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 19 Jan 2016 (Tuesday) 09:42
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

50 1.8 vs 50 1.4 vs 50 1.2 L

 
Brad999
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
420 posts
Likes: 76
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jan 19, 2016 10:46 as a reply to  @ post 17864355 |  #16

Ok, thanks. I will take a look.

I guess if nobody is saying the 1.4 is any great lens, I might as well send it back and buy the 1.8 STM since it is relatively cheap. I would have to save up for the 1.2L anyhow.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
nqjudo
Goldmember
Avatar
3,173 posts
Likes: 1031
Joined Apr 2007
     
Jan 19, 2016 10:48 as a reply to  @ Brad999's post |  #17

Personally I gave up on Canon's 50 1.4. It was in for service way too often. That lens has been due for a redesign for some time.


No photographer is as good as the simplest camera. - Edward Steichen.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BlakeC
"Dad was a meat cutter"
Avatar
2,673 posts
Gallery: 372 photos
Likes: 673
Joined Jul 2014
Location: West Michigan, USA
Post edited over 3 years ago by BlakeC.
     
Jan 19, 2016 10:53 |  #18

The new 50 1.8 STM is great and I've heard of quite a few people ditching the 1.4 in favor of it. I can only speak for the STM and I love it. As always, watch out for CA. The CA is usually easily taken out in PP. The sweet spot seems to be between f2-2.8


Blake C
BlakeC-Photography.com (external link)
Follow Me on Facebook (external link) , Instagram (external link), or Google+ (external link)
80D |70D | SL1 - Σ 18-35 1.8 ART, Σ 50-100 1.8 ART, Σ 17-50 2.8, Canon 24 2.8 Pancake, Canon 50 1.8 STM, Canon 10-18 STM, Canon 18-135 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,107 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1124
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 19, 2016 10:54 |  #19

Brad999 wrote in post #17864354 (external link)
Ok, in my last thread, it was about hockey, so that is why I was told that IS didn't matter because the players needed such a high shutter speed to stop them.

So as long as your camera can get a high enough shutter speed in the available light to stop the action and get a proper exposure, IS doesn't matter?

Yes. The purpose of IS is to prevent camera shake at slow shutter speeds. But IS only stops camera shake, not moving subjects. So it would be good to use in a museum or cathedral Etc. It is also helpful with longer lenses, like the 70-200 where minimum handheld speeds (1\200) are more than sufficient to stop people moving slowly. It's less useful, although not useless, on shorter lenses.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,147 posts
Gallery: 62 photos
Likes: 229
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Jan 19, 2016 11:29 |  #20

JeffreyG wrote in post #17864299 (external link)
I've owned all three, but not the newest stm lens.

Both the 1.4 and 1.8 are prone to busy bokeh if that kind of thing bothers you. I sold both and wound up with the 1.2 mainly because I found them both to be innaccurate focusing and prone to hunting in the dark.

The 1.2 is good excepting the price. Reasonably sharp, great bokeh, and about the best performance with flare I've experienced. Also fast, accurate AF.

My response would have been identical to Jeffrey's. The only Canon 50mm prime I have not owned is the new STM, and my experience with the other three is very similar. I have considered giving the new STM a try since it is so inexpensive, but just have not got around to it.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brad999
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
420 posts
Likes: 76
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jan 19, 2016 12:00 as a reply to  @ Scott M's post |  #21

Thanks for the information




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5694
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jan 19, 2016 12:18 |  #22

I'm also in the same boat as Jeff, owned all three except for the STM. The 1.2 has higher quality elements, however if I were to buy today, it would likely be the sigma 50 1.4 art. It wipes the floor when it comes to optics. I owned the 1.2 at the time because there was simply nothing worthwhile at the time. The 50 1.8ii had the worst AF ever. The 50 1.4 had the worst reliability ever, the sigma 50 1.4 was universally considered unreliable, so that left me with the 1.2, which I loved. The images were a tad better than the 1.8, however I could live with the 1.8's IQ. Being the worst AF lens to exist, it wasnt an option for me at the time. You're living in good times, the 50 STM is definitely good from my brief experience with the lens. I'de definitely get that lens, even if you have the 1.2 already. it's a lightweight/inexpensiv​e option with reliable AF, something canon didnt have for decades.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brad999
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
420 posts
Likes: 76
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jan 19, 2016 12:20 as a reply to  @ Charlie's post |  #23

Thanks Charlie




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Jan 19, 2016 13:35 |  #24

BlakeC wrote in post #17864377 (external link)
The new 50 1.8 STM is great and I've heard of quite a few people ditching the 1.4 in favor of it. I can only speak for the STM and I love it. As always, watch out for CA. The CA is usually easily taken out in PP. The sweet spot seems to be between f2-2.8

It's important to note that CA is only easy to remove for in-focus areas. If you have bright highlights in out of focus areas, the CA is very difficult to remove because it's spread out by the bokeh. It's less obvious than in-focus CA, but also much more difficult to remove. I've run into this issue with the 85mm f1.8.

Otherwise I think the 50mm STM is a good bet. I believe the lens has the same optical configuration as the 50mm f1.8 II, so the image quality isn't necessarily better from the lens elements alone. However, the 50mm STM has more aperture blades than the 50mm f1.8 II, so the bokeh will be cleaner.


