Beginner Canon 50mm f1.4 lens

Ah, okay. The statement in the video is ambiguous - it actually says Nikon DX is "two-thirds the size" of FX. That is true if you compare linear dimensions, but in that case a more accurate description would be "two-thirds the length" but this is surely what it means, so half an apology from me ;) In terms of total "size" though (that I took to mean "area") then the difference is the crop factor squared, which nets out at DX being 44% the area of FF (Canon is 38%).
 
HoppyUK said:
The statement in the video is ambiguous
Click to expand...
Sorry Richard, I do not see the ambiguity!
HoppyUK said:
In terms of total "size" though (that I took to mean "area"
Click to expand...
This may be contributing some ambiguity as no one in
the industry will consider surface values!

Since this is optical physics, the mathematical / geometry
approach is preferred by all: the hypothenuse!
 
Kodiak Qc said:
Sorry Richard, I do not see the ambiguity!
Click to expand...

Maybe it's me, maybe it's your native language, but it can certainly be read two ways. Manufacturers have a habit of using whatever turn of phrase suits their marketing message and I suspect that may be the case here - deliberate marketing sleight of hand. In the same way as Nikon's 1-series cameras have a "one-inch" sensor that actually measures 13.2 x 8.8mm, or "2/3in" that will actually fit on your little fingernail.

While we're correcting misunderstandings, maybe you'd like to revisit some of your earlier posts?

This may be contributing some ambiguity as no one in
the industry will consider surface values!

Since this is optical physics, the mathematical / geometry
approach is preferred by all: the hypothenuse!
Click to expand...

I've never seen the hypotenuse quoted in any camera or lens spec.
 
HoppyUK said:
Manufacturers have a habit of using whatever turn of phrase suits their marketing message
Click to expand...
You might just have touched the right bell with that! :)
HoppyUK said:
I've never seen the hypotenuse quoted in any camera or lens spec
Click to expand...
When it comes to sensor size and focal length considerations,
it is the usual "unspoken" value referred to.
 
Back on topic, if the OP has not yet lost the will to live, I'd just like to revise my comment to go for the 85/1.8. Not that it's not a great lens, and at a very fair price, but that 50/1.8 STM is just an amazing bargain at £89. You may find the 85 will be better, you might prefer the 50, but you'll probably find a use for both and at £89 you really can't go wrong (y)
 
Kodiak Qc said:
You might just have touched the right bell with that! :)

When it comes to sensor size and focal length considerations,
it is the usual "unspoken" value referred to.
Click to expand...

LOL You should change your user-name to Houdini :D
 
HoppyUK said:
Back on topic, if the OP has not yet lost the will to live, I'd just like to revise my comment to go for the 85/1.8. Not that it's not a great lens, and at a very fair price, but that 50/1.8 STM is just an amazing bargain at £89. You may find the 85 will be better, you might prefer the 50, but you'll probably find a use for both and at £89 you really can't go wrong (y)
Click to expand...

Hence why I asked the OP whether they were currently shooting portraits, if so what lens they were using and what they thought it was lacking.

If they don't currently have a nice portrait lens, then they may need to try a couple of different ones out before deciding to purchase.
I like my 50mm on a crop sensor body, but it's not for everyone. Some people like a 35mm for a wider "environmental portrait", others like an 85mm, 135mm or even the 70-200mm.

The best idea if possible, is for the OP to borrow a lens or two, perhaps from friends and then see what they prefer. But failing that the 50mm f1.8 is as it gets for good portrait lenses.
 
ABTog said:
Hence why I asked the OP whether they were currently shooting portraits, if so what lens they were using and what they thought it was lacking.

If they don't currently have a nice portrait lens, then they may need to try a couple of different ones out before deciding to purchase.
I like my 50mm on a crop sensor body, but it's not for everyone. Some people like a 35mm for a wider "environmental portrait", others like an 85mm, 135mm or even the 70-200mm.

The best idea if possible, is for the OP to borrow a lens or two, perhaps from friends and then see what they prefer. But failing that the 50mm f1.8 is as it gets for good portrait lenses.
Click to expand...

I think the OP might be enrolling for a pure maths course at night school to complement the photography - nicely brought back on track here....

