Upgrading from the 50mm F1.8 II to F1.4

Hello All,

I found a used very good condition 50mm F1.4 on Craigslist for $310. Is it worth upgrading from the 1.8 Mk II to this lens?

You can see my kit below. I am looking for something a little better that would be good for portraits on a crop. I feel like the 85 f1.8 (the other candidate on my list) would be too tight for me, but I haven't really done any portraiture to know for sure.

Maybe you could spend some time at the respective focal lengths on your 55-250, for example, to see which would suit you more. I personally think that the 85/1.8 is a stronger lens, but if you like 50mm then you like 50mm.

Albert Nam wrote in post #15600188
Maybe you could spend some time at the respective focal lengths on your 55-250, for example, to see which would suit you more. I personally think that the 85/1.8 is a stronger lens, but if you like 50mm then you like 50mm.

I agree that quality and optics wise the 85 looks like the more attractive piece of glass, but I feel like I would have to be so far away to get the shots that I would want (in this most recent case, a couple of friends that just got engaged engagement pictures)

Man I have been trying to sell my brand new one for months now and no luck. It is very nice lens and compared to 50mm f1.8, AF is quick and very sharp at f1.4. I couldn't mind much difference between my canon 50mm f1.4 and the sigma 50mm f1.4.

Buy with confidence from Bobby.

GLWS.

OP, if you need a 50 then a 50 is what you should get (as opposed to an 85mm).

So any thoughts on how much of an "upgrade"the 1.4 would be over the 1.8?

50mm 1.4 have a better bokeh and built quality. As for sharpness, 1.8 slightly sharper than 1.4. For me its worth an upgrade. You should decide your self, do you really need those upgrades?

Another thing to consider is the reliabilty. There are some reports that the af motor of this lens are not durable.

I sold my 50mm 1.8 and bought a 50mm 1.4. Worst move I ever made. My reliable old 50mm 1.8 produced far better results. I sold the 50mm 1.4 and bought a 85mm 1.8 and am finally getting the shots I want.

James P wrote in post #15601228
I sold my 50mm 1.8 and bought a 50mm 1.4. Worst move I ever made. My reliable old 50mm 1.8 produced far better results. I sold the 50mm 1.4 and bought a 85mm 1.8 and am finally getting the shots I want.

Oy. The more looking I do the more I am leaning towards the 85 haha. I think I am going to have to walk around with my 55-250 some more and play around with it. Shame I don't have anything that covers 50mm and 85mm to switch between the two.

James P wrote in post #15601228
I sold my 50mm 1.8 and bought a 50mm 1.4. Worst move I ever made. My reliable old 50mm 1.8 produced far better results. I sold the 50mm 1.4 and bought a 85mm 1.8 and am finally getting the shots I want.

Something wrong with your lens then. It is very sharp at f1.4 and AF is so much better than 50mm f1.8.

The differences in image quality between the f1.8 and the f1.4 Canons isn't huge. I couldn't see a big difference in iQ with the Sigma, either.

The Sigma is a little sharper wide open. Both the Canons benefit from a little stopping down, if sharpness is a concern. My Canon 50/1.4 is usable wide open, but I generally try to use it at f2 or f2.2 or smaller.

The Sigma and Canon are about the same from f2 or f2.2 through f5.6. Smaller apertures than that, the Sigma isn't as sharp.

The background blur of the f1.8 is the coarsest. The Canon 50/1.4 improves on that a lot. The Sigma has slightly smoother yet. The Canon 50/1.2L is the smoothest of all, as might be expected. The 50/1.8 has a five-bladed aperture. The Canon 50/1.8 has an 8-bladed. The Sigma is 9-bladed. The 50/1.2L is 8-bladed with curved blades.

The 50/1.8 has somewhat lower contrast and color satutation. This is probably mostly because it's more prone to veiling flare. Both the 50/1.4s are better in this respect, though the Sigma seems to have a slightly cool tint (that's easily changed in post production). The 50/1.2L renders the richest colors of the bunch.

Even though the Canon 50/1.4 isn't "true" USM, it's got considerably better performing AF than the 50/1.8. The f.1.8's micro motor AF is slower, less accurate and noisier. In fact, some who have tried to set Micro Adjust with FoCal software have found it impossible with the f1.8. It's too erratic.

The Canon 50/1.4 has a hybrid form of USM. It performs well, but is a little easily damaged. A hard bump on the focus ring or the front barrel can damage the AF mechanism. Best solution is to use the matched lens hood with it at all times. When shooting, it protects the front barrel. When the lens is stored with the hood reversed, it covers and protects the focus ring.

