canon 50mm 1.4 vs the 1.8

wheresdavid

i tried to find inforamtion on the differences between the 1.4 and the 1.8 but thought i would ask a question here to see if anyone has had both lenses and what their experience has been with the two lenses.

i shoot mostly "people/portrait" shots on a cropped body and the light for some reason always tends to be low so i want a fast lens. i am traveling around SE asia and have with me: xti, 24-105L, 135m L 2.0, 50mm 1.8 and a sigma 10-20. Right now i am using my 135 more but will probably start to use my 50mm more. so my question is this: is there much of a difference in sharpness and focusing between the 1.4 and 1.8? i know with the 1.4 i could shoot about a stop lower than the 1.8 which would be nice. i found the 1.4 at a camera shop here in thailand for about $390 (more than the states but i will be shooting with it for the next 8 months). i have already blown my camera budget of $50 by buying a speedlite and a lowpro bag. i could probably find a fellow traveller to sell my 1.8 to.

what are your thoughts? is the 1.4 that much better for portratis in lower light conditions :dunno?

cheers,

Dave

D.Rodgers

I have been down this road with Nikkon,almost identicle lenses and pricing.
For the money the 1.8 will give surpurb results and the extra stop wont make that much of a diffrence for a short lens.
Stick with what you have and wait till you hit the US again and buy a used one save some money..
Or buy on ebay and have it overnighted to Post Office ?? Use B&H or someone else reputable.

DavidTO

Yes, there is a difference.

Hang on, I'll find the link (I've posted this link at least 2 other times, here on dgrin, but I'll find it again!!! )

....and back


here you go.

Manfr3d

Hi Dave,

Both lenses are perfecty suited for portrait photography.
They are equally sharp but differ in the following aspects:

50mm/1.4

+ Better build quality than the 1.8
+ Metal mount (1.8 II is plastic)
+ Allows Full time manual focus
+ Silent (Ring-type) USM Motor
+ Brighter Viewfinder
+ Much better bokeh than the 1.8 version

Pro 50mm/1.8

+ As sharp as the 50mm/1.4
+ Only 1/3rd the price of the 50mm/1.4
+ A bit lighter

The 50mm/1.8 has a cheap plastic
feel to it. You will also need to buy
the optional lenshood for the 1.4
for best results in difficult lighting.
The 1.8 version can often be used
without a lens hood because its front
element is somewhat deeper inside the
lens.

If you want to use your 50mm with
your flash, be aware that neither the
1.8 nor the 1.4 version support ETTL-II
where distance information is passed
from the lens to the camera to allow better
flash exposure. Only the much more
expensive 50mm/1.2 L lens supports
this special feature.

If I had to decide I would get the 1.4
version simply because it has a much
better bokeh. Look here: http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/
But regardless, I think you can't go
wrong with either lens.

Good luck decideing.

ziggy53

Here is my own comparison of those two Canon lenses along with an old Pentax 50mm, f1.4.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=62165

The Canon EF 50mm, f1.4 is my favorite by far for general work. The autofocus is more accurate with most subjects in low-light, and the curved blades of the 8 bladed diaphram form a much nicer "bokeh" than the 5 straight blades of the Canon EF 50mm, f1.8.

Here are a couple of shots of my cousin Faythe Freese, (Associate Professor of Organ, The University of Alabama) when she played at a local church recently. The church was extremely dark, one of the darkest I have encountered. She is pretty animated and I think the exposure was 1/125th at f1.4 and ISO 3200.

Jeffro

wheresdavid wrote:

what are your thoughts? is the 1.4 that much better for portratis in lower light conditions ?

I had the 1.8, now I have the 1.4....night and day, IMO. I love the 1.4, worth every dollar.

LiquidAir

Canon 5D & 50mm/1.4
ISO 1600, f/1.4 1/80s
Hand held in ambient (halogen) light. Focus point was the dog's eye.
RAW conversion done in Lightroom Beta 3 with no sharpening.



Shots with the 50/1.4 at f/4 are sharp enough for 16x24 gallery prints. At f/1.4 the 50 is a tad soft and I probably wouldn't print this larger than 10x15.

evoryware

I dropped my nifty 50 about 3 feet and it broke into two pieces. I was switching from a top loading bag to a new side loading bag and had a mental lapse.
I plan to replace it with the 50 1.4, maybe. The 1.4 did hunt less when I tried it. I did not use this lens that much and was low in price so I didn't regret it too much. It hunted way too much when I least expected it for my tastes even in descent lighting.
I have no idea if the 1.4 would fare any better in a 3 foot drop.

sirsloop

The biggest benefit in getting the 1.4 is the aperture. The 1.8 is nice and sharp, but the 5 blade aperture limits its bokeh ability. Its a hot topic and there are tons of great bokeh shots with the nifty. Problems generally arise when you have a shot with OOF reflections. They look like a pentagon instead of a circle. The build on the nifty is definitly sub-par as exidence above. Its under 100 bucks so you can't really expect a tank, but at that price its optical value is very high.

JH-Photo

I have both lenzes as well.
I began with the 1,8mm and later on I bought the 1,4mm.
But at the end I must say, that the sharpness is not visible better at the 1,4 !
The blur is a little bit better, but for the price difference of nearly 300US$
I think the 1,8 is the better choice. You could save the upscaled money and buy another lenz like 28 - 105 L or something like this :-) or a nice macro.

best regards
Jens

wheresdavid

thanks for all the help. i think for now i will stick with the 1.8.
i think i am just frustrated that my 24-105 doesn't take tack sharp photos and was hoping for a quick fix. i think i will try to get the 24-105 repaired but this is going to be a big chore since i am traveling and right now i am not getting any help from canon.

cheers,

Dave

Buttkicker

Add my 2p
I have the 50mm 1.8mk2 and its an extremley sharp lens.. for the money you cannot really go wrong
however the autofocus is 'dog slow' and its build quailty is very poor
i recently went to a circus knowing that I would be needing every scrap of light I could get
My 50mm could not cope with the extreme poor light, so I had to autofocus manually focus pretty much throughout
and when I got home I was rather dissapointed with the results

a couple of days later I got some free tickets at the same circus so took along my brothers 50mm F1.4 for the very purpouse of seeing how it would perform in comparison!!!
well there is no comparison IMHO it locked on pretty much throughout and worked 'way' better than what mine did

I would say get the f1.4 over the cheaper option every time now
its a far better Lens in every department
Chris