50mm 1.8 vs 50mm 1.8 metal mount vs 50mm 1.4

Is there really a big difference between the 3? I've sen some good deals on the 50mm 1.8, but the metal mount ones are always a cost a little more. Is the metal mount worth the extra cost? Or should I just splurge on a 50mm 1.4?

If you plan to really get into photography, and if you can afford the 1.4, get it. Otherwise, there is no harm in getting the cheaper, plastic f1.8.

yep I like my 50 1.8 plastic mount. I'll upgrade to the 1.4 when I'm done gettign soem other stuff, but mostly for build quality.

Yeah the metal mount Mk1 is overrated. Even if the 1.8 is cheap plastic and feels like it was made by Playschool, it's about $80, so it's no big loss if something happens to it. The image quality is great. I MUCH prefer the 1.4 though. Very fast to focus, good low light focusing, and really nice wide open.

If you can swing the 1.4, you'll keep it forever.

as above... the cheap 50mm is very sharp but the autofocus is pretty sluggish and hunts badly in Low Light
whereas the 1.4 version is better in every respect plus the autofocus is way better

i have owned all three and now i own just the 1.4. i'd say i didn't notice a huge difference between the lenses but i don't test my lenses either.

i prefer the 1.4 because i use it for indoor animal shots w/o flash and it does very well @ f 1.8 and f 2.

ed rader

It's one of my favorite lenses...

1.4 is only like 300 USD. And it goes used for about 280. That's a pretty good price for an almost L like lens. Another similar lens with that L quality is the 85 1.8, which goes for about 350 USD.

Thanks for all the help.