Canon 50mm f1.4 vs f1.8

A

AJ1992

Suspended / Banned
Messages
28
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
I did a search but couldnt find a thread that addresses this. I've decided that i'm probably going to get a prime lens and both have really good reviews, however I was wondering if the extra £200 worth it for the f1.4 over the f1.8.
Cheers
Adam
 
Short answer - yes!

Longer answer - they are both capable of sharp images. The 1.4 is better built, let's in mor e light, focusses more accurately and has better oof areas.

Phil
 
There won't £200 worth of image quality in it if thats what your asking but it is no doubt a better lens. It is better built and has better image quality but it's up to you whether it's that much better.
 
Depends whether you need the extra stop as well. Very useful in low light and in better light nice bokeh. I had one for gig work and it was brilliant and only sold it because I bought the 30mm 1.4L.

Dunc
 
I've just got my 50mm 1.4 today and I have been pleasantly surprised at a few things - in good and bad ways.

Compared to the 1.8 it's surprisingly heavy, and a bit bigger in all the dimensions. The focus ring isn't as smooth as I'd like (nowhere near as smooth as my Sigma 10-20 which is like butter) and although better than the 1.8, the build quality still isn't exactly stellar. Again I feel my 10-20 is more solidly built. There is also not that much difference between 1.4 and 1.8 as far as exposure is concerned. The 1.4 will give you slightly better ability to freeze movement than the 1.8, but not much. You have ever so slightly less DOF at 1.4 obviously but again it's not overpoweringly different, and barely noticeable. The ultrasonic motor is certainly not silent, but it is quieter than the 1.8. It makes a similar shhhh sound to my 10-20. Focus performance didn't seem that much better than my 1.8 at all - it still hunted a little in our living room; my 10-20 AND EF-S kit lens outperform both lenses in this area. It raises the question; what good is a lens that excels in low light that can't focus in low light? Thank god for full time manual focussing, which IS included with this model, and is one of the deciding factors for my purchase. I can't stand not having FTM.

Now onto the more positive side of things - IQ. I didn't look at this in detail but from the brief comparisons I've done I can say this: Quality even when wide open is very impressive - it surprised me in fact. At f1.8 (and even f/1.4) the picture is relatively clean, miles better than the 1.8 wide open. There was some softness on the 1.4 when it was wide open, but the pictures were still largely free of defects; on the 1.8, there are abberations everywhere on each side of the focus plane, which don't clear up until roughly f/2.5. At f/2.8 both lenses produce superb images; but it is nice to know that I now have a lens which is very good wide open - I would often hesitate using my 1.8 wide open, and would try to keep it above f/2.2, effectively making it a slower lens than it actually was.

One thing I find very satisfying about the 1.4 is looking through the lens with both caps off. Both the hole at the back and on the business end of the lens are huge and this just shows how much light the thing can let in.

All in all I'm happy with it, upgrading mainly for the better build quality, FTM and the extra light gathering ability. It delivers in these departments.

Do I think it's worth 200 quid more than the 'nasty fifty'? Quite frankly... no - but I bought it anyway :D
 
Siggy 50mm 1.4 is also worth a look. Highly rated, it's a big 'un though. Onestop Digital at £309 last time I looked.
I used to have the Canon 1.4, always regretted not getting the Siggy (I've got a thing about 77mm front end) actually I was a bit dissapointed with the build quality. Couldn't fault the IQ though.
 
I'm convinced the 1.4 I bought had issues. I sent it back because it would really struggle indoors in lower light and would hunt alot before finding focus.

I decided it wasn't worth the money I paid and just got the 1.8 which in similar conditions has been much noiser to focus but a hell of a lot quicker. It was also very soft towards wide open. I keep meaning to go instore and try another because I read good things about the 1.4 but in my experience the lens I had was not worth 3 times the money although it was a lovely solid piece of kit.
 
Thanks for all the replys guys,
It sounds as though many people start with the f1.8 and then upgrade to the f1.4 or sigma 1.4 later on.
Would this be a good idea as i'm pretty my a complete novice and have never used a prime lens before and am not sure how much I would use it.
cheers
Adam
 
dannyjo22 said:
I'm convinced the 1.4 I bought had issues. I sent it back because it would really struggle indoors in lower light and would hunt alot before finding focus.

I decided it wasn't worth the money I paid and just got the 1.8 which in similar conditions has been much noiser to focus but a hell of a lot quicker. It was also very soft towards wide open. I keep meaning to go instore and try another because I read good things about the 1.4 but in my experience the lens I had was not worth 3 times the money although it was a lovely solid piece of kit.
Click to expand...

Yep, I think you've hit the nail on the head there. I'm happy with my purchase but I will wholly admit it's not worth the huge premium over the 'nifty fifty'. It actually makes me appreciate how much of a bargain the nifty fifty is - which will very soon be in the hands of a new happy owner here.

If your 1.4 was super soft wide open you might have got a crap copy. Mine and my friend's one is impressively sharp at 1.4.
 
I purchased the 1.8 not longer after I entered into the world of DSLR's and it has been a great extra lens to have in the bag. Cheap and cheerful and is good for portraits. Colour reproduction is very impressive for the price, although the bokeh could be better and smoother as it only has 5 blades, it still delivers good results.

Although I would like to upgrade to the 1.4 (which I may do at some point), I will probably feel it is not worth the extra difference in money, but justifiable for the extra build quality, extra stop and FTM.

Long story short, if you are looking for your first prime at a reasonable price, the 50mm f/1.8 mk2 is where to start, as it rarely fails to impress for the price. Having said that.......I don't really use mine as much anymore since getting my 17-55mm f/2.8........
 
Just FYI, the 1.4 is only 2/3 of a stop faster, and there is barely a difference between f/1.4 and 1.8 - I tested, the exposure difference is very slight as is the DOF difference.

The optical quality of the 1.4 wide open is a bonus though - I have a funny feeling I will be using it wide open a heck of a lot more than I did on the 1.8 - and that confidence is a good thing to have in your optics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top