Nifty Fifty question

I love this little lens when it works correctly, but mine has a terrible front focusing issue when in lower light situations. By lower light, I mean just about anything indoors. If I have good light or sunlight, the issue goes away completely and I get very correct focus. I've tested it in a number of situations, and it is very reproducible. I never hear the AF hunting, it just comes out front focused, and when using larger apertures, it is very noticeable.

My question being, is this common for this lens? Trying to decide if I should buy another one or save up for the 50 1.4, which I hear gives close to the same image quality but costs 4x as much

The 1.4 is also about better build quality and focus motor. There are some who swear the iq difference is substantially better and those who say it is essentially the same, so take from it what you will on that front.
There is the option of sending it in for calibration if you like everything else about it. I am assuming this is because you have a body that does not have MA.

Yes, save for the 50/1.4. The Sigma 50/1.4...

I love how some say that the 1.8 is almost the same as the 1.4 and that the 1.4 is pretty much like the 1.2 lol

BIllionfps wrote in post #15614119
I love how some say that the 1.8 is almost the same as the 1.4 and that the 1.4 is pretty much like the 1.2 lol

The 1.8 is junk. The 1.4 is a decent lens. I haven't used the 1.2.

Numenorean wrote in post #15614141
The 1.8 is junk. The 1.4 is a decent lens. I haven't used the 1.2.

It is cheap feeling, but that does not mean it's junk. For it's price, it's very good. Optically the 50mm f/1.4 is not 3 or 4 times better.

Having said that, I like my 50mm f/1.4 and I won't go back again. If you don't want to spend a lot of money, the 50mm f/1.8 II is a great lens.

Dillan_K wrote in post #15614238
It is cheap feeling, but that does not mean it's junk. For it's price, it's very good. Optically the 50mm f/1.4 is not 3 or 4 times better.

Having said that, I like my 50mm f/1.4 and I won't go back again. If you don't want to spend a lot of money, the 50mm f/1.8 II is a great lens.

Optically, I think the 1.8 is pretty darn good. It's just the focus issue I'm having in the settings without bright light. I hate to put out 3 or 400 dollars more on a lens when it may be that I just have a defective copy of the 1.8.

Mine works fine within its limits. Its not too bad at f/1.8 and nice and sharp at f/2.8.
Focus is noisy and a bit slow but for me it works even indoors in fairly poorly lit rooms. No front or back focus.

Build quality is terrible but for the price it produces perfectly acceptable photos. Its a little long for my APS-C sensor though indoors.

If you're getting a 1.4, get the Sigma. I had the Canon 50/1.4 and ended up selling it and keeping my 50/1.8 Mk I.

BIllionfps wrote in post #15614119
I love how some say that the 1.8 is almost the same as the 1.4 and that the 1.4 is pretty much like the 1.2 lol

Numenorean wrote in post #15614141
The 1.8 is junk. The 1.4 is a decent lens. I haven't used the 1.2.

gnirtS wrote in post #15614366
Mine works fine within its limits. Its not too bad at f/1.8 and nice and sharp at f/2.8.
Focus is noisy and a bit slow but for me it works even indoors in fairly poorly lit rooms. No front or back focus.

Build quality is terrible but for the price it produces perfectly acceptable photos. Its a little long for my APS-C sensor though indoors.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=7

Judge for yourself. In my mind, there is some difference up to f4.0

Numenorean wrote in post #15614141
The 1.8 is junk. The 1.4 is a decent lens. I haven't used the 1.2.

I agree and it's not like I haven't tried a number of copies . The ones that did focus were soft , and the ones that wouldn't focus were sharp , but I thought all were lacking contrast , didn't like the bokeh of the 50 1.8 either ...