Canon 50mm f/1.8 II vs. f/1.4 USM

[michelejo]

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00009XVCZ/ref=ord_cart_shr/002-0542272-6099262?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance"]Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM[/ame]

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00007E7JU/ref=ord_cart_shr/002-0542272-6099262?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance"]Canon 50mm f/1.8 II [/ame]

$75 or over $300. Which would you get (this is for portraiture)?

 

[Digital Matt]

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

 

[ShutteredEye]

I just got a 1.8 myself. I've shot 8 shots with it, and I LOVE it.

 

[danny]

I bought the 1.8 first, then the 1.4. The 1.8 is a great lens for the price. Only real problem I had was focusing in low light conditions. The 1.4 is USM and the 1.8 is not. My eyesight is not great and the viewfinder on the 10D is very small. If you can afford the 1.4, get it. If you don't mind doing a manual focus sometimes then I think you would be happy with the 1.8. There are other reasons, and this was just my 2 cents worth. Hope it helps.

 

['Daniel']

Yeah, I've heard great things about both and plan on getting the 1.8.

The general thing I've got from reviews of the 1.8 is

Pro's

Great Quality for price
Light
Cheap

Cons
Can break easily if you are careless (if you are, lenses will break anyway)
Focusing ring is not great (the same as the 18-55 standard)

 

[danalec99]

$75 or over $300. Which would you get

If you think you need that lil extra light and the built, go for the f1.4. I believe only the hardcore measurebators might be able to detect the difference between the results from both the optics. If possible, go to your nearest camera store, try them both on your camera and pick your fav.

Both are stellar performers and have happy users.

 

[michelejo]

Thanks for the input--great article too. It's a tough decision. The main part that has me stalling is the quality of the "bokeh" since the f/1.8's is not supposed to be as nice.

Throwing a wrench into this whole thing is that the guy at Ritz insists that I should not get a 50mm lens for portraits but rather an 85mm or 100mm or some zoom. But I've read a lot that these lenses are great for portraits and being so fast, great for moving subjects. All the things he was suggesting for me were in the $500+ range, which is a little steep for me at this point. I'm still getting over what the camera cost me, LOL! Now I am quite confused!

I'm really liking this one too:

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00007GQLU/002-0542272-6099262?v=glance&n=502394&%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance"]85mm f/1.8 USM Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras[/ame]




Canon has a triple rebate thing going on and I'm feeling like now is the time to buy a couple eligible lenses. The 50mm f/1.4 is eligible too. Would that and this one (above) be redundant?

I'm sorry to ask something that's probably so remedial but I don't have a lot of experience with lenses. I haven't use an SLR in almost 4 years and even then I had the kit lens and a 80-200mm zoom. I don't even really remember what I used the zoom for--didn't have it long before we got our digital and I ditched my film SLRs!

 

[hobbes28]

If you decide to go with Ritz again for either of these lenses, I'm going to have to side with your husband and tell you to get the extended warranty. They cover if your lens breaks due to "being too hard on it".

I have the 1.8 and love it. I haven't had any trouble focusing in low light with it at all. Great lens and, for me, the extra cash for the 1.4 wasn't worth it.

 

[thebeginning]

i agree that an 85mm or above is 'nicer' for closer up shots, but that 50mm is a very useful focal length for full body shots, and is really quite sharp (both of them). I'd personally get the 1.4 because of its extra speed, build quality and smoother bokeh, but the cost alone of the 1.8 is just about enough to outweigh all of the benefits of a 1.4. If you do alot of full body shots on a 1.6 crop factor camera, then get a 50mm, no doubt about it (or even a 30 or 35mm). If you do more headshots and upper body shots, then go with the 85 1.8. Just my opinion. The 85 1.8 is about as much as the 50 1.4 if you were wondering. It's pin sharp and the focusing is really fast. All three lenses are great IMO, though.

 

[uberben]

The 1.8 is so cheap for the quality pics you get. I use mine mainly for body shots and 3/4 shots. I'm 100% happy with mine. I bought mine new from bhphoto for 79 bucks and they go for 10-15 bucks less used on ebay. So even if you bought it, hated it, your not out that much money.