Questions concerning 50mm - f1.8 MK I versus f1.4

Before asked, I shoot on a crop body. I don't know when I will up to a full frame sensor (or If). I am an amateur, but taking photographs since FTBn (so not exactly a newbie – except for posting on this forum). I shoot mostly family and nature but just about anything can be fair game. I occasionally do landscapes and sports like HS basketball and such. I have zooms covering 10-500mm (24-200 at f2.8) range. Where I am lacking is fast primes. I also have flash power.

So the question is it worth upgrading to the f1.4 from the f1.8 MKI? Because it seems all the comparisons are between it and the poorly constructed Mark II. If I could afford and/or justify the f1.2 it would be less of a question.

I have the mark I. It is a good sharp copy and focuses well, almost all of the time. I read some say it hunts in low light. Mine does not hunt much, if any more, in the same lighting as my 85mm f1.8. It does not seem all that slow to focus, again compared to my 85mm – though much MUCH noisier. The noise does not bother me.

What it is, is a lens that lacks USM and it is not f1.4 (f1.2 is way out of reach $ wise). I prefer not to use flash, but I am not above using it. What I wonder/worry about! I hear the IQ is not much different between the two at similar apertures (from f2 on). I thought I read there is sometime also concern of the f1.4 and its focus in low light being not much if any better than the f1.8. I also thought I read it mechanically (AF mechanism?) can have problems.

So I think build quality is the same. So is it worth the 2/3 increase in stop and full time MF? Considering that I already have a good copy of the 1.8 mki? Yes, I do the natural ambient lighting, but not necessarily low light photos.

I also would prefer to stay Canon, so Sigma is probably out. And the 20mm to 30/35mm range is a different animal and a future purchase with different concerns. So these two canons 50mm are the ones in question.

Just looking for opinions! Especially, if you have used both the 1.4 and specifically the 1.8 mki (but any opinions are welcome)! In advance - Thank You, to all who respond!

My personal experience is no it's probably not worth it.

I upgraded from 1.8 to 1.4 and finally sigma 50 1.4, personally i think the sigma is the true upgrade.

I might go 50L one day but in your case just keep using the nifty. The canon 1.4 doesn't worth 4x the price imho.

I unfortunately don't have the lenses in particular you speak of but I have the nifty fifty and Sigma 50 1.4.

If you honestly have great use out of the 1.8 mk1, why the need to upgrade then? I personally went from the 1.8 mk 2 to the Sigma 50mm f1.4 and it was a world of difference to me. I can't say that for the Canon 50mm f1.4 but others have said it focuses quickly and you don't have to play the Sigma lottery.

I would only upgrade if my MK1 1.8 dies.

I just upgraded to the 1.4 from the 1.8ii and one thing is for certain is it is much much much more quiet. Low light compared to the 1.8, there is a difference, worth the extra $200 sure why the hell not. I dunno, I personally think the 1.4 a much more sturdy build, performs better in low light, is sharper and overall a better lens.

I love shooting candids with the 50 and goin to the 1.4 has opened up much more creative ideas after spending just a week with the 1.4. I'm on a full frame body though, so my opinion prolly isnt the one you're looking for.

I just did a good week worth of research on this and went with the 50mm f/1.4 just because the build and bokeh is better than the 1.8 ii. IMO $200 ($100 from the MK1) more is worth it in those aspects, but if you don't really think you'll use it that much go with the 1.8ii and save the money for another lens or something else.

The OP has the 50 1.8 i, not ii. That is the Mark 1, not Mark 2.

GregoryF wrote in post #13587561
I would only upgrade if my MK1 1.8 dies.

This guy.

I have the Mk.I, flawless copy. I've compared the two on FF. Do I like the Canon 50 1.4? Absolutely, can I justify the pricetag over the 1.8? **** that.....but wide open it can take photos with the lens cover on and make an image.

The 50mm f/1.4 is nice... but I don't think it's worth it over the 50mm f/1.8. The 50 1.4 still feels a bit fragile for my liking and it's not significantly sharper (to me at least) than the f/1.8. I think the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 would be a true upgrade as others mentioned above- it's built better, focusing is nice and silent, and very sharp once you stop down a bit. I also prefer its background blur over the Canon 50 1.4.

I have the 50 1.8 II. It cost me about $90. I am happy with it at f/2.0 and smaller. If it gets broken, lost, or stolen I will just buy another. Never owned the 1.4, and the price on the 1.2 is obscene! I am just a family photog/hobbyist.