Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

50mm at 5.6

Here's a couple of photos with a new 50mm f/1.4 lens I just bought. All four are f/1.4, varying shutter/ISO depending on lighting.

First two are in Aruba last week.

1. My 8 month-old cousin and our aunt

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

i love that fenceline shot, and the 2 baby photos
really nice work

some i shot today. Very few keepers today.

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

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

woloi wrote in post #4609434
Here's a couple of photos with a new 50mm f/1.4 lens I just bought. All four are f/1.4, varying shutter/ISO depending on lighting.

First two are in Aruba last week.

1. My 8 month-old cousin and our aunt

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

2. My cousin again

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

3. The band Zox playing at Worcester Polytechnic Institute

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

4. Again, Zox at WPI

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

Great examples featuring the true strengths of this lens at f1.4. I think this lens rocks if your subject matter is a bit father away than the usual 1-2 ft. - where the DOF is TOO shallow to render a bokeh (if that makes sense). I think you can achieve great images at f1.4 if you take a few steps back and shoot from 5-6ft. away. If you subject is too close, at f1.4 the DOF is simply exaggerated too much and renders most of the image as too soft.

JMO.

aridan wrote in post #4609758
Great examples featuring the true strengths of this lens at f1.4. I think this lens rocks if your subject matter is a bit father away than the usual 1-2 ft. - where the DOF is TOO shallow to render a bokeh (if that makes sense). I think you can achieve great images at f1.4 if you take a few steps back and shoot from 5-6ft. away. If you subject is too close, at f1.4 the DOF is simply exaggerated too much and renders most of the image as too soft.

JMO.

Thanks! I think the thin DOF can work close up, you just have to be exceedingly careful with how you position your shot. Definitely not for candids...or babies .

aridan wrote in post #4609758
. I think this lens rocks if your subject matter is a bit father away than the usual 1-2 ft. - where the DOF is TOO shallow to render a bokeh (if that makes sense). I think you can achieve great images at f1.4 if you take a few steps back and shoot from 5-6ft. away. If you subject is too close, at f1.4 the DOF is simply exaggerated too much and renders most of the image as too soft.

It's not that simple. There are clearly copies of the 50mm f/1.4 that are soft wide-open, regardless of subject distance. Judging from this thread, the ones that are sharp at f/1.4 are the exception, not the rule.

Tony-S wrote in post #4610108
It's not that simple. There are clearly copies of the 50mm f/1.4 that are soft wide-open, regardless of subject distance. Judging from this thread, the ones that are sharp at f/1.4 are the exception, not the rule.

I can't image most copies of this lens are bad, there's no way Canon would sell these, there'd be no profit. My guess is that most copies are "good enough" and there's a spattering of much better and much worse. You'll hear more people complain about how bad something is than comment on how good it is, it's human nature.

woloi wrote in post #4610345
I can't image most copies of this lens are bad, there's no way Canon would sell these, there'd be no profit. My guess is that most copies are "good enough" and there's a spattering of much better and much worse.

If you look through this thread at those images that are f/1.4 most are a bit soft. I have exhaustively tested mine and it does not sharpen up until f/2.

The thread was not titled "How soft is your lens at f/1.4", which would have introduced sample bias. Its title does not convey bias in any way, so I suspect this is about as close to a random sample as you can get. If I were bored, I'd go back and tabulate "sharp vs. soft" f/1.4 shots on this thread. I think it would be most interesting to see how many fall into each category. I suspect the majority are soft. One uncontrolled element, of course, is improper use of the lens.

Here's the first test shot I took with mine after buying it. I assume everyone has a keyboard shot...

woloi wrote in post #4609916
Thanks! I think the thin DOF can work close up, you just have to be exceedingly careful with how you position your shot. Definitely not for candids...or babies .

Couldn't agree more.

Here is a good example. My daughter at f3.2 and f1.4 respectively (lighting came out a bit differently as I adjusted the bounce angle between the two shots):

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

TheAztech wrote in post #4609333
50mm at 5.6

This shot really works for me, been back here twice to look at it tonight, Love the lone tree to the right and the soft curve....really great composition, very inspiring....thank you-MAtt

Tony-S wrote in post #4610433
If you look through this thread at those images that are f/1.4 most are a bit soft. I have exhaustively tested mine and it does not sharpen up until f/2.

The thread was not titled "How soft is your lens at f/1.4", which would have introduced sample bias. Its title does not convey bias in any way, so I suspect this is about as close to a random sample as you can get. If I were bored, I'd go back and tabulate "sharp vs. soft" f/1.4 shots on this thread. I think it would be most interesting to see how many fall into each category. I suspect the majority are soft. One uncontrolled element, of course, is improper use of the lens.

The bad/soft lens can be fix by a visit to the Canon service center.

@ ISO 1250