Four Ways To Shoot 50mm - Another Dumb Comparison

[Belmondo]

I was sitting in a parking garage today and though it might help pass the time to shoot a scene with my three 50mm lenses and my 24-70L set at 50mm. I actually took several more pictures than I'm posting here, and admittedly, the group I've chosen to post don't really show the lenses anywhere near the limits of their capabilities. I was really more interested in seeing what they would do in normal shooting environments, so I only compared the shots at f5/6. Anything else you're interested in seeing, I'd be happy to email to you directly, or if interest is sufficient, I can post others. I shot everything at f/2.8, f/5.6, and f/11. I also did a shot with each of the lenses at their maximum aperture, although the f1.0 and f1.4 were too much for the 1/4000ths shutter and were overexposed.

First, is the scene uncropped.

http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/353Parking_Garage-med.jpg

The 50mm f/1.8

http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/35350mm_f1_8_f5_6.jpg

The 50mm f/1.4
http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/35350mm_f1_4_f5_6.jpg

The 50mm f/1.0.
http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/35350mm_f1_0_f5_6.jpg

The 24-70L.
http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/35324-70L_f5_6.jpg

I don't know it there are any conclusions to be drawn from this, but it's been a while since I threw something out for 'show and tell.' Incidentally, these are all 100% crops.

Tom

[Tom W]

The only conclusion that I can draw is that the 1.0 lens exposes differently, and may be softer and less contrasty. The other three look similar. I've put down a couple of beers so I'll pass on critical judgement this evening.

[Tapeman]

These are pretty close (equal). If you have any one of the lenses used you have little to gain with another.

Looking forward to your Post "Four ways to shoot 17mm."

[Sketcher]

I'd say the 50 1.0 is the most soft of the bunch at that setting. Where the 1.0 will shine however is the slight edge in low light whereas the others just don't quite pull as hard (comparatively speaking).

[ChrisNardone]

Neat idea for a post, again. It's so hard to tell. To me it looks like in order of sharpness:

50 1.8, 24-70, 50 1.4, 50 1.0

Not what I'd expect, I was mostly judging from the ceiling.
I'd rather see something like the Ford logo on the truck to compare the lenses.

[rick barclay]

This is really a mis-application of the 50mm 1.0 and might lead to
some misunderstanding of the lens' usefulness and the justification of
spending two or three thousand dollars to purchase one.

In these photos the f1.0 looks quite inferior to the other two, but if you
had taken some picutres in candle light, then the f 1.0 would have shown
all why it commands such a large price.

[Belmondo]

This is really a mis-application of the 50mm 1.0 and might lead to
some misunderstanding of the lens' usefulness and the justification of
spending two or three thousand dollars to purchase one.

In these photos the f1.0 looks quite inferior to the other two, but if you
had taken some picutres in candle light, then the f 1.0 would have shown
all why it commands such a large price.

Rick:
I couldn't agree more. As I said when I started this thread:
the group I've chosen to post don't really show the lenses anywhere near the limits of their capabilities.

The primary complaint of the 1.0 lens has always been that it was a little ‘soft.’ Obviously it would not be my first choice for daylight shooting such as in this example. For marginal light, however, it would be the clear choice. If I wanted to setup a test that put the 1.0 in its element, I’d have gotten nothing with the other lenses at all.

What I was really trying to prove to myself was whether or not the f/1.8 'thrifty fifty' was as great a lens as many in this forum (and others) have argued. Clearly it is, especially factoring in that it costs less than a quarter of the f/1.4' s price. It would not be my first choice because of build quality and the extra f/stop, but I can enthusiastically recommend it others with a clear conscience.

[JZaun]

Belmondo
Thank you for this post. I am new to the game and have been aganizong over a 50mm lens. You just made up my mind for me. Clearly the nifty fifty as you call it, will do me a good job and leave some $$$ left for the 100mm macro I am lusting over!

Thank you
JZaun

[Belmondo]

Belmondo
Thank you for this post. I am new to the game and have been aganizong over a 50mm lens. You just made up my mind for me. Clearly the nifty fifty as you call it, will do me a good job and leave some $$$ left for the 100mm macro I am lusting over!

Thank you
JZaun

I sincerely believe you'll be well served by the f/1.8. If you don't need the extra f/stop, then it's really a no-brainer. The f/1.4 is a bit faster, but the bigger difference (to me) is the build quality. It is a lens I'll keep for a long time, and considering the price difference between it and the f/1.8, I'll have to just to get my money's worth from it.

Good luck. The 100 macro is a great lens, too. I have one and continue to be impressed by it.

Thos.