I've got 17-85mm IS and 120-400 IS lenses for everyday and wildlife. I've got a 90mm/2.8 macro that I want to replace with something shorter - it was bought when I had full frame film.
I've always meant to grab a nifty fifty, but wonder if with the crop sensor it is still the best everyday prime lens? If ~50mm on a crop is still a good buy then I will probably go with a macro option like Tamron 60mm/f2 rather than Canon's 50mm/2.5.
If however the cop sensor user's best option is a 25-35mm range to have the same fov as a 50mm on full, then I'll hold off on the macro and buy something like this.
Part of the reason to buy now is that low light Christmas photos always benefit from a fast lens and since my 90mm macro became too cropped for portraits I've made do with the 17-85 with IS.
In reply to icnoble: Provisionally seconded, if Canon make such a thing - though you may want to think about a 28mm or so (opinions seem to vary; a lot of people swear by 35mm, but I like 28mm; It's also far enough from 50mm that one can reasonably carry both for general and short portrait!
In reply to Philip:
Totally depends what you normally shoot. Nifty fifty will give you a mild tele. 35 or so equals a 50 on full frame and so forth. If you're not sure I'd really try to borrow both 35 and 50 and see which one you like best.
I have a 15mm, a 35mm and a 77mm prime (I also own a couple of zooms but I mostly use the primes these days) and I use them all in bursts, depending on how I feel and what I'm shooting. Some days are mostly wide angle days, some days I just like isolating details with the 77 and some days just feel like 35 days.
Of course another factor is that if your camera can use them, you can pick up oldy but goody 50s for cheap.
I'd forgotten the new EF-S 60mm macro. It does look good, so it probably will be that or the Tamron when I replace my 90mm Macro.
It's a bit unfortunate really, I had a new colleague recently and he wanted to get rid of his 60mm EF-S and buy the canon 100mm. I lent him my Tamron 90mm and he loved it. Before I could suggest a swap he sold his 60mm for peanuts to a friend and bought a canon 100mm.
I think the new macro will have to wait a few months. So I'll get the new prime first.
In reply to Philip: 50mm is far to cropped if not on a full frame, i have a 28mm but at f4.5 has its limitations!
Either 28 or 35 will be great, but my main offering for advice is dont by glass just because it comes with a cheap price tag! When i shot with my 60d my one regret was buying samyang and sigma lenses and not holding out to buy canon L!! Wait and save up for the top quality glass and shop around.
> (In reply to Philip)
> Personally, on DX it's 35 1.8, on FX, 50 1.4. Both great lengths, perfect as a walk around lens (use your legs!) and both excellent in low light even in the corners. Both Nikon.
Seconded, I love my 35mm f1.8 DX. Will be using it later today at the Glasgow TCA boulder comp.
In reply to Philip:
I've just bought the 40mm 2.8 stm lens is certainly one to consider. It's not only very slim and unintrusive, it is brilliantly built and super sharp. It rarely leaves the front of my camera.
Ive got the Thrifty Fifty which is great for close stuff with f1.8 depth of field potential, which is gvery pleasing. I dont think it would be the best choice for 'every day' use as its zoomed in too far. Is get a 30mm prime.
In reply to Philip: I agree with Bloodfire re the 40 mm pancake lens: very light, very small and very sharp. Great for one hand shooting when hanging around. I use it on full frame but it might be too long for you at 64 mm on a 1.6 crop sensor.
As I was running out of time to get one at a good price before Christmas I picked up a cheap 50mm f/1.8. It will do what I need for the time being.
Part of the problem is that once I started looking for lenses I got into reading about the 60D and am tempted to buy a new body to replace my 400D and I can only get away with spending so much on camera gear around Christmas. I've seen a manufacturer refurbished unit (either exdemo, damaged box or return) for £420.