50mm lens?

[grooveandmelody]

Okay,

Scraggles post about the 50mm is making me curious. My job requires me to take pictures of instruments and concerts. My 20D also couples as my family camera.

If I were to obtain a 50mm, I would probably use it to take pictures of the family, mostly, I think. Someone in Scraggles post said that one would get a lot of use out of a 50.

My question is: Would it be worth adding a 50mm to my camera bag. If so which one? is the 50mm 1.4 significantly better than the 1.8...even for home use?

Amateur here.:o Thanks for the help.

[Aylwin]

I used to have a 1.8 and later upgraded to 1.4. I think either one would be a good choice for different reasons. If cost isn't a issue, then definitely get the 1.4. It can come in handy, especially at home where lighting may be limited. That's actually one of the reasons I upgraded.

[Leorooster]

Agree with Aylwin. I mostly use my 50 1.4 indoor (i.e., at home) and I love it. The 1.4 can be used in low light conditions. Also, the build quality of the 1.4 is much better than that of 1.8.

[AjP]

I got 1.4 right away, great lense!!!!!!!!

[d'homme]

Just Personally... EVERY photography should have 50mm 1.4 or 1.8

[Longwatcher]

Consider this, there is only one currently in production lens with a wider aperture then the 50/1.4 and it costs 4-5 times as much (AKA the 85/1.2). 50mm is considered normal and on an APS-C sized sensor is an good portrait lens. And the 50/1.4 has better out of focus look to it (AKA better bokeh), which is what you look for in a portrait lens. So you get a good portrait lens and the next best thing to the widest aperture possible. Which means you can keep ISO down to minimum or get higher shutter speeds (important for fast moving kids).

So if you can afford it get a 50/1.4, if not the 50/1.8 is good enough and highly recommended for the price as a substitute for the 50/1.4. And as mentioned, if you get the 50/1.8 you will always wonder if you should have gotten the 50/1.4, but I have not heard or read about one person (other then a troll on DPReview) who has regretted getting the 50/1.4 instead of 50/1.8

Just my recommendation,

[grooveandmelody]

Thanks for the great advise.

I'm almost sold on the 50mm for taking pictures of the kids etc. Now I have to decide if it's worth going for the 1.4.

The 50mm 1.4 is more than 4 times the price of a 50mm 1.8. But I'm starting to think that it's going to be worth buying the 1.4 even if it means I have to save up for a month or so. Correct?

[nat869]

I really like my 50mm 1.8. It is a cheap very sharp lens. I use it for landscapes and people photography. For tight portraits I think the 85 would be better, but that said, my all time favorite portrait of my wife I took with the 50. The 1.4 version would be great, but I will get the 85 before that.

[Andy_T]

I went for the 50/1.8 MKI also instead of the 50/1.4 that I would really have liked to have.

The MKI has a better build (metal lensmount) so I think it will be more durable and hold its value better (it's 50% more expensive used than the 50/1.8 MkII new).

Still, for my photography (mainly portraits, aka family snapshots), I really would like to have better bokeh (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69785), so I will trade up to the 85/1.8 or 50/1.4 as one of my next steps. Other than that, it is my sharpest lens and quite useful ... though maybe not wide open, but rather stopped down to f/2.5 or f/2.8.

HERE (http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/) you can find a more detailed comparison of the 50/1.4 and the 50/1.8.

Best regards,
Andy

[xstrio]

personally i would go for the 1.4 ,, i own the 1.8 and it is cheap and pretty sharp but since i got the tamron 28-75 its not even been on the camera. so if i were to get another prime it would be the 1.4 the photo`s took with this lens look stunning.

[Eric DeCastro]

I like the USM. I hate how mine focuses.