Canon Nifty 50 f/1.8 v Canon Nifty 50 f/1.4

wibbly

wibbly

Messages
4,989
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
I own the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and whilst I'm pretty happy with the results I get from it, I'm wondering if there's any real advantage to swapping it out for a f1.4 version.

Whilst I quite enjoy the nifty 50 experience, quite often I'm reaching for my Tamron 17-50mm as I want the extra flexibility of a little less focal reach. (I use it on my 40d).

I realise I'm getting a little more low light flexibility, I'd like to know if there's any other real world advantages. Is it bigger, is it much better built for instance...

Considering the difference in cost, I'd be quite interested to hear of the pro's and con's.

Failing to swap the f/1.8 for a f/1.4 I am considering a 28mm f/1.8mm.
 
Have a look at the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. It more closely resembles the FOV of a 50mm on a full frame camera and gives you a bit more working distance compared to the quite close crop of a 50mm on a crop-sensor camera. It's known to be a great lens too.
 
When you use your 17-50, what sort of focal length do you desire?
You may want to consider canon 28/1.8 or 35/2 or even 85/1.8 for more reach...
 
Nuffles said:
Have a look at the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. It more closely resembles the FOV of a 50mm on a full frame camera and gives you a bit more working distance compared to the quite close crop of a 50mm on a crop-sensor camera. It's known to be a great lens too.
Click to expand...

I can confirm that the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is a great lens. However, whilst mine was super-sharp wide open on my 1000D, the same lens appears to suffer from slight front focussing on my 60D (enough to make me annoyed that one of the features the 60D dropped compared with previous XXD models was Micro Focus Adjustment).

Thankfully it's only 15 months into its 3-year warranty, so I'll be shipping it back to Sigma for calibration in the next week or so.
 
The 50mm f1.4 is a better built lens than the lighter plastic f1.8 version, And gives great sharpness right across the frame but depending on how much use your gonna have for this lens is it worth the outlay? yes and no imo, Its still a dam sight cheaper than the f1.2 but its only half a stop faster that the f1.8 and immage quality is quite comparable. Me myself would rather buy the f1.4 than the toy f1.8 version but each to their own i say.
 
aeronic said:
When you use your 17-50, what sort of focal length do you desire?
You may want to consider canon 28/1.8 or 35/2 or even 85/1.8 for more reach...
Click to expand...

I am considering the 28mm f/1.8, it's the kind of length I tend to shoot at quite a bit.

Hotshots said:
The 50mm f1.4 is a better built lens than the lighter plastic f1.8 version, And gives great sharpness right across the frame but depending on how much use your gonna have for this lens is it worth the outlay? yes and no imo, Its still a dam sight cheaper than the f1.2 but its only half a stop faster that the f1.8 and immage quality is quite comparable. Me myself would rather buy the f1.4 than the toy f1.8 version but each to their own i say.
Click to expand...

Thanks, are the images pretty comparable? I was hoping someone would say the images on the f/1.4 would be far superior - especially given the difference in cost :D
 
spjwebster said:
I can confirm that the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is a great lens. However, whilst mine was super-sharp wide open on my 1000D, the same lens appears to suffer from slight front focussing on my 60D (enough to make me annoyed that one of the features the 60D dropped compared with previous XXD models was Micro Focus Adjustment).

Thankfully it's only 15 months into its 3-year warranty, so I'll be shipping it back to Sigma for calibration in the next week or so.
Click to expand...

OK on one camera but not on another? Does that point towards the lens or the camera? Hmmm...
 
The 1.4 is better than the 1.8 in every way.

Build quality, although not an L but it is more sturdy, and a metal mount (hated that plastic mount)
USM motor
Half a stop faster
Much nicer bokeh, almost L like
Lovely contrast
Easier to use in low light, the 1.8 just doesn't like to focus in low light

It really is worth £150 more.

Here is one I made earlier, at F/1.4

 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
OK on one camera but not on another? Does that point towards the lens or the camera? Hmmm...
Click to expand...

I thought so too, but having tested my other lenses on the same body they're perfectly fine. I still have my 1000D, and I'll dig it out just to double check, but for whatever reason it seems to be this one lens on this one body that's front focussing.

Bear in mind that third party lens manufacturers reverse engineer AF routines for the major camera manufacturers, and AF routines differ between models even from the same manufacturer. If it were all mechanical I'd accept that I'm going bonkers, but it isn't and I'm not (well, probably not).

Back to the OP's question, I think it's a worthy upgrade. I have the 50mm f/1.8, but having played with the 50mm f/1.4 recently it's on my wish list of camera gear to buy in the next few months.
 
wibbly said:
I own the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and whilst I'm pretty happy with the results I get from it, I'm wondering if there's any real advantage to swapping it out for a f1.4 version.

Whilst I quite enjoy the nifty 50 experience, quite often I'm reaching for my Tamron 17-50mm as I want the extra flexibility of a little less focal reach. (I use it on my 40d). ....................I am considering a 28mm f/1.8mm.
Click to expand...

wibbly said:
I am considering the 28mm f/1.8, it's the kind of length I tend to shoot at quite a bit.
Click to expand...

Hi Dave

I think you've answered your own question here - I'm not sure the 50mm 1.4 is what your after, you have the 1.8 and reach for the 17-50 as you want the extra flexibility and often use around the 28mm range for shooting.

If you are looking to buy a new prime, I'd opt for one around this focal length.

Do you need to sell you nifty fifty to purchase this, or can you keep it as well ?

Hope this helps ...
 
andyred said:
Hi Dave

I think you've answered your own question here - I'm not sure the 50mm 1.4 is what your after, you have the 1.8 and reach for the 17-50 as you want the extra flexibility and often use around the 28mm range for shooting.

