Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 20 Aug 2011 (Saturday) 16:46
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF 85 1.8 vs EF 50 1.4

 
SeanL
Member
179 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Aug 20, 2011 16:46 |  #1

Other than focal length and max aperture, are these lenses similar?

I ask because I'm not really satisfied with the IQ of the EF 50 1.4 on the 5D Mark II.

S


Sean
Canon cameras and lenses | Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
thestone11
Goldmember
Avatar
1,203 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
     
Aug 20, 2011 16:52 |  #2

Can't really compare lens head to head with different focal range. After all, their optic design are totally different. Can u post up some of your pictures along with the metadata here for us to take a look. I am totally happy with the IQ from my 50mm f/1.4, it is very sharp.


Canon 5D MK II | Fuji X100 | Canon T2i | Canon 100mm macro f/2.8 | Canon 135L f/2 | Canon 50mm f/1.2 L | 17-40mm f/4 L | 24-70mm f/2.8 L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM |Canon 430EX II Flash X2 | Pocketwizard TT5 & TT1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SeanL
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
179 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Aug 20, 2011 17:13 as a reply to  @ thestone11's post |  #3

thestone,

Having some trouble posting images.

How does the IQ of your 50 1.4 images compare to your 70-200 f/4 IS as a point of reference?


Sean
Canon cameras and lenses | Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LeeRatters
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,125 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6356
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Bristol, UK
     
Aug 20, 2011 17:27 |  #4

thestone11 wrote in post #12969132 (external link)
I am totally happy with the IQ from my 50mm f/1.4, it is very sharp.

I'd say the same personally. Even wide open it's acceptable!!


>> Flickr << (external link)


>> Instagram<< (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
psychodweep
Member
137 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Aug 20, 2011 18:00 as a reply to  @ LeeRatters's post |  #5

Build quality and AF are much better with the 85mm.
I would prefer the 85mm over the 50mm. It would prefer a 50mm f1.4 with the AF and build quality of the 85mm.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cfvisuals
Senior Member
866 posts
Joined Mar 2011
Location: San Diego
     
Aug 20, 2011 18:09 as a reply to  @ psychodweep's post |  #6

85 1.8 and 50 1.4 are both soft wide open.
They reach sharpness at f2.8.
At 2.8 their sharpness matches 70-200mm's.

Some users think it's "acceptable", but that is a very subjective term. But the general idea is they are just soft wide open and sharpness increases as they stop down to 2.8.
I think that is what making them $300~400, it's that their softness at wide open. Sigma 85mm f1.4 is sharp wide open. 35L is sharp wide open. Except 50L, which is soft wide open.

Otherwise their IQ is indistinguishable.
I have owned 50mm 1.4 and 85mm f1.8. I am using a 5Dc. I like 85mm better is because its FL and AF speed, otherwise they are similar in IQ.

However, my experience with these lenses might have variations from those of other users. Because other users might have better copies of the lenses.


flickr (external link)
5∞ portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TweakMDS
Goldmember
Avatar
2,242 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Netherlands
     
Aug 20, 2011 18:11 |  #7

I don't own the 50 but played with one a few times. Regarding image quality, there's not too much between them, but as stated above, the 85mm has much a much better AF design (faster and without protruding elements). The 85 isn't razorsharp wide open, but certainly good enough to capture a great shot. For wallpaper sized prints you might wanna stop down to f/2 - 2.8.

Based on the many reports and user experiences, I'm tempted to think the 50 1.4 is a really flawed design. It's AF system seems really too sensitive for proper every day use. I'm not saying it won't last a lifetime with proper babying, but that's no way to treat a lens if you want to shoot it on a day to day basis.

Back on topic, I opted for the 85 1.8 (bought one used) and I'm happy I did. Whenever it's too long, I use my 50 1.8, but if Canon ever comes out with a 50 1.4 with real ring USM, I think I might buy it also. One thing I don't love about the 85 is the hood, but it also doesn't bother me so much. The focus ring is a bit stiffer than it needs to be, quite similar to the 28 1.8. However, with the great AF, I barely ever use manual focus on the 85mm, and when I do, it does work fine.


Some of my lenses focus beyond infinity...!
~Michael
Gear | Flickr (external link)
"My featured shots" (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
paulkaye
Senior Member
Avatar
559 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Leamington, UK
     
Aug 20, 2011 18:38 as a reply to  @ TweakMDS's post |  #8

I've got both and here's my view:
- 50mm is a little soft wide open, but it's quite acceptable. By f2 it's already much better and at f2.8, as sharp as any will need it.
- 85mm is sharper wide open, but it's got terrible purple/green fringing on out of focus highlights. I haven't found a way of removing them satisfactorily in PP. Thr fringing reduces as you stop down.
- 85 build and AF is better, but I've not had any problems with the 50. I always leave a hood fitted which prevents stress on the AF assembly.

