Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 14 May 2012 (Monday) 07:43
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

My 50 1.8 is better than 50 1.4 ????

 
watson76
Member
74 posts
Joined Jan 2012
May 14, 2012 07:43 |  #1

This is strange, this is the 2nd 50 1.4 I have owned. The first one I bought as an upgrade to my 50 1.8 II over a year ago, but found that images didn't have the contrast and detail that my 50 1.8 had so I sent the 50 1.4 back to Amazon.

Recently thinking that maybe it was user error or a bad copy, I purchased the 50 1.4 again. Same results. With both lenses set @ 1.8, the 50 Mark II delivers a better image (fine detail like the lashes of the eyes are crisp, colors seem to pop), the 50 1.4 is a bit softer (marginally so) and contrast is a bit flatter (again it's marginal). Has anyone else experienced this ? I really want to love the 1.4: Focusing is faster, the build is nice, and of course it's 1.4.

I also have noticed that the 50 1.4 produces brighter images than the 50 1.8. At the exact same aperture and shutter, the 50 1.4 image is about a 3rd stop brighter. Strange ?

Maybe I just need to give the lens more time, anyone else experience this ?




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,570 posts
Joined Dec 2010
May 14, 2012 08:49 |  #2

the 50 1.8 is a great value in the canon lens lineup. mine was great until it (literally) fell apart.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Elvin
Member
203 posts
Joined Jul 2010
New Yor[HK]
May 14, 2012 09:20 |  #3

Unless you need the slightly wider aperture, FTM and faster focusing, the 50mm f/1.8 II is better in image quality in my opinion. FWIW, both lenses need to be stopped down for sharp results.


Canon Camera
Canon Lenses
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
Siaon
Member
Siaon's Avatar
34 posts
Joined Jun 2011
May 14, 2012 09:23 |  #4

My 50 1.8 is so awesome.

IMO, all 3 have fairly similar IQ.


Canon 5D Mark II | Canon 24-105 f/4 L | Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS | Canon 50mm F1.8 II | YN-467 |
|| flickrexternal link ||

LOG IN TO REPLY
watson76
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
74 posts
Joined Jan 2012
May 14, 2012 09:26 |  #5

rick_reno wrote in post #14428981external link
the 50 1.8 is a great value in the canon lens lineup. mine was great until it (literally) fell apart.

I read on photozone that the 50 1.4 has low contast until 2.8, so maybe that's what I am seeing. A Digital Picture also states that the 50 1.4 lens has low contrast due until f2. So I guess what I am faced with is better wide-open performance on the 1.8 vs faster focusing and aperture on the 50 1.4




LOG IN TO REPLY
contributor_M
Senior Member
341 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Austin
May 14, 2012 11:03 |  #6

going lens shopping today.

I'm either going to upgrade my 50 1.8 to the 50 1.4 or buy a 28mm f/1.8 or 35 f/2.

Decisions, decisions.


Adrian
Gear | Flickrexternal link | 500pxexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
BrickR
Cream of the Crop
5,874 posts
Joined Mar 2011
Dallas TX
May 14, 2012 15:23 |  #7

50 1.8's biggest knock has always been the build quality. The glass itself is really nice.


My junk
The grass isn't greener on the other side, it's green where you water it.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike ­ Deep
Goldmember
Mike Deep's Avatar
Joined Apr 2008
Tampa, FL
May 14, 2012 15:45 |  #8

Generally speaking, slower lenses tend to perform better than faster lenses (This is not always true, so don't read too much into it). Ultra-fast lenses are a compromise, as are most things in photography.

Consider also that the 50/1.4's optics date back to at least 1968, while the 50/1.8's optics were designed in the late 1980s.


www.mikedeep.comexternal link | SportsShooterexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
macvisual
Goldmember
macvisual's Avatar
1,692 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Scotland
May 14, 2012 16:26 |  #9

I've just bought a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mk2, can't believe the quality it produces for the low price, shot this image a couple of hours ago on my 5D/1, would the f/1.4 be better I wonder?


IMAGE: http://i382.photobucket.com/albums/oo268/macvisual/8817_mayrose.jpg

hand-held - 50 iso setting - J-Peg - shot @ f/4

'Peter McCullough Photography'
Follow my flickr
http://flic.kr/ps/2sfe​3Pexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Warlock
Senior Member
The Warlock's Avatar
505 posts
Joined May 2011
Stavanger, Norway
May 14, 2012 20:05 |  #10

I was underwhelmed by the 50 1.4 coming from the 1.8, got the 50L (and eventually, a new 1.8) instead.
Both the 1.8's has been stunningly good, for the price. The 50L is spectacular.


