AF problems with 50/1.4?

The autofocus problems of Canon's 50mm f1.8 lens have been discussed pretty widely, and I have one that's pretty bad; it's accurate on a tripod with a focus target about 1/3 of the time. It's worse at f2 than at f1.8. I haven't seen that much about AF problems with the 50mm f1.4. Is it a problem? As much as with the 1.8?
Thanks

The EF 50mm f/1.4 is another one of those lenses that you might have to send back a couple times to get a "good copy".

The AF also sounds horrible and is said to break easily. Having said that, mine seems to work quick and predictable.

My 50/1.4 is great. Autofocus is accurate and about as fast as my 28/1.8 or 85/1.8, and when it's focused properly, it's pretty sharp wide open. I got it used as an upgrade from the nifty and haven't regretted it at all. That said, I didn't have a problem with the nifty either. Focus was slow but not noticeably inaccurate.

I had one with serious focusing issues on subjects 8-10 feet or more away. Trips to Canon didn't fix it either even though they would verify something was wrong with it each time it was sent back.

Seems like there's plenty of good copies out there though.

ncjohn wrote in post #15408991
The autofocus problems of Canon's 50mm f1.8 lens have been discussed pretty widely, and I have one that's pretty bad; it's accurate on a tripod with a focus target about 1/3 of the time. It's worse at f2 than at f1.8. I haven't seen that much about AF problems with the 50mm f1.4. Is it a problem? As much as with the 1.8?
Thanks

my observation over the years i've been here is some people tend to have more "problems" with equipment than others. the 50 1.4 is a lens that i would just forget everything i've read and just use and not expect problems. if you are expecting tack sharp images wide open you will encounter a "problem".

if you expect laser fast AF in low light like a canon ring USM lens .... "problem".

the 50 1.4 focusses much better than the 50 1.8, imo and is an excellent bargain at the price.

I just picked up my copy of the 50 1.4 this weekend and I have noticed the AF is finicky, I realize it will be soft wide open which is fine but plain old OOF is frustrating. It will be tack sharp in one image and the next it will be OOF. I love the lens regardless though, I guess Ive gotten used to the really accurate AF of my other USM lenses.

I sold my 50 1.4, but I did got so really nice images with it, it is hard at times but if you learn how to use it you can get some really nice images. I'll never use it again on a wedding, you only get about 70% keeper.

Loads of threads about this - some say they are happy with theirs and others arent. People are saying its user error but I'm convinced mine is hit or miss. Don't use it much now knowing that my 17-55 is almost always great.

kozal01 wrote in post #15409756
I realize it will be soft wide open which is fine but plain old OOF is frustrating. It will be tack sharp in one image and the next it will be OOF.

Sounds like my 1.8.
I don't think it's particularly slow, and I understand about "soft" at wide open. But I expect the "sharpest" point to be where the red square is in DPP. What I've got very frequently is the focus point is the eyeball and the sharpest point is usually the eyeglasses (not too bad), the nose (not too good!), or someplace where I can't even find it.

No problems with my 1.8... AF right in the middle, sharpness is pretty good too but you need a 100% crop rather than 1024X683

For the last couple of years I am using this lens, I didn't have any issues with focusing. But from last couple of weeks focus ring is getting stuck, to get back normal I've to manual adjust focus ring to get that out from sticking position. Is anyone having this issue?

The focus on mine isn't always consistent, but it's still a decent lens at this price point and one I depend on a lot.

Q

I havnt heard it has accuracy issues but canons 50/1.4 is as frail as a very frail thing on a weak day. Sadly by design.

I've been using this lens for the last year and have found that the AF can be a bit difficult to work with in situations with low light or low contrast. However, for the price, it is a good buy and generally performs well with a little coaxing.

Part of the problem is comparing the AF on a lens like this to more expensive models. It's perfectly fine unless you are micro scrutinizing the performance. I always get great shots in real life--which is where most people shoot unless you are going for pictures of little black and white lines. =}

Having used all three 50's, I've found that of the three, the best cost-for-performance model is the 1.4. The improved AF on the L is not worth the extra coins for me.

MakisM1 wrote in post #15410322
No problems with my 1.8... AF right in the middle, sharpness is pretty good too but you need a 100% crop rather than 1024X683

That's an excellent shot Gerry. (As long as it's like that most of the time.) My 1.8 is like that very rarely.