Beginner Canon 50mm f1.4 lens

Smurphy

Smurphy

Messages
11
Name
Debbie
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello everyone
I'm looking for some advice please, it's my first post so be gentle with me!!!
I'm wanting a prime lens and a 50mm f/1.4 was suggest to me as I was looking for the bokeh effect when taking portrait shots.
I'm interested in anyone who has this lens to give me honest feeback. I'm reluctant to spend a lot and £250-300 was my budget. I have a Canon EOS 7D mk1
Thank you
 
•
Greetings Debbie!

I'm no canon user (Nikon freak!) but here are some pointers…

Bokeh is achieved in many ways —adding their respective
contribution to the whole quality.

Gear dependant
Greater aperture and longer focal length are the two gear
dependant characteristics.

Condition dependant
Closer distance sensor to subject and greater distance
subject to background are the two shooting dependant
characteristics.

You may use a 50mm successfully @ +/- ƒ1.4 for a full figure
but, to achieve portrait quality, a longer 85+mm will do better
because of the highly desirable compression effect it will pro-
duce of any taken say head and shoulder portrait!

Does this help?
 
Last edited:
Welcome to TP.

I have the Canon 50mm f1.4 USM. I upgraded to this from the 50mm f1.8 Mk2. I really like it, definitely better in terms of build quality and focus speed. You can get one s/h for less than £200.
Having owned both the f1.8 and the f1.4, they have very similar bokeh and image quality. (The new 1.8 STM is better built and faster to focus).
It's not as good as the Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art, but then it is less than half the price and 1/3rd of the weight.
The older Sigma 50mm 1.4 DG is good (if a bit hit and miss getting a reliable copy by some reports), but I've not tried it.
I really like my 50mm f1.4, I can go for days just shooting with that one lens. I doubt that I would have bought it brand new, but for under £200 s/h, it's a worthwhile purchase.

Here's a couple of my samples (taken with the Canon 50mm f1.4 USM and a Canon 60D, the same basic sensor as the 7D Mk1)
Happy by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

Elsa by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr


Kodiak is right about focal length, distance and bokeh, it's not all about wide aperture.
Here's two shots of my wife, the first taken at f4 at 73mm (Canon 24-105 f4L), the second at f4.5 at 95mm (Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM, not even a portrait lens) but look at the bokeh

Summer Portrait by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

Winter Portrait by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr
 
Hi
Thank you those look really good thank you for sharing them.
There is a deal on at my local camera shop and I can pick one up brand new for £189
A couple of people had them in my college class last week and got some great shots but then again it could just be technique!
 
I think that £189 brand new is a great price, i have the 50mm 1.4 and i like it, it's not as good as my sigma 1.4 but it's a lot cheaper.

You could always try the 50mm 1.8 'nifty fifty' you can pick one of those up for £50ish and while it's a much cheaper build, it's still a very capable lens.
 
I feel I should have this in 'copy & paste' but 50mm isn't a great focal length on a crop camera, the 85mm 1.8 is in budget and beats the 50 1.4 in every way.
 
The OP asked for advice on the 50mm 1.4 which is why i didn't mention the 85mm
 
If you want a 50mm I would always say get the "nifty fifty"! The 50mm f/1.4 USM is better, but it's only a little bit better for nearly 4 times the price!
 
keenan said:
If you want a 50mm I would always say get the "nifty fifty"! The 50mm f/1.4 USM is better, but it's only a little bit better for nearly 4 times the price!
Click to expand...
The new STM is even more of a bargain IMHO.
 
What complaints are there? Well, apart from the loud clunky focus motor, minimal focus ring and toy like feel..? :)
 
keenan said:
What complaints are there? Well, apart from the loud clunky focus motor, minimal focus ring and toy like feel..? :)
Click to expand...
The complaints addressed:
Plastic mount (not really an issue but adds to the 'cheap feel'
Slow, noisy and inaccurate focus motor
5bladed diaphragm creates ugly OoF areas

The new one has a metal mount, a better focus motor than both the 1.8 and 1.4, and a smoother aperture diaphragm


Given the 1.4 only had a slightly improved focus motor, build and diaphragm going for it (it's no sharper), the new STM is brilliant. They really should build a 30mm equivalent for crop cameras.
 
Phil V said:
I feel I should have this in 'copy & paste' but 50mm isn't a great focal length on a crop camera, the 85mm 1.8 is in budget and beats the 50 1.4 in every way.
Click to expand...

Ive never understood why they don't make a cheap option for a 35mm on canon , I've got the EF-S 24mm 2.8 which is quite bargainous if a little cheap feeling , but its a shame there isnt a 35mm f1.8 in easy reach (I know theres a 35mm f2 for about 400 notes)... given that 50mm isnt really that handy on a crop
 
Phil V said:
The complaints addressed:
Plastic mount (not really an issue but adds to the 'cheap feel'
Slow, noisy and inaccurate focus motor
5bladed diaphragm creates ugly OoF areas

The new one has a metal mount, a better focus motor than both the 1.8 and 1.4, and a smoother aperture diaphragm

Given the 1.4 only had a slightly improved focus motor, build and diaphragm going for it (it's no sharper), the new STM is brilliant. They really should build a 30mm equivalent for crop cameras.
Click to expand...

