Canon 50mm 1.4 and 1.8

rookies

rookies

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,064
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
I recently Purchase the Canon 50mm 1.4 and found it be a lovely lens.... but keep thinking should I of got the 1.8 and saved the extra money toward other lens? Or is the 1.4 really much better as someone said it not just cos it 1.4 it also better built is this correct?
 
yep
 
so i made the right choice
 
I had the same thoughts with Nikon's equivalent

I bought the f1.8 at 1/3 the price of the f1.4

Unless you're playing footie with it, how well built do you need a tiny 50mm lens is my view?

And the difference to f1.4 just isn't worth the pennies

But as you've already bought it - be happy !!!

DD
 
I originally had the 50 1.8 but sold it and got a 1.4 .

The 1.4 is sharp even at 1.4 (at least my copy) whereas with the 1.8, I had to go at least 2.8 to get sharp(my copy again). Stepping down defies the purpose of the lens (my opinion).

The 1.4 beats the 1.8 in every respect (my own opinion again).

I think the OP made the right choice.
 
if you have the money it's worth it for the bokeh alone, the canon 1.8 gives horrible (by comparison) haexaganol out of focus highlighs where as the 1.4 give a much more rounded effect.
 
yip, 1.4 over the 1.8 if you can afford it.
 
I have thought this before too, the main reason I got the 1.4 was for the build quality and suposedly beter optics, but it has already had to go back to Canon after the focusing jammed, so though maybe I would have been better off with a .8 and more money towards something else...
 
I have a 1.8 and it's excellent - very sharp. The plastic construction does not bother me in the slightest. Like every other lens out there, a lot is down to your own personal copy (of course I cannot compare to the 1.4, but I'm sure that's excellent too).
 
Why not the f1.2 then ???

'Build quality' (assuming you mean better/stronger) hardly ever matters to amateurs really as you don't give them that much work & punishment compared to a Pro who may be using it every day

But even to Pros, a lens 1/3 the price means you can destroy it 3x for the same price - and few would be so clumsy

As for better Bokeh???

I doubt if most togs really know what that means or appreciate the difference, and I do know that most clients would never have a clue even if shown the same image shot with both lenses

And quality???

How big/sharp should it be? My cheapie f1/8 looks great at f1.8 to A3 size

:shrug:

It's all too easy to thing most expensive is best, when all you need to be sure of is...

'Is it good enough?'

DD
 
Nikon 50 1.8's build is comparable to Canon 50 1.4's build.
 
I've got the 1.4 purely because I didn't like the manual focusing ring with the 1.8, and I have used the 1.4 with a polariser too, which would have been hard work with the 1.8.

However, it did have to be replaced with a new one after it stopped focusing after only a few weeks
 
DiddyDave said:
Fuelling the Nikon v Canon wars again there???

:lol::lol::lol:

DD
Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol:

Not my intention. Just siting what my observation is. My friend has Nikon, and has the 50 1.8. I think thats the only edge Nikon has over Canon:D.
Gotta go:wave:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top