first shot with my brandnew 50mm f1.4

[EoSD30fReAk]

I love the bokeh this lens produces!

i love the sharpnes of this lens

i ........ am sooo happy with it!

this is the first shot i've taken with it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v59/EoSD30fReAk/test50mmF1.jpg

[condyk]

I wonder if this lens is worth the extra over the f1.8. Serious question, because while it's a nice enough shot, I think my 1.8 would take at least as good. Be interested in opinions ..

[EoSD30fReAk]

i bought it for the better build quality, because i didn't like the plastic f1.8don't get me wrong! the f1.8 is also a very sharp lens for it's money.

[ddelallata]

Well, not only does he get a faster lens for the extra cost of the F1.4, but he also gets a very fast ring USM and a metal mount. The image quality over the f1.8 is probably negligeable.

[mr.photoguy]

I think it's worth it...
I like the f1.8, but remember you get what you pay for.

[schmoelzel]

There is no way that the 1.8II can producethat kind of bokeh.......highlights are not as smooth.....this is probably also why many (including myself) see the 1.4 as being sharper and more contrasty........well worth the extra money!

[condyk]

I think it's worth it...
I like the f1.8, but remember you get what you pay for.

I don't think that's true or the 1.8 would cost maybe £300 ... and there are loads of mediocre yet expensive lenses out there. So, what do you get that is worth the extra cash given it seems better image quality isn't it? USM? Metal mount? Are they really worth it in real world usage? Nicer Bokeh ... Ok, I might accept that :)

[cdhender]

I don't think that's true or the 1.8 would cost maybe £300 ... and there are loads of mediocre yet expensive lenses out there. So, what do you get that is worth the extra cash given it seems better image quality isn't it? USM? Metal mount? Are they really worth it in real world usage? Nicer Bokeh ... Ok, I might accept that :)

You mean is a better built lense worth extra money? Or USM? In a general sense,of course it is. These features add value to the lense to make your pictures better (USM) and to ensure you're not buying another lense a year from now (a better build). Not to mention that the f/1.4 is a third lower stop. I have and enjoy my 50 1.8, but there's a reason it's $70 US. If, as you say,Canon thought they could charge £300, do you really think they wouldn't?

[condyk]

I accept any general argument about better build and USM being worth having: I've been talking about image quality and whether it's worth spending the extra, because the OP attached an image.

On build, maybe there are 1,000's of 12 month old broken and smashed 50mm II's out there, but I've never heard of one on this forum as yet. Of course, one or two will no doubt be along in a minute :lol: :lol:

On price ... many people buy the 50mm II and then transfer the good feelings they get to other Canon products, by which time external build is largely irrelevant as they now use their more expensive purchases more. Same could apply to the 70-200mm F4 which then gets people on the L bandwagon. I understand the Canon strategy ... and it works well for them.

[Croasdail]

I may be a little old school here, but there was a day when the old 50 was the main stay of anyones bag, and people spent a lot of money getting the best 50 possible. But this is back when to get really georgous images you shot 25 and 64 film. Now with zooms and technology the way it is now, it probably means a lot less. But because I come from that perspective, I would still spend the extra $200 on a really solid prime 50 and keep it as my partner for atleast 10 years or until they come up with something that forces me to divorce from it. For my son - $70 is enough because I know he will beat the heck out of it.

As for this lense... the shot is really nice and sharp - so it looks like a keeper - congradulations on your addition.

[EoSD30fReAk]

thanks Croasdail.

i'm very happy with it and i will certainly keep it for some years.

[rdenney]

...Not to mention that the f/1.4 is a third lower stop....

Actually, 1.4 is two-thirds of a stop faster than 1.8. And if you want thin depth of field for portraiture, that speed is important at this focal length.

I don't have either, but I have handled the 1.8 and I don't like the noise and slow focusing. And focusing it manually is not easy, given the focus ring is very sloppy.

It was the same with the 75-300. I didn't really think the image quality was unacceptable, but the handling of the lens was intolerable for me.

Rick "using a screw-mount 1.4 at the moment" Denney

[BlueTit]

I had a lend of both for the week from friendly local camera dealer, with a view to buying one or the other. I returned the 1.8 today. I was hoping I would settle for the 1.8 as it us so much cheaper, but after playing around with both during the week the 1.4 won out. The 1.8 is very sharp, but I think the 1.4 it is worth the extra for the bokeh, speed and build quality. Although the build quality is, I think better, on the 1.4 I still think the focus ring is a bit thinny and loose. No I have made my decision I hope to prove it was worth it over the weekend.