms in to the 50mm mark on a 24-105mm lens, will it actually give me the “look”/ perception of an actual 50mm? Or should I invest in a proper 45mm/ or 50mm prime if I want to give my future clients a more flattering look? Or would you recommend just sticking to the 70-200mm when shooting subjects rather than buying a whole new lens?
Simon Wiffen
2nd December 2025 at 7:08 am
Hi Calvin, thanks for the comment. When you say your clients faces and bodies look fat/distorted are you shooting at the wider end of your zooms? If you’re shooting fairly close with anything from 40mm down to the 16/24 wider end of your lenses then I’d expect to see distortion and unflattering results. For faces/portraits I find 70-85mm is the sweet spot for flattering/natural results for portraits but it depends a lot on the subject distance from the lens. I’ve recently picked up an RF 24-70mm f/2.8 lens and at 50mm it’s fairly similar (perhaps a touch wider) than my EF 50mm f/1.2 but each lens will have it’s own unique characteristics as well so worth experimenting really. You shouldn’t have any issue getting flattering results with the lenses you’ve listed there but hard to advise without knowing more about the specifics. If you are shooting at the wide end then I’d suggest using a longer focal length for more flattering results, or, if you’re seeing this distortion in people in wider shots try avoiding having people on the very edges of the frame as if you are shooting wide, the distortion will be worse on the edges of the frame in wider focal lengths
Calvin Klein
2nd December 2025 at 3:16 am
Good day Simon, I specialize in lifestyle/ event photography. I care and thrive on providing the best images one can provide for their clients during delivery. However (there is a however), one thing that has been bugging me a shit tone about my photos is how distorted (fat) my clients’ faces and body look; I have mostly been shooting with zoomed lenses Ie: 16-35mm, 24-105mm, and 70-200mm. Since you are a subject matter expert/ avid promoter of the nifty fifty, I am wondering if one zooms in to the 50mm mark on a 24-105mm lens, will it actually give me the “look”/ perception of an actual 50mm? Or should I invest in a proper 45mm/ or 50mm prime if I want to give my future clients a more flattering look? Or would you recommend just sticking to the 70-200mm when shooting subjects rather than buying a whole new lens?