Canon 50mm f1.8 vs f1.4

Skyline On Fire

Skyline On Fire

Messages
1,391
Name
Luke
Edit My Images
Yes
I've currently got the f1.8. It's a great little thing minus the god awful build quality, and the bokeh isn't perfect but I really cant complain.

Should I upgrade to the f1.4? I'm awfully tempted based on how much I use my 50mm lens.

Benefits vs negatives of the upgrade?

Thanks in advance guys
 
Hi if it's bokeh your after then the 50mm 1.4 knocks the socks off the 1.8, but bear in mind this is a 20 year old design, i moved to the sigma 50mm 1.4 and the bokeh balls to coin a thread are superb, slightly soft wide open but 1.6 upwards sharp, as a prime lens there both great can i justify the £100 more for the sigma yes, hardly any hunting the canon was prone to this, it does everything better faster and smoother giving better results than the canon. this lens will stay in my kit bag.

but the canon 1.4 will not disapoint, just don't go to a trade show and use the sigma :nono: and fall in love :love: with it.

Merc
 
Last edited:
i LOVE my canon 1.4 and since i bought it havnt taken it off!
 
I have a canon 1.8 and 1.4, love the 1.4, nice and Sharp. I hear good things about the Siggy 1.4 too, I'm sure someone will chip in who has one.
 
mercmanuk said:
but the canon 1.4 will not disapoint, just don't go to a trade show and use the sigma :nono: and fall in love :love: with it.

Merc
Click to expand...

Oh ruddy well stop it will wer? I keep hearing about the Sigma being better than the Canon 1.4.

I went from 50mm 1.8 mk1 straight to the 1.4 and I love it. Typically silent Canon AF- unlike the old 1.8. That being said some of the 50mm MF lenses give rather good results and I'm bound to say that if I had to start again I'd keep an MF 1.4 and look for a Canon 1.2.

In the meantime I've just spent a full ten days with the Canon 1.4 on my 5D and taken some super "grandson at 9 months portraits" without flash and under ambient domestic lighting. And some around Cambridge. Here's a lady taken at f/1.8.

IMG_4547.jpg
 
Skyline On Fire said:
Benefits vs negatives of the upgrade?
Click to expand...

Benefits - Slightly sharper centrally at 1.8, better performance around the edges of the frame, better build quality, full time focusing, quieter focus motor, metal mount, extra 2/3 stop, improved rounded bokeh.

Negatives - Cost vs quality improvement hard to justify, still plasticky (much less than 1.8).

Most of this is subjective so you really should go into a shop with your camera body & 50/1.8 lens, and try out to 50/1.4. Take a few pictures with both wide open, thank the shop helper-person and leave, review pictures at home and decide whether this combined with the feel of the lens is worth the extra £200.
 
tikkathreebarrel said:
Oh ruddy well stop it will wer? I keep hearing about the Sigma being better than the Canon 1.4.
Click to expand...


Ok ok the only reason i got it was to save £££ on filters,Canon 70-200mm, 17-40mm, 24-70mm, and the sigma 50mm 1.4 are all 77mm


I'll save a fortune :D

Merc
 
Perhaps it's my monitor, but that shot does not seem so sharp. Cannot see what is supposed to be in focus as both hands, being at different distances, are not sharp, neither is the hair. Please correct me if its at my end, as I am not seeing what I hoped and am seriously considering the 1.4 myself

Can you post any others?

Malcolm
 
http://www.flickr.com/groups/664291@N24/pool/with/5266265183/

Try the Sigma. I've got one and it's ace. I've only got one photo uploaded as a test shot at the moment, and I've mucked up my colour profile on that one, so it's not a good example, but the above link should force you to save a bit more and go with the Sigma 1.4 :)

I should add that there are a few people currently reporting softness & AF issues with them, but my lens came straight from Sigma on 17/12/10 and is pin sharp. I've no idea what batches of them have problems, or if it is even a batch issue (or if you can even track this), but my lens was spot on and someone else on these forums bought one from the same online store at the same time as me and there's is fine too.
 
Last edited:
alexam said:
Perhaps it's my monitor, but that shot does not seem so sharp. Cannot see what is supposed to be in focus as both hands, being at different distances, are not sharp, neither is the hair. Please correct me if its at my end, as I am not seeing what I hoped and am seriously considering the 1.4 myself

Can you post any others?

Malcolm
Click to expand...

Doesn't look sharp to me either.
 
Hmm the sigma is looking tempting now,

Although I've just seen the Sigma 30mm f1.4... Which would work a bit better on my crop sensored 7D for what I'm after. I've always felt the 50mm is a little close.

Any opinions on the 30mm?

The 50 has the 77mm filter size, a big attraction to me over the 62 of the 30mm. Sigma this is
 
Laudrup said:
Doesn't look sharp to me either.
Click to expand...

Aye, that's fair enough but when you reach my age :naughty: you'll come to accept that ladies don't always want their photo to be (a) taken and/or (b) razor sharp.

So why did I put up this photo? It is unsharpened and straight from the camera apart from a tidying crop. As a low light lens it's lovely.

How better might I help - would you like sharpness at different apertures? I've spent a while and, frankly might need another hour to find images taken with this lens to show off the bokeh at its best.

@ f/1.4: this first image was part of a back to back test with a number of MF lenses, all using the same settings. I don't think this lens is at its best sharpness at 1.4 but you'll gauge DoF and bokeh:

Canon50EF1_4at1_4AutoFocus.jpg


@ f/1.8: this is where I use this lens mostly. Not much bokeh but DoF:

IMG_1584.jpg


Lastly, @ f/1.6 - another favourite setting but DoF can be too short sometimes:

IMG_4370.jpg
 
That photo is a good shot to shot just how shallow the DOF is but does highlight the danger of these very wide apertures that your subject can get completely lost in the OOF areas.

I've been having a look at this DOF calculator which really helps to choose a realistic aperture even when i want to push the creativity of these things.
 
Here are a couple of shots taken with my Canon 50mm 1.4

This was tricky as shot through dirty aquarium glass and obviously the fish wouldn't keep still

4368103007_68f2932542_z.jpg


4346384843_27c3552e56_z.jpg


4231660342_685604f4f3_z.jpg
 
Hi Julian.................... now that's what I call sharp, particularly the tank and what I would expect from a 1.4 50mm lens. I think tikkathreebarrel needs to compare.
Perhaps he has a faulty lens?

Malcolm
 
I had both and to be honest, there's not a huge difference in results. I sold on my 1.8 and kept the 1.4 but I wouldn't say the difference in price is really worth it.
 
neil_g said:
indeed, on that angle it does highlight an extremely shallow DOF.
Click to expand...

Again i say The depth of field at f1.4 is so shallow that even minor movements will throw off focus. If your camera isn't properly aligned in the field of focus, then. it will appear that the focus of the lens is 'off'.

Merc
 
neil_g said:
not the most thrilling shot but, sigma 1.4 bokeh..

(Test Shot - Sigma 50mm on Canon 1Dmk3 (ISO2000, F1.4, 1/320))


722Q2350a by neilgates, on Flickr
Click to expand...



this shot shows iso cranked up on a body that can handle it, luckily the 5D is very good at handling high iso,

it does get sharper the higher the iso in ambient light like churches and receptions, also settings like AI Focus (back button AF)spot metering and shooting in faithfull bring some good results,

any 1.4 needs to be teased about with, lesser on the 1D III and 1Ds III 1D IV

they just nail em

Merc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top