I hope you guys can give me some advice! I want to get myself a prime 50mm lens for my camera (Canon 600D) but I am torn between the f/1.8 and the f/1.4 (with USM). The price different is big, with the latter lens being over 3 times the price of the f/1.8.
I can afford the more expensive lens (I'll probably wait a month or two, but it shouldn't be a problem) but my question is, is the f/1.4 USM lens worth the extra fee? My feeling is that I should probably wait just a little and get the f/1.4, but I thought I'd ask you guys what your experiences with the two lenses are.
The bottom line, is the f/1.4 a waste of money (compared to the much cheaper f/1.8) or well worth it?
I had this same dilemma months ago. I did a lot of research and reading and pretty consistently everyone said if you could afford it to go with the f/1.4 so that's what I ended up doing. I personally have no experience with the f/1.8, but the 1.4 is WONDERFUL! It does gorgeous portrait shots and handles low-light situations beautifully.
I have a 50mm f1.8. So, i can say a lot of my experience with it.
This prime require a lot of pratice. You will have to walk around the scene a lot to frame what you want. Also, keep in mind that to the 600D (same camera i have) this lens is a tele. So, in a small room, you cannot do family group portraits and so on. I always have this problems. This problem you will have with both lenses.
If that is an issue, then you should buy a 35mm lens. (i read the new sigma 35mm prime is outstanding!)
Once you go to a low light situation, the f1.8 is a beauty. Marvelous aperture. Also, the lens is amazingly sharp. BUT, it is only sharp IF you master how to focus manually. This is important.
The autofocus in the f1.8 is terrible. At a low light situation it is even worse. It twists back and forth and can't focus at all. I can't describe how many great photos i lost because the camera tried to focus and did not shoot because it couldn't confirm focus.
So, i usually turn autofocus off, since in low light it is not trustworthy. And i also lose pictures because f1.8 is a very very thin focus field and i usually cannot see it precisely on the viewfinder and put the focus in the wrong place. Everything ends up slightly out of focus.
In your place, i would buy the f1.4.
Only because i was told the focus engine is way better.
I want one myself.
I have the f/1.8 and it does the job, but the build quality is terrible! I've had the front lens pop out several times, and then spent ages finding the correct area to slot it all back in!
In the conclusions:
f1.8 Inconsistent autofocus in low light (most problematic when using large apertures)
f1.4 Fast and accurate autofocus with full-time manual override
Also, if you want something increadibly sharp, i would go for the Sigma 35mm. It won the golden award in dpreview and other several sites.
But i don't know why they made it so bulky. The lens is huge for a prime. http://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/lenses/sigma_35_1p4
i have both---but love the f1.4 better---the shots are more deliciously buttery-the f1.8 is lighter(plastic) 'tho...i have love/hate relationship between the two--but personnaly i really love-love-love the f 1.4.... check some cool photos from Flickr---and see the differences.--Good Luck---and @gabrielklee is 100% right..:)
From Ken Rockwell .... About 3/4 of the way down the page is a table comparing them. i Although first-hand users experience trumps a bunch of number anytime.
I have the f1.8 and I do like it, but there are times when the auto focus has a problem trying to focus in low light. It works beautifully for portrait shots in my studio, which is what I mostly use it for so for me it was a great buy at $100. If I had to choose because I could afford either, I would definitely go with the f1.4! I hear rave reviews on it and would love to add it to my collection some day! Hope this helps :)
If you can afford it, then definitely go the 1.4 otherwise you'll be left wishing later on. The quality is way better. The 1.8 is all plastic. It does take some getting used to using a 50... at first I hated it. Now it is my most used lens. I used to do macro heaps, but I'm loving the 50 and I LOVE the 1.4 aperture... omg I'm in love with that lol.
If you look through about the last month or 2 of my project, I think that the majority are with the 50...
Here are just some which were taken with the 50mm f/1.4 USM..
My vote for the 50mm f/1.4. Buy one, buy the best. Fast & silent AF, good build quality & manual AF override is big plus.
The 50mm f/1.8 is not bad but it surely does has the habit of hunting AF in low light inspite of the the wide f/1.8 aperture. Build quality again is poor & if you happen to drop it would mean purchasing another piece.
So I recommend the 50mm f/1.4. If you do not mind a bit telephoto focal length, I would suggest the 85mm f/1.8(136mm on your DSLR) which is one hell of a lens. Super sharp & absolutely no distortion, amazing contrast. An 'L' lens in normal clothing. If not, then definitely save & get the 50 mm f/1.4. Don't think much. :-)
@shuttertux I already have the 100mm f/2.8 USM, which is an incredible lens! So I don't think the 85mm will give me anything that the 100mm doesn't (except being a little less zoomed of course). However, i think I will follow yours (and everyone's!) advice and save just a little longer for the f/1.4 50mm. I do use the full time manual override on my 100mm lens a lot, so I think that feature in the 50mm will be awesome.
Because of the cost I bought the Canon EF f1.8 and a manual film Olympus version of the 1.4 and I'm glad I got the 1.8 because to me the 1.4 isn't much better and the Olympus OM one is supposed to be very good. To me the price of the 1.4 is too much.
No experience with the f1.4 but I have a f1.8 but it is the mark I lens not the plastic mark II currently being sold. The mark I can now only be bought second hand (ebay etc). I got mine for £150. I love it but also got the 35mm f2 lens. I love the 35mm so much more. Works better in smaller rooms, you can focus closer than the 50mm and the build quality is great for the price. I would guess you could probably get a 35mm f2 and a 50mm f1.8 (Mark I or II) for the price of the 50mm f1.4? Another option maybe?