Having said all that, I much prefer the 50 despite all this - the FL seems to match what I shoot better. I might sell the 85 in fact.


Paul
_______________
5DII, 50mm 1.4, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, 24-105L IS, 70-200L f4 IS, 100-400L, 100 f2.8 Macro
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lyttleviet
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
Aug 20, 2011 20:56 |  #9

85 > as far as build quality goes. Both yield great images but I would take the 85 over the 50 any day. Just my personal preference.


www.opulentphotography​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SeanL
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
179 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Aug 20, 2011 23:08 as a reply to  @ lyttleviet's post |  #10

A few comments about the 50 1.4 AF.

Maybe I'll try manual focusing and compare with autofocus.


Sean
Canon cameras and lenses | Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fotuwe
Senior Member
403 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Germany
     
Aug 21, 2011 03:00 |  #11

calvinjhfeng wrote in post #12969386 (external link)
85 1.8 and 50 1.4 are both soft wide open. 35L is sharp wide open.


85 1.8: is one of the sharpest lenses canon produces. Not only in the center but also superb edges.
50 1.4: agree. Not the sharpest lens... still love it.
35L is only sharp wide open in the middle. The corners are quite soft @1.4


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
plastic_
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Feb 2011
     
Aug 21, 2011 03:42 |  #12

I got to say, 85 1.8 is always hyped, I don't like it. It is sharp, but the contrast is bad, compared to the 100mm L macro, for example. The 50mm 1.4 build quality is horrible, you can as well get the 50mm 1.8. They both break easily.


Marc
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dmbpettit
Senior Member
Avatar
370 posts
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Loveland, Colorado
     
Aug 21, 2011 22:20 |  #13

I purchased both within a 2 week time period. Like others have said, the 85 does have a better build quality but the 50 1.4 is a lot better than the 50 1.8. The 85 may be the faster focusing lens I have used, it is quite flawless in this manner. I prefer the 85 over the 50 1.4 but my shooting style has made me use the 50 1.4 a whole lot more. That being said, I do really like my 50 1.4. On my 5Dmk2, the 50 is used for full portraits while I use the 85 for head and shoulder shots.

I think they compliment each other quite nicely for those who can't afford the 50L and 85L.


Body: 5DMKIII
Lenses: 17-40L, 24-70L, EF 50 1.4, EF 85 1.8, EF 70-200 F4 L, Lens Baby
Flash: 2x Canon 430EX
www.brianpettitphotogr​aphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LowriderS10
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,170 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Mar 2008
Location: South Korea / Canada
     
Aug 21, 2011 22:33 |  #14

no...the 50 1.4 is, I think, Canon's worst lens ever FOR THE MONEY. And that's key, Canon has made worse lenses, but they have all been much cheaper. They have issues up the ying-yang...front focus/back focus/AF motors that break when you breathe on them, etc...

I've had two 50 1.4s and an 85 1.8 and when it comes time to re-buy one of them, it'll be the 85 without a doubt. The 85 was a pleasure to use, very sharp and fast focusing and felt much more solid and better built than the 50 1.4.


-=Prints For Sale at PIXELS=- (external link)
-=Facebook=- (external link)
-=Flickr=- (external link)

-=Gear=-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Aug 21, 2011 23:12 |  #15

SeanL wrote in post #12969108 (external link)
Other than focal length and max aperture, are these lenses similar?

I ask because I'm not really satisfied with the IQ of the EF 50 1.4 on the 5D Mark II.

The 85 is very good, and in my experience is better than the 50, but it would be useful to know why you are not satisfied with the 50. Examples would be a big help. Your copy of the lens may have an issue we might be able to help identify. (Or the problem could be user error...we have no way of knowing really without seeing pics or at least having you describe the perceived deficiencies.)

plastic_ wrote in post #12971293 (external link)
I got to say, 85 1.8 is always hyped, I don't like it. It is sharp, but the contrast is bad, compared to the 100mm L macro, for example.

Contrast on the 85/1.8 is quite good even with challenging lighting. It may not always hold up in a side by side against higher end glass like Canon L or Zeiss, but it is a solid performer.




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

3,689 views & 0 likes for this thread
EF 85 1.8 vs EF 50 1.4
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is m.nobles
788 guests, 178 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.