Canon 50mm/1.4 or 50mm/1.8 Mk11 lens?

M

millermixing

Suspended / Banned
Messages
22
Name
paul miller
Edit My Images
Yes
hello all

In line with my recent research drive for portrait photography gear I have been observing that people seem to recommend the 50mm prime lens. I have a Canon 20D and the Canon brand seems to be endorsed so I have seen two possible lenses in their range...the 50mm/1.4 and the 50mm/1.8 Mk11. Obviously the 1.4 is a better bit of glass and has auto-focus (am I right in this?) but honestly how much better can it be for someone who is starting out in portrait work..perhaps the autofocus would help me early on...but it is over double the cost of the 1.8 so I don't want to spend money needlessly..unless I'm going to really see the difference that is...! All the best for now.

Cheers

Paul
 
The main difference between the two is the build quality and AF motor. The 1.8 is a bit on the noisy side and has a plastic mount. The 1.4 has a good solid construction, Ring USM with full time manual.

I've got the 1.4 and love it but the 1.8 turns out some stunning results as well, maybe just a touch softer at the edges than the 1.4.
 
Another point that might be important for portrait work - the 1.8 only has 5 aperture blades so out of focus highlights suffer a bit.
 
Thanks guys...about the build quality....its sad that they don't make them out of good ole metal anymore...unless you pay big bucks I'd imagine...are there any old, but more robust lenses out there that are now relatively cheap and still fulfill the requirements...although I would imagine that they wouldn't be autofocus and possibly not work with the 20D?
 
A word of caution for a possible future move to an FF body. I briefly had a 50/1.4 but found that there was an unacceptable amount of vignetting on a 5D when wide open. Strangely the 50/1.2 and 50/1.8 don't exhibit this tendency.

Bob
 
For me the whole point of a 1.8, 1.4, 1.2, 1 is a wide open shot - if that's the only style of portraits you're into then fine

Few people like shots where the tip of their nose and their ears are out of focus, so you'll quite likely soon start using it as a 5.6 or above lens. So why waste money on such a specialised lens unless you already have a bagful of others?

So unless you are already overloaded with lenses, buy a good zoom instead (and yes a 2.8 if budget allows) it'll be far far more useful




2p rolls slowly by...
 
:agree: with DD.
Yes the 1.4 is a stonking lens, but the lack of DOF....?
 
pxl8 said:
Another point that might be important for portrait work - the 1.8 only has 5 aperture blades so out of focus highlights suffer a bit.
Click to expand...

That's one of the biggest points in favour of the 1.4 for me - it produces lovely round oof highlights due to the extra diaphragm blades.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top