On a completely separate note can you clarify why your Flickr signature is working and hasn't gone into "refresh" mode? Can't find any recent posts on the subject.....thanks!
 
slightly off topic theres been a lot of talk here about the 50mm stm being a lot better than the mk2 - can anyone clarify how it compares to the Mk1 (whichwas generally better built than mk2)
 
Canon brook said:
On a completely separate note can you clarify why your Flickr signature is working and hasn't gone into "refresh" mode? Can't find any recent posts on the subject.....thanks!
Click to expand...
Our Flickr sigs are generated by different websites, yours is from BigHugeLabs, mine is from FlickRiver. That's probably why.

Slightly back on track
big soft moose said:
slightly off topic theres been a lot of talk here about the 50mm stm being a lot better than the mk2 - can anyone clarify how it compares to the Mk1 (whichwas generally better built than mk2)
Click to expand...
I think the Mk1 vs the STM, the Mk1 is probably heavier, but about equal in build quality. The focus motor will be better in the STM. Both the Mk1 and Mk2 have 5 blade apertures, but the STM has a 7 blade aperture, so the bokeh should be nicer/more rounded. The lens coatings should be better on the Mk2 and STM, so less prone to flare and better contrast.
If you have the Mk1, you could probably sell it at a profit and still have cash leftover after buying an STM. :)
 
ABTog said:
Our Flickr sigs are generated by different websites, yours is from BigHugeLabs, mine is from FlickRiver. That's probably why.

Slightly back on track

I think the Mk1 vs the STM, the Mk1 is probably heavier, but about equal in build quality. The focus motor will be better in the STM. Both the Mk1 and Mk2 have 5 blade apertures, but the STM has a 7 blade aperture, so the bokeh should be nicer/more rounded. The lens coatings should be better on the Mk2 and STM, so less prone to flare and better contrast.
If you have the Mk1, you could probably sell it at a profit and still have cash leftover after buying an STM. :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up will have a look at FlickRiver...!
 
big soft moose said:
slightly off topic theres been a lot of talk here about the 50mm stm being a lot better than the mk2 - can anyone clarify how it compares to the Mk1 (whichwas generally better built than mk2)
Click to expand...
It's not though.

The Mk1 has a metal mount but exactly the same optical characteristics as the MkII, it gained cult status just for the build quality and a lot of people endowed it with properties that simply didn't exist, just because the MkII is so cheap and plasticky.

IIRC the optical design goes back to the first EF lens. And for clarity carries on into the STM version with the exception of the aperture diaphragm, so 'sharpness' is close to identical for all of the Canon 50mm 1.8's but the 'look' of images from the STM should be improved.

The FD had 6 elements in 4 groups, the EF lens was improved and has 6 elements in 5 groups, but they share the 5 bladed diaphragm. As above the new STM lens boasts using the proven optical design of its predecessor.
 
85--1.8 is also my recomendation for portraits. It is good to have lower f number because of the light power , but 1.4 is no need for more situations.
 
I'm very new here but i bought a 50mm 1.4 last week and i must say it's a great Lens on my D5s i'm very pleased for not a lot of money. Just my 2 bob's worth.
 
Poor @Smurphy - you've all probably frit her half to death not to mention confused the crap out of her.

Debbie - if you can afford it, do it. It's a lovely lens, great build and and has it's sweet spot at around F2. And if and when you move to a full frame, you'll have yourself an even better performer as well.
My two cents...
 
Smurphy said:
Sorry I've just realised I sent a reply to you as a message!
Click to expand...
haha.. no worries, I just saw that! :)

I'm sure you and your new lens will be very happy! :)
And I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say we look forward to seeing you post some images up taken with it!
 
The new STM version is very good and great value for money. I've had the 50mm 1.8 II, 1.4, and now the 1.8 STM.
I sold my 1.4 as I was considering shipping off my 5D but in the end I decided to keep it so opted for the budget fantastic, new STM variant. Pretty chuffed with it. It's a nice step up in build quality from the older 50mm II.
 
To help the bokeh geeks the Canon 50mm STM also has curved aperture bladed to smooth the out of focus areas more than lens that use straight aperture blades.
That's canons marketing guff anyway. I have not tried to get bokeh with my 50mm STM. If I find myself some time when I have nothing else to do I might try bokeh images.
 
I'd suggest the cheapest way to get overdoing bokeh out of your system would be the best option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top