If you are looking to buy a new prime, I'd opt for one around this focal length.

Do you need to sell you nifty fifty to purchase this, or can you keep it as well ?

Hope this helps ...
Click to expand...

Thanks Andy, I think I am there with the answers, the 50mm f/1.8 will be staying, I'm just trying to find a 28mm f/1.8 at a decent second hand price :LOL:
 
My 50mm f1.4 and 40d have made all the other lenses redundant.

I sold my 50mm f1.8 as it was hardly ever use.
 
Hotshots said:
The 50mm f1.4 is a better built lens than the lighter plastic f1.8 version, And gives great sharpness right across the frame but depending on how much use your gonna have for this lens is it worth the outlay? yes and no imo, Its still a dam sight cheaper than the f1.2 but its only half a stop faster that the f1.8 and immage quality is quite comparable. Me myself would rather buy the f1.4 than the toy f1.8 version but each to their own i say.
Click to expand...

+1 from me.

I sold a Mk1 Nifty Fifty (the metal one) to "upgrade" to the 1.4, and wondered what I'd gained other than faster and quieter AF and half a stop.

I also have a number of other brand 50mm and 55mm lenses, all older lenses, some of which are 1.4, all of which I use in manual focus. As a result I tend to grab the Canon 1.4 when I need AF over MF. If you like playing with bokeh you'll perhaps try some other makesand decide for yourself.
My favourite is actually a Canon FD/FL 1.4 lens which I had converted to EOS mount, but I'll say again, it's MF only.
 
I went from a 1.8 to a 1.4 a few weeks ago with the hope there would be a bit of an increase in sharpness wide open. TBH I was utterly amazed at the IQ difference. I know the 1.8 is a bit dodgy in the build quality, but the difference is like black and white with mine.
 
I upgraded from the 1.8 to the 1.4 last month and so far not used it enough due to what I have been shooting so I can't really comment much but the build is a huge step up and the silent focusing is better. Image quality is better but not as huge as you would hope for a lens 3 times the price.
 
Little John said:
I upgraded from the 1.8 to the 1.4 last month and so far not used it enough due to what I have been shooting so I can't really comment much but the build is a huge step up and the silent focusing is better. Image quality is better but not as huge as you would hope for a lens 3 times the price.
Click to expand...

3 times the price makes it sound like it's thousands 3x nothing isn't alot
the 1.4 is hardly a dear lens and the 1.8 is a round of drinks
just the build quality and usm alone would justify the cost of the 1.4 imo
 
I own the 50mm f/1.4 and I must say it's my favorite lens by a long shot. the dof and low light shots I get from it are really worth it.

5487217830_0097f0a425.jpg
 
Last edited:
Rebel t3i said:
3 times the price makes it sound like it's thousands 3x nothing isn't alot
the 1.4 is hardly a dear lens and the 1.8 is a round of drinks
just the build quality and usm alone would justify the cost of the 1.4 imo
Click to expand...

I upgraded from a 1.8 to a 1.4 and was a little disappointed. It's not 'proper' USM and the build quality isn't in the leage of my 28 1.8 and 100 2.0. The lens design is old, and it feels it.
 
I'm also looking at similar lenses and frankly am getting confused by the myriad of options available.

criteria: low weight, good low light capability, not too bulky.

Sounds like the 28mm 1.8 might be a winner but does anyone have any experience of the canon 35mm f2?

(not trying to hijack the thread, especially as a newbie :D )
 
I'd consider the 28 1.8 bulky. IIRC, weighs more than my 50 1.4. Low weight you're looking at the 35/2.
 
M4FFU said:
I'd consider the 28 1.8 bulky. IIRC, weighs more than my 50 1.4. Low weight you're looking at the 35/2.
Click to expand...

does it feel plasticky with its low weight though? I had a nifty 50 a while ago (before moving to m4/3rds and then back again) and it always felt like it would fall apart at the slightest knock.

I don't mind a bit of bulk if it feels well built (wish i could say the same about myself :LOL: )
 
I don't think you'll get lightweight without plasticy.

My 28 1.8, if I banged it against your head, would come off better. Not sure the 35/2 & 50/1.8s of this world would fair so well. Infact, I'd say my 28/1.8 is more of a tank, build quality wise, than my 70-200/4.

It won't make your arms ache, but it's not lightweight in the class of the 35/2 and 50/1.8.
 
M4FFU said:
My 28 1.8, if I banged it against your head, would come off better.
Click to expand...

:LOL: :LOL:

I've just bought a 28mm f/1.8, I'm waiting for it to arrive.

I'm really aiming to have a 28, 50 & 85mm in my bag. I've got the 28, I think I'll stick with the 50mm f/1.8 for the time being and throw the remainder of the budget left into an 85mm f/1.8.

After that, I think I'll go with a 50mm f/1.4 :cool:
 
Similar to you, Dave, but I went 28, 50/1.4 and 100/2 as I aimed for a doubl-ing focal length [ish] approach, and I think the 100 performs a little better, at a price.

I'm going to look at the Sigma 50 soon, as I've not been wow'd with my 50/1.4.
 
M4FFU said:
Similar to you, Dave, but I went 28, 50/1.4 and 100/2 as I aimed for a doubl-ing focal length [ish] approach, and I think the 100 performs a little better, at a price.

I'm going to look at the Sigma 50 soon, as I've not been wow'd with my 50/1.4.
Click to expand...

You'll be even less wow'd by the sigma! I know a lot of people like them but my experience of three 50 1.4 and two 30 1.4 sigmas was utter poo AF IQ and sharpness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top