Does the 50mm f1.4 really suck, or is it just me?

[Hatem Eldoronki]

As far as I understand, the lower the f-number, the faster the lens, but, also the more blurry? I undertsand that by increasing the f-value, the sharper the image gets, the slower the shutter speed, and lesser light is needed. But I am not getting a sharp picture in any light condition with this lens, except, when I shoot at f2.8 or higher, which seems like not taking advantage of the f1.4 factor (shooting sans flash in low light). Noise is also apparent at IS0 200 or higher (of course), so really I am lost with this f1.4 deal..
I had just bought a 50mm f1.8 (later switched for the f1.4), and I noticed almost exactly the same problem (which I am sure is my own inexperience-related).
All I can say is that the f1.4 has a beautiful bokeh, and accurate color..
Could someone please explain to me? Thanks in advance.

Here's at f1.4, ISO 400, 1/30sec exp. :
http://www.eldoronki.net/test/2858.jpg

And this one @ f4.0, ISO 200, 1/60: (better results, but higher f-value)
http://www.eldoronki.net/test/2905.jpg

[RichardtheSane]

Your shots are at 1-30th and 1-60th of a second, which if a child is moving at all is too slow a shutter speed. Try using at least 1/125th of a second.

The 50mm lenses are really sharp, and neither suck one bit :D

[Tom W]

You're also dealing with a very shallow depth-of-field at f/1.4. So shallow that if the eyes are in perfect focus, the ears will already have reached a point where they may be out-of-focus enough to be objectionable.

BTW, were you shooting with ordinary incandescent lighting in the first picture? There's a strong color cast that indicates so. Set your white balance to Tungsten when you shoot with indoor available light (but not with flash).

And I agree with Richard, 1/30 is kind-of slow, both with regard to the child moving, and to your own movements.

[Hatem Eldoronki]

You're also dealing with a very shallow depth-of-field at f/1.4. So shallow that if the eyes are in perfect focus, the ears will already have reached a point where they may be out-of-focus enough to be objectionable.

BTW, were you shooting with ordinary incandescent lighting in the first picture? There's a strong color cast that indicates so. Set your white balance to Tungsten when you shoot with indoor available light (but not with flash).

And I agree with Richard, 1/30 is kind-of slow, both with regard to the child moving, and to your own movements.


Yes I was shooting indoors with AWB. I normally use custom WB. I will try higher speeds..
Thanks guys.

[Tom W]

It would help to get a little more light as well. With f/1.4 available, even a 60 watt lamp would help immensely, provided it isn't too far away from the subject.

You may wish to experiment with ISO 800 also. That will give you another stop to work with.

[scottbergerphoto]

I recently posted two focus tests of the Canon 50mm f/1.4. They are located at:
http://www.pbase.com/scottbergerphoto/50mm_f_14__focus_test
http://www.pbase.com/scottbergerphoto/revised_50mm_focus_test

What you will see is that the 50mmf/1.4 is pretty soft at 1.4, better at 2.0 and very sharp at f/2.8. This is consistent with its MTF test results at www.photodo.com. The lens has an extremely narrow depth of field at large apertures, so you have to be careful what you are focusing on. At f/1.4 the DOF when shooting 5 ft from the subject is only 0.16 ft(less then 2 inches). See for yourself: http://dfleming.ameranet.com/dofjs.html
Also the pictures you posted were underexposed. That reduces the quality you will get from any lens.
Scott

[randyk]

I have this lens and know it can be a challenge to get great results in certain conditions. Its not the fastest at focusing in low light so you also might want to try manual focus when lighting is really bad.