Is the 50mm 1.4 that much better than the 1.8?

I currently have the thrifty fifty f1.8. I recently got a used 1D from a 300D and I like the combination. It focuses much faster on the 1D than on the 300D, even in mid-low lighting. However, I may be upgrading to an 1D MKII.

My questions:
Is it weird to have a $60 lens on a $2000 camera (1D MKII)?
If I am relatively satisfied with the pictures from the 1.8, will I be even MORE satisfied with the pics from a 1.4?

And on that note, should I eventually upgrade my Tamron 28-75 2.8 to a Canon 24-70?

Nice upgrade, I was tempted to take that route, but got a new 30D instead,
the nifty fifty as everyone calls it really is a great lens for what it cost, but the f1-4, is really a great lens to for what it cost, I have had some great results from my f1-4 (I think it works great on a 1-6 crop as well, with the extra length) especially with the extra DOF, but my answer to your ?, is yes you will be far more satisfied with the f1-4.

But ? you have to ask yourself, is do you need other lens first that are more important, I would upgrade others if need be, before updrading the f1-8

Good Luck

Yes you would be even more satisfied with the pics from 1.4.

I have had both (only on a 350D) but the 1.8 would sometimes miss the focus in low light. But the 1.4 for me does a much better job on the focus, the build is better and it feels just that bit nicer.

At the end of the day I had many more keepers with the 1.4 than the 1.8

R

I've had two good copies of the 1.8 and now a good 1.4. The latter is a better build and nicer Af but not that different to my eyes. If the 1.8 and Tamron are doing a good job for you then keep them. Don't expect large increases in IQ by spending more, you just get better build and usability in my experience.

segasaturn,
If build quality, bokeh quality, and larger aperture have any meaning to you. Then yes the 50mm f/1.4 will give you more satisfaction (just my opinion)

Had the 50f1.8 for a bit then sold it and got the 1.4,its a bit faster in the aperture,a lot faster in focus speed cleaner Bokeh and nice build quality,to me it was worth the extra.

Build, faster AF, f1.4, better bokeh quality all says YES!

Yes
Yes

and Yes, if you want to.

segasaturn wrote in post #3429979
I currently have the thrifty fifty f1.8. I recently got a used 1D from a 300D and I like the combination. It focuses much faster on the 1D than on the 300D, even in mid-low lighting. However, I may be upgrading to an 1D MKII.

My questions:
Is it weird to have a $60 lens on a $2000 camera (1D MKII)?
If I am relatively satisfied with the pictures from the 1.8, will I be even MORE satisfied with the pics from a 1.4?

And on that note, should I eventually upgrade my Tamron 28-75 2.8 to a Canon 24-70?

yes. don't get cheap now !

ed rader

segasaturn wrote in post #3429979
If I am relatively satisfied with the pictures from the 1.8, will I be even MORE satisfied with the pics from a 1.4?

And on that note, should I eventually upgrade my Tamron 28-75 2.8 to a Canon 24-70?

Here's what I found with the 2 Canon primes http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/50v50

As for the Tamron to Canon upgrade, of course the Canon is the better lens but is it worth the price difference to you? 4mm wider is nice, much better AF speed, noise, and accuracy, but quite a bit heavier.

Yes, yes and yes.
It is most definately worth the increased price.
As has already been said, you now have a high quality camera. You shouldn't be cutting corners on the quality od the lenses you use with it.
You also say you may get the MKII in the future.

Thanks for the input. Wow, not a single NO! Okay, you've all convinced me. I'll try to sell the 1.8. I might go for the 50mm 1.4 or a 35mm 1.4.

Sorry but what's bokeh?

Ben Jourdain wrote in post #3432702
Sorry but what's bokeh?

Background blur...

Any picture comparison between the 1.4 vs 1.8? Besides the build, faster AF & etc, sure like to convince myself that it is a good upgrade.