a question re canon 50mm f1.4

gus

Guys im looking to buy this lens next.

I love my little 50 f1.8 & was wondering is the 50mm f1.4 going to focus at similar speed ?

I ask this because i have heard that the 85mm f1.2 is a bit of a slow coach (ive been told its more a studio lens) not that i intend to pull on a tea cosy & hold-up the local bottl'o to buy that lens.

ta Gus

wxwax

To me it focuses the same. The 85 1.2 is a honking big lens, and I imagine that it focuses slower because it's moving those heavyweights around. The 50 1.4 isn't that big.

Mongrel

Hi Gus,

I have both the 50mm f/1.8 and the 50mm f/1.4 USM. If anything, the f/1.4 USM is *faster* than the f/1.8 (which is pretty fast consider the cheaper AF motor used). I've used the 50mm f/1.4 to shoot basketball and the AF is almost imperceptable-quiet and accurate . I've also shot with the 85mm f/1.8 side by side with it and the build quality and AF is very similar between the two.

Honestly, since purchasing my 50mm f/1.4, I haven't used the f/1.8 version. I keep holding onto it as a 'just in case' lens or for use in 'hazardous locations' like the beach or anywhere else I'd rather not take my f/1.4.

There is a definately advantage to the 50mm f/1.4 over the f/1.8 in image quality, I highly recommend it. It's one lens you can buy without hesitation.

Mongrel

gus

Thanks guys, if you like it then i like it...looks like i need it then.

Andy ...you have a lot to answer for mate

Gus

Andy

Humungus wrote:

Thanks guys, if you like it then i like it...looks like i need it then.

Andy ...you have a lot to answer for mate

Gus

small steps, gus, small steps.

if i were you, i'd get the 35L before the 50 1.4 but that's just me

the 50 1.4 is a sweeeeeeet lens

ginger_55

I'd get just about anything before either 50 mm, . Others love it.

ginger (just had to say that)

Seriously, gus, you have that glorious 10-22, if you don't have a longer wide, I would follow andy's advice. Wide is sooooooooooooooo good! In all of its manifestations, IMO.

Gus, I wrote that wrong.................sorry. Yeah, speed! I would stay with the 1.8, I can't see that you gain that much, unless you already have everything else, or are starting over. So I would stick, hold them, so to speak, and go with Andy's suggestion. I can't see what the f stops are.

But if it is fast enough, I would go with his suggestion, or an 85, or whatever. I can see where the price on the 1.4 is more attractive than some of the other primes. But if you are happy with the 1.8, what are you gaining?

ginger (I guess at my age I am slowing down, but with me, size does matter.)

I have a slower than the 50, a bit, a 300 Prime for sale:D , you could try that with a little more money.

gus

10mm is wide enough for me ginger...its speed im chasing.

Hey andy...you started me on this road to hell...dont be tellin' me to put the brakes on.

Andy

Humungus wrote:

10mm is wide enough for me ginger...its speed im chasing.

Hey andy...you started me on this road to hell...dont be tellin' me to put the brakes on.

no brakes mate... the 35L is a prime prime... the 50 1.4 is an excellent lens -- i shoot with both allthe time.

luckyrwe

50mm isn't 50mm any more with crop factors considered. All of a sudden the 35/1.4 does not look good but the 24/1.4 does....

Andy

luckyrwe wrote:

50mm isn't 50mm any more with crop factors considered. All of a sudden the 35/1.4 does not look good but the 24/1.4 does....

bah bs i say. put the 35L on a 20d (1.6x body) and it's nearly the same as the 50mm "normal" lens. one simply has to step back a few paces that's all.

if you use the 24L, also a great choice of lens, you have to step forward a few paces.

there's also a brand new sigma 30 f/1.4 out just now, that's something to consider to

canon 50mm f/1.4 on a 1.6x body (canon digital rebel, iso 1600)

Khaos

I highly recommend both. But the 35 is a little steep in price. It's worth it in my opinion, but not everyone wants to pay that much for a prime.


Here are some 50 1.4 examples. I've actually used this lens a lot as aportrait lens. On a 1.6 crop it works well.

pathfinder

wxwax wrote:

To me it focuses the same. The 85 1.2 is a honking big lens, and I imagine that it focuses slower because it's moving those heavyweights around. The 50 1.4 isn't that big.

The 85 f1.2 does focus slowly - especially if you are shooting in light that you need to use f1.2 But if you need f1.2 it is a nice tool.
The 85mm f1.8 is a great little lens despite its lack of the "L" designation. Inexpensive, fast to focus, and sharp. I've always had a soft spot for 85-90mm lenses Of course, Tamron makes a VERY nice 90mm f2.8 Di macro for slightly more money than the 85 f1.8 Canon...... And it will do portraits and macro both....... Something else to desire, eh, 'gus?

gus

pathfinder wrote:

Something else to desire, eh, 'gus?

Mate im in deep...im dreaming lenses nowadays. I used to look at women on the street & thus walk into telephone poles but now i find myself relegated to staring down peoples lenses as they walk past & then tripping on the gutter.

Gus

luckyrwe

andy wrote:

bah bs i say. put the 35L on a 20d (1.6x body) and it's nearly the same as the 50mm "normal" lens. one simply has to step back a few paces that's all.

The 50mm at 1.6x is now a 80mm. The 35 at 1.6 is close to 50mm but remember I work at 1.3x with my camera. I prefer the 35mm and 105mm lenses in full frame.

gus

What blows me away is just how usefull the 135 f/2 is in a room. I mean it ends up at 216mm but when i drop it on i always find something to shoot with it. Got to be carefull handling it for new punters though as its very heavy & with the hood on it...it certainly takes some looking after in a mosh pit.

I know i could take the hood off in a dark room but i remember something that was said to me in Yosemitw

"jesus gus will ya put the hood on that thing !!!"

pathfinder

Humungus wrote:

What blows me away is just how usefull the 135 f/2 is in a room. I mean it ends up at 216mm but when i drop it on i always find something to shoot with it. Got to be carefull handling it for new punters though as its very heavy & with the hood on it...it certainly takes some looking after in a mosh pit.

I know i could take the hood off in a dark room but i remember something that was said to me in Yosemitw

"jesus gus will ya put the hood on that thing !!!"

Andy's tryin' to give you a hint, Gus.... I can't tell you how many times a lens hood has saved my lens from damage. I have an aquaintance who temporarily took the lens hood off his 16-35f2.8 L in Antelope Canyon, and ended up with a deep scratch from the canyon rock wall on the lenses front element. A lens hood would probably have protected the glass. The canyon is kind of like a mosh pit - not the very safest place for fine optics.