Which 50mm lens and why?

I have the nifty-fifty. I have used it 4-5 times, probably only once to photograph something more or less serious. Results were so-so, not very sharp, not very fast, but they again - it is super cheap, so I understand.

Still this lens is better then nothing for sure.

I am certain that people tested 50 mm range to death, so what is the consensus? If money is not in the equation and only ultimate quality is what matter, what will you get?

.....and why.......?

If money wasn't an object then I'd get a 50L.

Better bokeh, better auto-focus, and a much better build.

Get the Sigma 50. I got lucky and got a great copy.

Even if you aren’t that lucky, exchange for another copy - eventually you’ll have a perfect one. And when you do, it’ll be better than 50L.

I know it takes perseverance, but it will pay off.

Really better? How better?

Found this. Very informative article. If I read it correctly, the Canon f/1.4 is probably the best all around winner in some cases by quite a bit. The Canon f/1.2 totally smokes everyone at f/1.2. The Siggy is sort of average being pretty good but doesn't out resolve anyone at any aperture. The thing that surprised me was that the the Ziess lenses are really no better than the Canon f/1.4.

http://www.lensrentals​.com …1/the-great-50mm-shootout

^That's close to my experience, having owned/used all those 50's except Zeiss. I owned the sigma for the longest, but only because I enjoy Sigma's 'brand' of bokeh. Mine recently got stolen so I've been looking really hard at the new Siggy 35

gjl711 wrote in post #15282850
Found this. Very informative article. If I read it correctly, the Canon f/1.4 is probably the best all around winner in some cases by quite a bit. The Canon f/1.2 totally smokes everyone at f/1.2. The Siggy is sort of average being pretty good but doesn't out resolve anyone at any aperture. The thing that surprised me was that the the Ziess lenses are really no better than the Canon f/1.4.

http://www.lensrentals​.com …1/the-great-50mm-shootout

This is tested for sharpness only. What more important for the lenses are color rendition, bokeh and handling of the lens. Never use 50 1.2 but I could say Sigma 50 1.4 is much better than Canon 50 1.4, even though it looks like canon 50 1.4 has better sharpness.

great article....so it looks like 50L doesn't really add much (PRACTICALLY) on top of what Canon 1.4 can do? Interesting....I think it costs 75% less.

p360 wrote in post #15282807
Get the Sigma 50. I got lucky and got a great copy.

Even if you aren’t that lucky, exchange for another copy - eventually you’ll have a perfect one. And when you do, it’ll be better than 50L.

I know it takes perseverance, but it will pay off.

Lol. How much time are you willing to do these kind of things ? Only that when you thought you found a prince, 3 months later it turns out to be a frog.

If money is not in question than the 50 f1.0 would be the best.

gjl711 wrote in post #15282850
Found this. Very informative article. If I read it correctly, the Canon f/1.4 is probably the best all around winner in some cases by quite a bit. The Canon f/1.2 totally smokes everyone at f/1.2. The Siggy is sort of average being pretty good but doesn't out resolve anyone at any aperture. The thing that surprised me was that the the Ziess lenses are really no better than the Canon f/1.4.

http://www.lensrentals​.com …1/the-great-50mm-shootout

The thing to be careful of in this report (which the author painstakingly points out in the second section) is that this covers nothing more than sharpness.

I've owned four Canon 50mm lenses (50/1.8, 50/1.4, 50/1.2L and 50/2.5CM).

At apertures below about f/2.8, the first three are pretty close in sharpness. If anything, I guess I would say I found the 50L to be a little better below f/2 and the other two to be better above f/2.8. But they are really close.

But I think for these lenses any tiny difference in sharpness are probably not what would drive anyone to the 50L. Obviously, the 50L is a huge amount more money, and I'll be honest in stating that unless you can easily afford it I would be careful in thinking it will feel like a good deal.

That said, I had one major and one minor issue with the 50/1.4 and the 50/1.8 that finally made me choose the 50L.

Major - Both of the cheaper Canon 50mm lenses have poor AF performance. Both are innaccurate in general, and I found they would give up and refuse to focus in light levels where slower lenses (like my 24-105L) were still going strong. The 50/1.4 would just rack back and forth, I'd change to something else and it would lock. Happened all the time.
Minor - Both of the cheaper Canon 50mm lenses have poor bokeh, and I'm the kind of guy that usually doesn't worry about bokeh too much. About the only Canon lens I have with worse bokeh is the 24-105L. The problem is related to both bright ring effects and doubling and the outcome can be some really busy blur regions when you get the right conditions. The 50L is one of Canon's best for bokeh by comparison.

vaflower wrote in post #15282897
Lol. How much time are you willing to do these kind of things ? Only that when you thought you found a prince, 3 months later it turns out to be a frog.

It’s my longest-tentured lens. It’s been a prince from day one. And I’ve had and used all three of these lenses. For one-third of the price of 50L, I think I can put up with trying a few times until you find the right one.

Common sense has to prevail, of course, as with everything in life. If you end up with a frog after a few attempts, chances are you’re not going to find the prince.

I voted 50L because that's what I ended up with.

Of course, 50 1.8 isn't really an option for what I shoot.
The Canon 50 1.4 is decent, but the build and AF isn't that great.
The Sigma 50 1.4 is better than the Canon, but I found low light focusing to be an issue.

The 50L, while having its share of issues, has better low light focusing (not necessarily faster) the best build of the bunch, and just renders better for me.

Of course there's the pretty big disparity in price to consider as well.

See my 50mm thread.

this questions gets asked all the time and the correct answer is: there is no clear consensus. all you're are going to get is a rehash of everything that's been said before.

there are certain guys whose opinions i just trust and they do not agree on which 50mm prime is the "best". i'm selling my 50 1.4. my next 50 will probably be the 35 f2 IS .