glen_dc wrote in post #16638691
I am sitting at the dinner table next to big bay window into backyard covered with 5 inch snow at 1 pm, shooting photos of things on the table. That’s day light plus reflection from snow. I have Tv=1/80 priority and with IS0=100 or 200 I get aperture 1/4. When I have Tv=1/80 and ISO=800, I get aperture 2.8 or 4 that's 'sweet spot' of the 50/EF1.4. I cannot believe that I have to use such high ISO (800) during day with 50 mm lens. The lens behaves like there is a thick UV or Natural Density filter that drastically reduce the light.
I expected always ISO 100 or 200, Av priority mode between 2.8-5.6 and auto shutter speed well below 1/80 so no tripod required. Were my expectations totally wrong?
If you think about it, aperture between f/2.8-f/4 is pretty much the same as your kit lens at the wide end - in other words, don't expect miracles if you're using these settings. When I shoot indoors with my 40mm f/2.8 wide open, I often have to use ISO speeds of 800, 1600, even 3200 in some cases. Without knowing exactly what the mix of daylight, clouds, and indoor light is, it's very hard to say whether you "should have" been getting narrower apertures for a given shutter speed and ISO setting.
In the interest of full disclosure, I was somewhat disappointed with the 50mm f/1.4 when I owned it. Image quality was pretty hideous wide open at f/1.4, so I found that I had to stop down to f/2 for acceptable results. That's only a stop faster than my old Tamron 17-50mm zoom, which was much more flexible in most situations. Add in the poor build quality, awkward FOV on crop, and lack of IS, and the lens just didn't cut it for me. A lot of people seem to like it though. For general "walkaround" prime photography, I think I'd much rather have the Sigma 30mm, Canon 35mm f/2 IS, or even just my 40mm pancake.
