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 26 Jan 2014 (Sunday) 14:14
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

My terrible Canon 50mm/EF1.4 first experiense

 
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,675 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3972
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jan 29, 2014 10:29 |  #31

Kanye wrote in post #16646937 (external link)
Its quite known that the 50 f/1.4 is relatively soft and has subpar IQ.

Did you even read the OP? And the biggest complaint I ever hear about the EF 50/1.4 is that it has an optical formula the same as most vintage 50mm lenses (like your Takumar) and that the micro-USM is fragile and not always accurate. If you saw yours as "soft" you either had a bad copy or you weren't hitting focus where you wanted. I've shot with it numerous times, it's definitely not a "soft" lens.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Kanye
Senior Member
Avatar
670 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
     
Jan 29, 2014 10:35 |  #32

Prob a bad copy then.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Jan 29, 2014 12:40 |  #33

Kanye wrote in post #16646937 (external link)
Its quite known that the 50 f/1.4 is relatively soft and has subpar IQ.

Are you even posting in the right topic?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_d
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,378 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 604
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jan 29, 2014 19:35 |  #34

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16646999 (external link)
Did you even read the OP? And the biggest complaint I ever hear about the EF 50/1.4 is that it has an optical formula the same as most vintage 50mm lenses (like your Takumar) and that the micro-USM is fragile and not always accurate. If you saw yours as "soft" you either had a bad copy or you weren't hitting focus where you wanted. I've shot with it numerous times, it's definitely not a "soft" lens.

I do find mine soft wide open. But its sharp at f/2 and beyond.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,675 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3972
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jan 29, 2014 20:59 |  #35

mike_d wrote in post #16648449 (external link)
I do find mine soft wide open. But its sharp at f/2 and beyond.

The two copies I shot with seemed plenty sharp to me wide open... certainly up to par with vintage lenses like my Yashica ML. I decided not to buy one because it rendered very similarly to my Yashica but I hated the MF ring and the colors/contrast wasn't as pleasing as my Yashica.

This is the only shot I have from one wide open, but I definitely wouldn't call it "soft"

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3805/10641436013_d85fe3bdfb_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …rydaygetaway/10​641436013/  (external link)
IMG_8880.jpg (external link) by EverydayGetaway (external link), on Flickr

Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,214 posts
Gallery: 77 photos
Likes: 305
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Jan 30, 2014 07:22 |  #36

Kanye wrote in post #16646937 (external link)
Its quite known that the 50 f/1.4 is relatively soft and has subpar IQ.

The 50 f/1.4 I used to own was pretty sharp wide open. I just did not care for the AF mechanism compared with my ring USM lenses.

But as others have already said, that is not the OP's issue anyway.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adamo99
Goldmember
1,173 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 34
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Mississauga, ON
     
Jan 30, 2014 10:38 |  #37

Can we PLEASE get an 'ignore' button on this forum??

Kanye wrote in post #16644694 (external link)
EF 50mm 1.4 sucks. My manual Takumar out does it everywhere. Sharp as ****!

Sold mine and got myself a REAL lens.

See my signature.

Kanye wrote in post #16646937 (external link)
Its quite known that the 50 f/1.4 is relatively soft and has subpar IQ.

Kanye wrote in post #16647018 (external link)
Prob a bad copy then.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,627 posts
Gallery: 25 photos
Likes: 371
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Jan 30, 2014 11:03 |  #38

adamo99 wrote in post #16649904 (external link)
Can we PLEASE get an 'ignore' button on this forum??

We have one!

Click on the offender's nickname under the avatar.

Click on view public profile.

Click 'add to the ignore list' on the blue ribbon on the top and right.


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,556 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6187
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jan 30, 2014 11:10 |  #39

Kanye wrote in post #16644694 (external link)
EF 50mm 1.4 sucks. My manual Takumar out does it everywhere. Sharp as ****!

Sold mine and got myself a REAL lens.

See my signature.

Yeah, but your sucky lens has nothing to do with this particular thread. ;)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,556 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6187
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jan 30, 2014 11:13 |  #40

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16648648 (external link)
The two copies I shot with seemed plenty sharp to me wide open... certainly up to par with vintage lenses like my Yashica ML. I decided not to buy one because it rendered very similarly to my Yashica but I hated the MF ring and the colors/contrast wasn't as pleasing as my Yashica.

I have had several soft copies at f1.4 as well. It really is a bargain lens IMO, but priced above that designation simply due to supply and demand. However in this case for this post, there are other issues at play that have nothing to do with that.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adamo99
Goldmember
1,173 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 34
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Mississauga, ON
     
Jan 30, 2014 15:08 |  #41

MakisM1 wrote in post #16649971 (external link)
We have one!

Click on the offender's nickname under the avatar.

Click on view public profile.

Click 'add to the ignore list' on the blue ribbon on the top and right.