The Sigma 50/1.4 has HSM, which is similar to Canon USM. So it's a pretty good performer, too. However, it's common for the lens to need to be sent in for calibration when new... or one or more exchanges to get a "good copy".

The 50/1.8 is inexpensive, very lightweight and small. It lacks a focus scale, has a very narrow manual focus ring and is about as plasticky as a lens can be. More than a few have broken in half. Still, for the money it's a bargain... is able to take far better images than the price might lead you to expect. It uses a 52mm filter and, because the front element is somewhat recessed, might be used without a lens hood (the Canon hood is sold separately and expensive because it needs an adapter, too).

The Canon 50/1.4 costs more than 3X as much as the f1.8, weighs about twice as much and is a bit bigger. It uses a 58mm filter and should always be used with a matched hood (sold separately... if the Canon hood is too expensive, get one of the third party hoods).

The Sigma 50/1.4 costs 25% more than the Canon 50/1.4. The Sigma comes with a matched lens hood, so there isn't that add'l cost, the way there is with the Canon. The Sigma is also considerably bigger and heavier (bordering on ridiculous for a 50/1.4, IMO). It uses a 77mm filter and actually is close to the size and weight of the premium 50/1.2L.

The Canon 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 complement each other very nicely. Used on a crop camera, they are a nearly ideal "short portrait" and "long portrait" pair, with similar image look and quality, as well as similar AF performance. I don't see one or the other as "better"... they give different angles of view for different types of portraits. Use the 50mm for head and torso to full length portraits and the 85mm for tighter head shots or to work from a greater distance. If you kept the 50/1.8 and got the 85/1.8, I predict that you'd be looking at upgrading from the f1.8 soon, too, once you see how much nicer the USM lenses are.

Canon 50mm f1.4 at f2, EOS 30D at ISO 400, 1/30. Handheld, ambient light.

amfoto1 wrote in post #15601676
The Canon 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 complement each other very nicely. Used on a crop camera, they are an ideal "short portrait" and "long portrait" pair, with similar image look and quality, as well as similar AF performance. I don't see one or the other as "better"... they give different angles of view for different types of portraits. Use the 50mm for head and torso to full length portraits and the 85mm for tighter head shots or to work from a greater distance. If you kept the 50/1.8 and got the 85/1.8, I predict that you'd be looking at upgrading from the f1.8 soon, too, once you see how much nicer the USM lenses are.

Wow! Thanks for the very detailed response. At this point, I think it likely that this is what I am going to do. Keep the nifty fifty and grab a used 85 1.8. I just have to take my 55-250 out and play around with 85mm, make sure I like it. I'll address the issue of keeping the nifty fifty, upgrading it, or selling it all together. I have the sigma 30 1.4, So i havent been using the nifty fifty hardly at all. But I think most of that is me not liking the plasticy-ness of it.

I definitely have some more playing to do, but I think I am getting an idea of the direction I want to move in.

Thanks again!

bobbyz wrote in post #15600519
Man I have been trying to sell my brand new one for months now and no luck. It is very nice lens and compared to 50mm f1.8, AF is quick and very sharp at f1.4. I couldn't mind much difference between my canon 50mm f1.4 and the sigma 50mm f1.4.

Bought the Canon 50mm f1.4 new for $299.00 ship free from B&H in December.
They are now going for $359.00 so you should have no problem getting $300.00 for
yours now.

bobbyz wrote in post #15601443
Something wrong with your lens then. It is very sharp at f1.4 and AF is so much better than 50mm f1.8.

I believe you are right. I must have bought a clunker because I've seen some very sharp shots on this forum taken with the 50mm 1.4. Mine however was soft at all apertures, even after micro-adjusting.

singer.rick wrote in post #15601695
Wow! Thanks for the very detailed response. At this point, I think it likely that this is what I am going to do. Keep the nifty fifty and grab a used 85 1.8. I just have to take my 55-250 out and play around with 85mm, make sure I like it. I'll address the issue of keeping the nifty fifty, upgrading it, or selling it all together. I have the sigma 30 1.4, So i havent been using the nifty fifty hardly at all. But I think most of that is me not liking the plasticy-ness of it.

I definitely have some more playing to do, but I think I am getting an idea of the direction I want to move in.

Thanks again!

I just got my 85 1.8 and I have not taken it off the camera since I put it on. Admittedly, I shoot a lot of my indoor shots from long range, even up close the detail in low light is AMAZING.
I personally would keep the 30, ditch the 50 and upgrade to the 85 1.8 with USM.