50mm Question

Worth twice the cost for USM??

there's a lot more difference between the two lenses I assume you're comparing (50mm 1.8II vs. 50mm 1.4). The 1.4 is built much better, USM is much better than the 1.8's AF motor, the 1.4 lets in more light (obviously), and this....

http://photo.net/equip​ment/canon/ef50/

For most things, the 50 1.8 is very good, but, the 1.4 is a much better "lifetime" lens.

The link was very informative, thanks. Think I'll save my pennies for the 1.4

Choices for Canon users at 50mm are hell.

50/1.8 - a lens with bad bokeh, soft wide open and with frustrating AF performance.

50/1.4 - Believe it or not, this is practically the same lens as the 50/1.8 except it is a a little faster. Due to the same optical design, the bokeh still sucks, the lens is still soft wide open and the 'USM' motor is not ring-USM. So the AF still isn't all that good.

50/1.2L - Great bokeh and a lens with fast and accurate AF. The optical performance is OK but if you are used to sharpness like the 24L and 85L in your $1000+ lenses, well....not quite. The lens is capable but it is not as sharp as the best of the L primes. I think this is why the 50L is kind of controversial. The lens is actually better than the 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 when used at f/2.8 or faster, but people ding it when compared to the really sharp L primes like the 24L II, 35L and 85L.

So there you go.

And there's also the Sigma 50mm f/1.4.

That mean to say there's nothing good in the 50mm Canon line-up in 2012. I believe a new 50mm f1.4 will come soon but the price will be more like 800$.

I have the f1.8 but use my 85mm f1.8 most of the time. I though hard about the 50mm f1.4 but it's not enough of an upgrade over the f1.8 for my taste. I am keeping my money for the Sigma 35 f1.4 if the reviews are good enough...

The 50mm f/1.8 is really a lot better optically than you would expect. With the 1.4, you get better build quality more than anything, and a bit more light. I would get the 1.8 first because it's so cheap, and then if you find yourself needing the extra fraction of a stop or tire of the plasticky construction, look at the Canon and Sigma 1.4's. The 1.8 seems really easy to sell without much loss; there always seems to be a demand for it.

There is a lot to say, but let me give it to you straight... get the 1.4, or you will regret it.

haha, vague, but it's truth mate.

I like the 50mm f1.4 about 10x better than the f1.8. I don't get the negative comments about the f1.4. I thought it was phenomenal.

if you can live with f2.8 then get the 40mm pancake... its has better bokeh, color and sharpness at 2.8 then all of canons 50mm lenses

wasn't worth it for me ... but i am shooting a crop body so the 50mm is not where i want to spend all my money

EnsitMike wrote in post #15278269
There is a lot to say, but let me give it to you straight... get the 1.4, or you will regret it.

haha, vague, but it's truth mate.

I got the 1.8, and I don't regret it. I wouldn't regret it if it broke either, since I could buy another one and still be under the cost of the 1.4.

Tony-S wrote in post #15277981
And there's also the Sigma 50mm f/1.4.

Having the 50mm 1.4 of both Sigma and Canon, I'd say go with the Sigma. The build quality is better and so is the image quality. I bought the Sigma because the focus on my Canon jammed. And I was pleasantly surprised at how it performed better. It's also got a good price.

gtrag94 wrote in post #15277950
For most things, the 50 1.8 is very good, but, the 1.4 is a much better "lifetime" lens.

If the 1.4 AF system doesn't fail!

tkbslc wrote in post #15278278
I like the 50mm f1.4 about 10x better than the f1.8. I don't get the negative comments about the f1.4. I thought it was phenomenal.

You like it 10x better. It IMO is not 10x better, but it is better

The comparisons I've found. The wider aperture with an 8 blade versus 5 blade diaphragm and faster and more accurate AF (due to USM) make it better. That and build quality (if you are comparing it to the 1.8 II - I have the MK I so there is no improvement) are the only improvements over the 1.8. IMO even though it is USM, I wouldn't use full-time manual, as I would be afraid of AF system failure which the 1.4 is known (though it can be argued that this may or may not be an overblown issue).

But f/1.4, better OOF highlights (IMO and others), and more accurate AF are huge. Enough to justify getting it? Not for me! Only because I currently use my zoom, and my 28mm or 85mm more frequently than the 50mm. Plus there is the 50L (or the 50mm Sigma) that I feel are better options than the Canon 50mm f/1.4.

That said, if I found a fantastic deal on a 1.4 - I'd still get it.

Get the Sigma.

/thread.