Canon 60D, Canon 1100D , 17-40 4L , 24mm 1.4L II,Zeiss Distagon T*2/35 ZE,50mm 1.2L, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 IS L, 50mm 1.8II, 18-55 III, 430 exII,TT Retrospective 20, Lightroom 4.
Set a pen to a dream, and the colour drains from it.
R.H. Barlow and H.P. Lovecraft
"The Night Ocean"

LOG IN TO REPLY
maplewoods
Member
53 posts
Joined Jan 2012
May 14, 2012 21:46 |  #11

That wouldn't be strange.

Designing a lens is balancing among many factors.

For wider aperture, better bokeh, they have to sacrifice some other things.

For me, sharpness of any 50mm is decent enough,but 50 1.8's bokeh is unacceptable.




LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
snake0ape's Avatar
Joined Jan 2007
Los Angeles
May 15, 2012 01:56 |  #12

maplewoods wrote in post #14432603external link
That wouldn't be strange.

Designing a lens is balancing among many factors.

For wider aperture, better bokeh, they have to sacrifice some other things.

For me, sharpness of any 50mm is decent enough,but 50 1.8's bokeh is unacceptable.

+1. Bokeh and is why I upgraded to 1.4. Love the 1.8 $/IQ , but geez, the 1.8 sounds so cheap, literally. zzzzzzzzech.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

LOG IN TO REPLY
maplewoods
Member
53 posts
Joined Jan 2012
May 15, 2012 03:23 |  #13

After I upgraded to Sigma 50 1.4, I sold my 1.8. But I'm gonna buy it back one day. They are of different use.




LOG IN TO REPLY
melcat
Goldmember
1,121 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Melbourne, Australia
May 15, 2012 03:43 |  #14

watson76 wrote in post #14428670external link
This is strange, this is the 2nd 50 1.4 I have owned. The first one I bought as an upgrade to my 50 1.8 II over a year ago, but found that images didn't have the contrast and detail that my 50 1.8 had so I sent the 50 1.4 back to Amazon.

This is a well-known characteristic of f/1.4 and f/1.8 50mm lens pairs from the same maker. The softness of various 50mm f/1.4 lenses wide open has often been described as "halation", although of course it isn't really that. It's simply the type of aberrations produced by the traditional f/1.4 design.

Canon fix it with the f/1.2. It'll cost you. Knowing the characteristics of traditional 50mm designs and the poor build quality of Canon's f/1.8, it was the only one I considered.

I also have noticed that the 50 1.4 produces brighter images than the 50 1.8. At the exact same aperture and shutter, the 50 1.4 image is about a 3rd stop brighter. Strange ?

This is most likely different fall-off between the two lenses which the camera's metering is not exactly compensating for. Remember, the camera meters wide open, so if metering mostly from the centre of the frame through a lens with severe fall-off it will need to reduce exposure stopped down.




LOG IN TO REPLY
modchild
Goldmember
modchild's Avatar
1,469 posts
Joined Jul 2011
Lincoln, Uk
May 15, 2012 03:56 |  #15

I've had a 50 1.8 MkII for a few months and have been happy with the results, but I bought a 1.4 version last week and I'm completely blown away. At 1.4 it's as sharp as the 1.8 at 2.4 and stepped down to 2.8 it's razor sharp, as good as my 100 2.8 L macro. I must of just got a good one I suppose.


EOS 5D MkIII, EOS 70D, EOS 650D, EOS M, Canon 24-70 f2.8L MkII, Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS MkII, Canon 100 f2.8L Macro, Canon 17-40 f4L IS, Canon 24-105 f4L IS, Canon 300 f4L IS, Canon 85 f1.8, Canon 50 f1.4, Canon 40 f2.8 STM, Canon 35 f2, Sigma 150-500 OS, Tamron 18-270 PZD, Tamron 28-300 VC, 580EX II Flash, Nissin Di866 MkII Flash, Sigma EM 140 Macro Flash and other bits.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

2,484 views & 0 likes for this thread
My 50 1.8 is better than 50 1.4 ????
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00182 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is cesserap
1209 guests, 659 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016