Aaron @grizzlysghost did a side-by-side shot to compare bokeh with the 50 mm 1.4 vs 1.8. I would look it up for you to show you, but I'm on my phone. I have the 50 mm f 1.8 (and a crop sensor camera) and it's my favorite lens, but I still think I would eventually like to have the 50 mm / f 1.4 or the 35 mm / f 1.4. Shooting family portraits at Christmas, I could have used the extra space with the 35 mm and the extra f stops to play with.
@rockinrobyn The 35mm you mentioned is definitely too expensive for me, but I have decided to save for the f/1.4 instead of the f/1.8... I think I would sooner or later want the classier lens anyhow and, as I can afford it, I may as well get that one right off.
My oldest sister, Naomi, is expecting a baby (number 5) in April, so I'd like the 50mm before then as we are planning a newborn shoot and I think that lens would be perfect for the purpose.
50mm 1.4 ALL THE WAY!!! i have both. I've had to buy 2 1.8s trying to correct focus issues and had the first one sent to canon for focus issues. It takes forever to focus and it is loud. Decided to buy the 50mm 1.4 and it is amazing...that lens is like butter. I seriously want to just bite it sometimes lol
If the autofocus is important for you than go with the 1.4. When I had a canon camera i bought the 1.8 and it takes beautiful pictures but I can speak from experience that the autofocus hunts a lot and it frustrated me.
@victorypuzzle For what you like to shoot, the f/1.4 is definitely the way to go. I just looked online and in the States, Adorama has a kit version of that lens that comes with a UV filter for the same price as the non-kit version. You may be able to get that same kit offering locally. (Having been saved more than once, I always put a UV filter on my lenses. I'd have lost 2 really high-end lenses if I hadn't.)
I had both the 50mm 1.8 and the 35mm 2 and founding them both a little lacking, so sold them both for the Sigma 30mm 1.4, beautiful lens and on the crop sensor it is that little bit wider (like a 50mm on full frame) it is all I use inside (my 85mm 1.8 is my outside lens)
Thank you all so very much for your feedback on my query! I have decided to go for the 50mm f/1.4, as most of you advised. I will probably get it within the first 3 months of 2013...
Thanks again!
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
I have a 50mm f1.8. So, i can say a lot of my experience with it.
This prime require a lot of pratice. You will have to walk around the scene a lot to frame what you want. Also, keep in mind that to the 600D (same camera i have) this lens is a tele. So, in a small room, you cannot do family group portraits and so on. I always have this problems. This problem you will have with both lenses.
If that is an issue, then you should buy a 35mm lens. (i read the new sigma 35mm prime is outstanding!)
Once you go to a low light situation, the f1.8 is a beauty. Marvelous aperture. Also, the lens is amazingly sharp. BUT, it is only sharp IF you master how to focus manually. This is important.
The autofocus in the f1.8 is terrible. At a low light situation it is even worse. It twists back and forth and can't focus at all. I can't describe how many great photos i lost because the camera tried to focus and did not shoot because it couldn't confirm focus.
So, i usually turn autofocus off, since in low light it is not trustworthy. And i also lose pictures because f1.8 is a very very thin focus field and i usually cannot see it precisely on the viewfinder and put the focus in the wrong place. Everything ends up slightly out of focus.
In your place, i would buy the f1.4.
Only because i was told the focus engine is way better.
I want one myself.
I took the below with the 50mm ...
f1.8 here http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_50_1p8_ii_c16/5
f1.4 here http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_50_1p4_c16/6
In the conclusions:
f1.8 Inconsistent autofocus in low light (most problematic when using large apertures)
f1.4 Fast and accurate autofocus with full-time manual override
But i don't know why they made it so bulky. The lens is huge for a prime.
http://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/lenses/sigma_35_1p4
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/50mm-f14.htm
If you look through about the last month or 2 of my project, I think that the majority are with the 50...
Here are just some which were taken with the 50mm f/1.4 USM..
The 50mm f/1.8 is not bad but it surely does has the habit of hunting AF in low light inspite of the the wide f/1.8 aperture. Build quality again is poor & if you happen to drop it would mean purchasing another piece.
So I recommend the 50mm f/1.4. If you do not mind a bit telephoto focal length, I would suggest the 85mm f/1.8(136mm on your DSLR) which is one hell of a lens. Super sharp & absolutely no distortion, amazing contrast. An 'L' lens in normal clothing. If not, then definitely save & get the 50 mm f/1.4. Don't think much. :-)
Thanks so much for the feedback!
My oldest sister, Naomi, is expecting a baby (number 5) in April, so I'd like the 50mm before then as we are planning a newborn shoot and I think that lens would be perfect for the purpose.
You will not regret the extra money on that lens.
That is all :)
I've been calling the 1.8 a "shifty fifty" for ages - its loud, hunts WAY too much and always had a tendancy to focus on eye lashes and flyaways.
Strangely enough, I still find the 1.4 loud and it still hunts a bit in low light but it doesnt have the focus issues of the 1.8
Here's my example of the 1.4
Thank you all so very much for your feedback on my query! I have decided to go for the 50mm f/1.4, as most of you advised. I will probably get it within the first 3 months of 2013...
Thanks again!