Yes. The old 50/1.8 Mk2 is a horrible thing, not nice to use but worst of all is the focusing - both inaccurate and inconsistent. New STM version is a little gem and only £89 on Amazon ATM. Actually, all Canon STM lenses are very good and great value. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EF-1-8-STM-Lens/dp/B00XKSBMQA?ie=UTF8&keywords=canon 50mm stm&qid=1459814610&ref_=sr_1_1&s=electronics&sr=1-1

Edit: the Canon 85/1.8 is probably the better choice for the OP's specific purpose, but a lot more money than the 50/1.8 STM.
 
Last edited:
Thanks everyone .......so just to be clear THIS is the one I should be looking at buying????
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    347.4 KB · Views: 32
Phil V said:
but 50mm isn't a great focal length on a crop camera
Click to expand...
Surly a 50mm on a APC sensor = 80mm which is pretty close to the classic portrait lens focal length. Correct me if I am wrong?
 
redsnappa said:
Surly a 50mm on a APC sensor = 80mm which is pretty close to the classic portrait lens focal length. Correct me if I am wrong?
Click to expand...
•

I will.

This statement is WRONG! I'll try to explain…

A shot taken with any lens on a FX sensor will reflect all the
characteristics of that lens. Do to it what ever you want, like
cropping it, it will still be a shot taken with that given lens and
still will reflect all the characteristics… but the angle of view.

So a 50mm FX take may be cropped to the angle of view of say
an 85mm but it will have all the characteristics of that 50mm but
will never reflect the slight compression of the prime 85mm.

A 200mm lens on an FX sensor does not behave like a 300mm
once on the DX…

One will not get a better reach nor a
greater compression! This is "BS"!
The best that will come out of it is the angle of view.

So, the statement:
A 50mm on a DX sensor = +/- 80mm on a FX sensor which is pretty close
to the classic portrait angle of view but not lens focal length… is right.

Phil V said:
50mm isn't a great portrait focal length on a crop camera
Click to expand...
THIS IS A CORRECT APPRECIATION!
…because of the absence of compression!
 
Last edited:
Smurphy said:
Thanks everyone .......so just to be clear THIS is the one I should be looking at buying????
Click to expand...

I think you've got the right one there.
Just as an aside, I have the 50mm 1.4, but to be honest, the new 50mm 1.8 STM would be a better bet and much better value if you are still considering a 50mm too.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
So a 50mm FX take may be cropped to the angle of view of say an 85mm but it will have all the characteristics of that 50mm but will never reflect the slight compression of the prime 85mm.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clear explanation, Never seen it explained that well. So My 85mm f1.8 used on a APC sensor will have roughly the angle of view of a 135mm of Full Frame but will retain the compression of view and it's other 85mm qualities. Got Yer!
 
Last edited:
redsnappa said:
Thanks for the clear explanation, Never seen it explained that well.
Click to expand...
•

Thank you, much appreciated…
since english is not my language, I was very nervous when
I pressed the "Post Reply" button cause I know I am going
against (as usual!) wrongly accepted ideas.
redsnappa said:
My 85mm f1.8 will be have roughly the angle of view of a 135mm but will retain the compression of view and it's other 85mm qualities.
Click to expand...
Beautifully said and correct!
 
redsnappa said:
Thanks for the clear explanation, Never seen it explained that well. So My 85mm f1.8 used on a APC sensor will have roughly the angle of view of a 135mm of Full Frame but will retain the compression of view and it's other 85mm qualities. Got Yer!
Click to expand...

No. And Kodiak is mistaken - at least the way I have read his post #20.

An 85mm f/1.8 lens when used on a 1.6x crop camera will behave like a 136mm f/2.88 lens on full-frame. The field of view will be the same, and depth of field too - both adjusted by the crop factor. Perspective ('compression') will also be the same as the shooting distance will also be the same as a 136mm lens on FF, when the subject is framed the same size.

The only characteristic of the 85/1.8 that is unchanged is the aperture for exposure purposes.
 
HoppyUK said:
No. And Kodiak is mistaken - at least the way I have read his post #20.

An 85mm f/1.8 lens when used on a 1.6x crop camera will behave like a 136mm f/2.88 lens on full-frame. The field of view will be the same, and depth of field too - both adjusted by the crop factor. Perspective ('compression') will also be the same as the shooting distance will also be the same as a 136mm lens on FF, when the subject is framed the same size.

The only characteristic of the 85/1.8 that is unchanged is the aperture for exposure purposes.
Click to expand...

So, the 50mm f/1,8 on a crop would effectively be more like 80mm f/2.8?