Thanks! This forum just became SO much better.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kanye
Senior Member
Avatar
670 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
     
Jan 30, 2014 15:12 |  #42

adamo99 wrote in post #16649904 (external link)
Can we PLEASE get an 'ignore' button on this forum??

lol, this is the kind of guy who whines about everything, including to his wife/husband.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jt354
Senior Member
401 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Michigan
     
Jan 30, 2014 16:27 |  #43

glen_dc wrote in post #16638691 (external link)
I am sitting at the dinner table next to big bay window into backyard covered with 5 inch snow at 1 pm, shooting photos of things on the table. That’s day light plus reflection from snow. I have Tv=1/80 priority and with IS0=100 or 200 I get aperture 1/4. When I have Tv=1/80 and ISO=800, I get aperture 2.8 or 4 that's 'sweet spot' of the 50/EF1.4. I cannot believe that I have to use such high ISO (800) during day with 50 mm lens. The lens behaves like there is a thick UV or Natural Density filter that drastically reduce the light.

I expected always ISO 100 or 200, Av priority mode between 2.8-5.6 and auto shutter speed well below 1/80 so no tripod required. Were my expectations totally wrong?

If you think about it, aperture between f/2.8-f/4 is pretty much the same as your kit lens at the wide end - in other words, don't expect miracles if you're using these settings. When I shoot indoors with my 40mm f/2.8 wide open, I often have to use ISO speeds of 800, 1600, even 3200 in some cases. Without knowing exactly what the mix of daylight, clouds, and indoor light is, it's very hard to say whether you "should have" been getting narrower apertures for a given shutter speed and ISO setting.

In the interest of full disclosure, I was somewhat disappointed with the 50mm f/1.4 when I owned it. Image quality was pretty hideous wide open at f/1.4, so I found that I had to stop down to f/2 for acceptable results. That's only a stop faster than my old Tamron 17-50mm zoom, which was much more flexible in most situations. Add in the poor build quality, awkward FOV on crop, and lack of IS, and the lens just didn't cut it for me. A lot of people seem to like it though. For general "walkaround" prime photography, I think I'd much rather have the Sigma 30mm, Canon 35mm f/2 IS, or even just my 40mm pancake.


Zenfolio (external link)
flickr (external link)
Gear: Canon 60D / Canon G12 / Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 / Canon 35mm f/2 IS / Canon 85mm f/1.8 / Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 / Speedlite 430 EXII / Slik 700DX legs / Cullmann MB6 head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddie3dfx
Senior Member
486 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jan 30, 2014 16:38 |  #44

Kanye wrote in post #16650669 (external link)
lol, this is the kind of guy who whines about everything, including to his wife/husband.

your pictures are very nice and you seem to really enjoy photography.
I'd tone it down a little bit, not to mean, but enough just to enjoy the hobby.
Photography is a very perspective/personal art, where you can't really say one piece of art is necessarily better than the other.

For example. Zeiss intentionally created the 85mm 1.4 a little soft at 1.4... Not to ruin the photos, but to give it a warmth/softness to portraits. This was actually technical genius, especially because photoshop was just a dream back then.

The canon 50mm 1.4 is really an impressive lens for $300. It's sharpness at 2.8-5.6 is really nice and it's bokeh is fairly pleasant. It's autofocus is probably the best of all the 50's.
The pentax takumar is a great lens and legendary, but manual lenses and older lenses are not for everybody and really not practical for all situations.
If I could make all my zeiss lenses automatic, I would.

I actually would never recommend manual lenses on our cameras due to a non manual focusing screen, a real time oled viewfinder, and no focus peaking


Canon 6D, Canon L 24-105, Zeiss Distagon 28mm 2.8, Planar 50mm 1.4, Planar 85mm 1.4, Sonnar 135mm 2.8 & Zeiss Mutar 2x, Canon 50mm 1.8
http://www.edwinraffph​otography.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brodog2525
Senior Member
Avatar
450 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2006
Location: Fairfield, CT USA
     
Jan 30, 2014 18:02 |  #45

ceegee wrote in post #16640689 (external link)
Before spending more money on gear, either take a class or buy a basic photography book and learn how to use a DSLR. You need to understand how f-stop, shutter speed and ISO work together to produce an image, and how to use your camera to control depth of field. Once you get the hang of it, it's easy.

The most useful $100 I ever spent on photography was a four-week online class on how to use my camera.

I support what ceegee said. Expensive camera gear is nice, but learning to shoot with a simple camera is even better. the more we shoot in M (manual), the more we learn. Also a paid photo class will be super helpful


Canon 30D | 17-85mm EF-S with IS | 430EX Flash
50mm f/1.8 II | 18-55mm lens kit
70-200mm f/4 L
brodiehenry.smugmug.co​m (external link)http://www.BrodieHenry​.com (external link)

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

8,814 views & 0 likes for this thread
My terrible Canon 50mm/EF1.4 first experiense
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 socrbob
945 guests, 255 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.