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BlakeC
"Dad was a meat cutter"
Avatar
2,673 posts
Gallery: 372 photos
Likes: 673
Joined Jul 2014
Location: West Michigan, USA
     
Jan 19, 2016 13:38 |  #25

mikepj wrote in post #17864644 (external link)
It's important to note that CA is only easy to remove for in-focus areas. If you have bright highlights in out of focus areas, the CA is very difficult to remove because it's spread out by the bokeh. It's less obvious than in-focus CA, but also much more difficult to remove. I've run into this issue with the 85mm f1.8.

I don't have an issue with it. Must depend on your technique. I can get rid of nearly 100% of it just in ACR. Most of the CA I remove is in the background too.


Blake C
BlakeC-Photography.com (external link)
Follow Me on Facebook (external link) , Instagram (external link), or Google+ (external link)
80D |70D | SL1 - Σ 18-35 1.8 ART, Σ 50-100 1.8 ART, Σ 17-50 2.8, Canon 24 2.8 Pancake, Canon 50 1.8 STM, Canon 10-18 STM, Canon 18-135 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Jan 19, 2016 14:17 |  #26

BlakeC wrote in post #17864649 (external link)
I don't have an issue with it. Must depend on your technique. I can get rid of nearly 100% of it just in ACR. Most of the CA I remove is in the background too.

I don't want to verge off topic, but below is an example. This photograph isn't very good and has a lot of other issues beyond CA, but shows the CA issue I'm talking about. The magenta CA in the foreground is nearly in focus and fairly easy to remove in Lightroom. The green CA in the background around the edges of the building do not get caught by the green slider in Lightroom. If you expand the hue the filter uses, then it does work, but that could have negative impacts in certain images.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BlakeC
"Dad was a meat cutter"
Avatar
2,673 posts
Gallery: 372 photos
Likes: 673
Joined Jul 2014
Location: West Michigan, USA
     
Jan 19, 2016 14:19 |  #27

mikepj wrote in post #17864706 (external link)
I don't want to verge off topic, but below is an example. This photograph isn't very good and has a lot of other issues beyond CA, but shows the CA issue I'm talking about. The magenta CA in the foreground is nearly in focus and fairly easy to remove in Lightroom. The green CA in the background around the edges of the building do not get caught by the green slider in Lightroom. If you expand the hue the filter uses, then it does work, but that could have negative impacts in certain images.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by mikepj in
./showthread.php?p=178​64706&i=i189752424
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

yea that's what I was picturing too. You have a link to the RAW so I can play with it? Pretty sure I could fix it up pretty decent.


Blake C
BlakeC-Photography.com (external link)
Follow Me on Facebook (external link) , Instagram (external link), or Google+ (external link)
80D |70D | SL1 - Σ 18-35 1.8 ART, Σ 50-100 1.8 ART, Σ 17-50 2.8, Canon 24 2.8 Pancake, Canon 50 1.8 STM, Canon 10-18 STM, Canon 18-135 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Jan 19, 2016 14:36 |  #28

BlakeC wrote in post #17864713 (external link)
yea that's what I was picturing too. You have a link to the RAW so I can play with it? Pretty sure I could fix it up pretty decent.

Here's a link: http://www.starcoder.c​om/etc/photography/7D2​_1607.CR2 (external link)


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BlakeC
"Dad was a meat cutter"
Avatar
2,673 posts
Gallery: 372 photos
Likes: 673
Joined Jul 2014
Location: West Michigan, USA
     
Jan 19, 2016 15:12 |  #29

mikepj wrote in post #17864706 (external link)
I don't want to verge off topic, but below is an example. This photograph isn't very good and has a lot of other issues beyond CA, but shows the CA issue I'm talking about. The magenta CA in the foreground is nearly in focus and fairly easy to remove in Lightroom. The green CA in the background around the edges of the building do not get caught by the green slider in Lightroom. If you expand the hue the filter uses, then it does work, but that could have negative impacts in certain images.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by mikepj in
./showthread.php?p=178​64706&i=i189752424
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

I just used the defringe tool in ACR. no other editing was done. Looks fine to me. I may not be as picky tho :)

Sorry to everyone else for getting a little off track. :P


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Blake C
BlakeC-Photography.com (external link)
Follow Me on Facebook (external link) , Instagram (external link), or Google+ (external link)
80D |70D | SL1 - Σ 18-35 1.8 ART, Σ 50-100 1.8 ART, Σ 17-50 2.8, Canon 24 2.8 Pancake, Canon 50 1.8 STM, Canon 10-18 STM, Canon 18-135 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Jan 19, 2016 16:39 |  #30

BlakeC wrote in post #17864768 (external link)
I just used the defringe tool in ACR. no other editing was done. Looks fine to me. I may not be as picky tho :)

Sorry to everyone else for getting a little off track. :P

That does look a lot cleaner. Good to know that there is a way to fix this, because it was pretty annoying seeing the CA that wasn't cleaned up by just using the standard sliders. It was the one thing I didn't like about the 85 f1.8. :-)

Getting back to the 50mm, I haven't noticed a lot of CA on the 50mm f1.8 II. Usually I stop down when using that lens though, simply to get the extra sharpness (it's crazy-sharp at f2.8). Might have to pay closer attention in the future when I'm wide open.


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

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

10,064 views & 10 likes for this thread
50 1.8 vs 50 1.4 vs 50 1.2 L
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 voodoochile30
1103 guests, 311 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.