I still think the best all round lens on a crop body is the Sigma 30mm f/1.4..

Lord knows why Canon won't do something similar...
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
keenan said:
So, the 50mm f/1,8 on a crop would effectively be more like 80mm f/2.8?
Click to expand...
•


…hold your breath and see the link in post #27…
 
Canon brook said:
Just getting a little bit lost on this one now- can anyone confirm / expand on why the f stop ibehaves differently....?
Click to expand...

Same here, I can half understand the reduction in angle of view due to the size of the sensor, but the lens would still let the same amount of light in..right?
 
Canon brook said:
Just getting a little bit lost on this one now- can anyone confirm / expand on why the f stop ibehaves differently....?
Click to expand...

redsnappa said:
Please explain why aperture of an 85mm f1.8 become f2.88 when the lens is used on a APC sensor camera?
Click to expand...

When swapping lenses between full frame and crop format, the f/number remains unchanged for exposure purposes, but depth of field changes - by the crop factor (1.8 x 1.6 = 2.88).

Depth of field is fundamentally an effect of magnification and anything that changes the size of the image impacts on that. Check it out on this DoF calculator http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html On DoFmaster, you select the camera from a drop-down menu and this changes the Circle of Confusion value (bottom right of panel) according to format size.
 
Last edited:
keenan said:
but the lens would still let the same amount of light in..right?
Click to expand...
•


Right!
… furthermore, it remains at the same distance from the sensor!
 
There is a lot of confusion regarding crop-factors and lens equivalency.

Worth watching this video which demonstrates the difference in angle of view and depth of field between a full frame camera and a crop sensor camera (and a micro 4/3rds).
View: https://youtu.be/f5zN6NVx-hY


Regarding the 50mm lenses, I might not have bothered with the Canon 50mm f1.4 if the 1.8 STM version had been out at that time as it addresses most of the issues with the old Mk2 version (bar the obvious f1.4 aperture).

Question for the OP: do you already shoot portraits? If so what lens are you using and what is it lacking?
 
ABTog said:
There is a lot of confusion regarding crop-factors and lens equivalency.

Worth watching this video which demonstrates the difference in angle of view and depth of field between a full frame camera and a crop sensor camera (and a micro 4/3rds).
View: https://youtu.be/f5zN6NVx-hY


Regarding the 50mm lenses, I might not have bothered with the Canon 50mm f1.4 if the 1.8 STM version had been out at that time as it addresses most of the issues with the old Mk2 version (bar the obvious f1.4 aperture).

Question for the OP: do you already shoot portraits? If so what lens are you using and what is it lacking?
Click to expand...

That's a good video link (y)

Edit: the whole business of equivalency between formats is as complicated as you want to make it. Here's a more technical explanation from DPReview, but even this is not 100% complete! http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care

When you swap between FF and crop format, pretty much everything changes one way or another, but in practical terms, all you really need to know is this:
- Field of view changes ('effective' focal length if you like) though that's pretty obvious!
- Depth of field changes at same f/number, with crop format showing just over one stop more DoF, when you frame the subject the same, from the same distance, at same f/number. (Though f/number remains unchanged for exposure purposes.)

There are a couple more things relating to image quality, which is why full frame is favoured for this.
- FF collects more light from the larger sensor, so high ISO performance is better and dynamic range is increased (though both are also dependent on sensor development that is constantly moving the goal posts).
- FF is sharper, because it's bigger and demands less lens resolution. Therefore contrast is higher and FF images have more detail and punch.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
A DX sensor is not two-thirds the size of FX, it's nearer one-third the size (actually 44%).
Click to expand...
•

If it is so, all the argumentations brought forward by all camera
and lenses manufacturers are wrong… so that statement could
be right!

AN OTHER POINT TO CLARIFY: THE CROP FACTOR
which is not measured in units of surface² but in ratio of relative
hypothenuse length.

FX: 24² + 36² = hypothenuse² = √1872 = 43,26mm***
DX: 24² + 16² = hypothenuse² = √832 = 28,84mm
Ratio: 28,84 /43,26 = 0,6667 = a two third ratio, 2/3.


*** this is why Nikon had, for a certain time, a normal lens of 43 mm!
 
Last edited:
Kodiak Qc said:
•

If it is so, all the argumentations brought forward by all camera
and lenses manufacturers are wrong… so that statement could
be right!

AN OTHER POINT TO CLARIFY: THE CROP FACTOR
which is not measured in units of surface² but in ratio of relative
hypothenuse length.

FX: 24² + 36² = hypothenuse² = √1872 = 43,26mm***
DX: 24² + 16² = hypothenuse² = √832 = 28,84mm
Ratio: 28,84 /43,26 = 0,6667 = a two third ratio, 2/3.


*** this is why Nikon had, for a certain time, a normal lens of 43 mm!
Click to expand...

Crop factors are not that accurate. They're rounded and approximate, but plenty good enough ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top