50 mm f/1.8 or 1:1.4 (buying this morning)?

Y

Yllek

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I was just about to go and buy a 50mm f/1.8 mk II for my Canon 1100d for about £65 second hand.

However I've come across a Canon 50mm 1:1.4 fd for about the same price.

I'm just wondering whether I would be better getting the 1.4? Would it fit the 1100D, and if not what adaptor would I need?

I'd have to buy this online which I'm loathe to do as I prefer to see the item before I buy, but do people think it's worth it?
 
The FD wont fit the 1100D, you may be able to get an adaptor but you will not have autofocus. You're probably better going for the f1.8 here.
 
Hi Ross, thanks or the reply. I forgot to mention that I rarely, if ever, use the autofocus feature so that wouldn't be a problem for me.
I had a feeling I would need an adaptor but I don't know which one I would need or if they would be widely available.

What's attracting me to this is the 1.4 as opposed to the 1.8 which can only be an advantage?

Or do you still think better going for the 1.8?
 
I was going to say go straight for the f1.4 as I didn't see the 'fd' until after I'd written my reply. This is now the edit you're looking at. Go for the f1.8, the AF ability alone is worth it, manual focussing isn't easy at wide apertures so you'll probably end up frustrated by the FD and end up not using it. I don't know how much the adapter would be on top of the price either so the £65 for the f1.8 is a decent price.
 
Last edited:
The OP is looking at an FD mount 50/1.4 so will need an adaptor with corrective lens built in as the FD mount has a shallower flange than the EF-S mount.

If you are happy using manual focus, you would be better off with an Olympus OM Zuiko 50mm 1.4 because the adaptor to mount it is pretty much flush to the EF-S mount and there is no glass in it to degrade the image.

Cheers
Steve
 
Last edited:
modchild - this is the EF 1.8 vs the FD 1.4, not the vastly more expensive EF 1.4!!

TBH OP the 1.4 FD lens will be a very old vintage and probably not be as good as modern lenses with things like flare or CA.
 
Why do you not use auto focus? There is rarely an occurrence where focusing manually if more effective than auto focus, also Manual focus, is not as accurate especially without a proper focusing screen.
 
Re autofocus, manual is something I prefer to do anyway - just a matter of preference.

given this, are people thinking the 1.8 would still be better?
 
Last edited:
I really thought the 1.4 would be the better option given the wider apeture, but based on what everyone has said I'll stick with the 1.8.

Thanks to everyone for their help and time responding.
 
Ross Wallace said:
Looks like adapters are readily available.
Click to expand...

But without glass, you will not be able to focus to infinity. There are adapters with glass though, but the glass might have influences to the image quality.

Beside the focus problem, the aperture will follow immediately, so you may have to open it for focus and close it right before every single shot.
 
It's worth noting as well that the focus ring on the f/1.8 is incredibly thin, personally I find it a bit awkward to focus manually. Having said that it's a great lens
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top