Why the Canon 50mm 1.4 USM over the 50mm 1.8 II?

[sapphire]

(First of all, I have a cropped-frame body)

Okay, this might be an old question. But everyone is saying the 50mm f/1.4 has better IQ than the f/1.8?

The 1.8 might has slower noisy focus and cheap plastic build, moving front element, 2/3 stop slower, not as good bokeh. But the IQ from the f/1.8 should be better than the 1.4?

At least from what I see here (blur index/ MFT chart?)

Canon F/1.8

http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon50f18/tloader.htm

Canon F/1.4

tloader


The f/1.8 has better test result than the f/1.4. The 50mm 1.8 II at f/4.0 has IQ as good as any L lenses gets.

Why people like the 1.4 more is because of its color depth and high contrast??

I am talking only for photos use, not video.

 

[.SimO.]

I purchased my 1.4 because of build quality and budget.

 

[Mach0]

From what I understand, focus is faster, it's 1.4 vs 1.8, and the quality of bokeh is better.

 

[Dao]

Based on the MTF chart from photozone.de

I will say the f/1.4 seems to be slightly better in sharpness at f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6 and f/8. Also the f/1.4 is slightly better in CA and Vignetting control. The question is can you see the difference in the photos? Maybe yes, or maybe not.

So people who buy the f/1.4 instead of the f/1.8 most likely because of other factors as well.

For me,
- Better AF
- If need, I can shoot at f/1.4
- Rounder out of focus blur


Just based on that, it worth to upgrade from my first generation f/1.8 to f/1.4 ( Note: the first generation f/1.8 is not bad in build quality when compared to the second generation)

 

[subscuck]

You seem to be looking at IQ and nothing more. There is far more to be considered. The 5 blade aperture of the 1.8 renders some of the worst bokeh characteristics you will ever see. It's jagged and nervous, not appealing at all. The bokeh characteristics of the 1.4 are much, much better. Most people buy a fast prime for low light capability. The 1.8 struggles with this. All lenses will have a hard time focusing in low light from time to time, the 1.8 will hunt and fail to lock on a much higher percentage of the time than a better quality lens. The build quality of the 1.8 lends itself to a short life span, the build quality of the 1.4 lends itself to a long, useful life span. And then there's the issue of slow, noisy, clanky, AF. The 1.8 sounds like it is going to fly apart during focusing, as well as being loud enough to wake the dead in a three county radius. The 1.4 is quiet and much faster. Spend the money on the 1.4, it's a quality lens. The 1.8 is a bargain basement lens with decent IQ.

 

[Derrel]

You seem to be looking at IQ and nothing more. There is far more to be considered. The 5 blade aperture of the 1.8 renders some of the worst bokeh characteristics you will ever see. It's jagged and nervous, not appealing at all. The bokeh characteristics of the 1.4 are much, much better. Most people buy a fast prime for low light capability. The 1.8 struggles with this. All lenses will have a hard time focusing in low light from time to time, the 1.8 will hunt and fail to lock on a much higher percentage of the time than a better quality lens. The build quality of the 1.8 lends itself to a short life span, the build quality of the 1.4 lends itself to a long, useful life span. And then there's the issue of slow, noisy, clanky, AF. The 1.8 sounds like it is going to fly apart during focusing, as well as being loud enough to wake the dead in a three county radius. The 1.4 is quiet and much faster. Spend the money on the 1.4, it's a quality lens. The 1.8 is a bargain basement lens with decent IQ.

THIS OUGHT TO BE A STICKY!!! As the former owner of a 50/1.8 aka "nifty fifty", AKA "plastic fantastic" aka "the rubbish bokeh-er" aka "the sounds-like-a-combine-focuser", all I can say is subscuck hit basically every sour note that the 50/1.8 is capable of hitting. Buuuuuut, he left out one sour note, sort of the encore warm-up for the 50/1.8, which is called "barrel separation". The thing is literally pop-riveted together, not held together by screws...when it suffers impact while on a camera body, and MOST often when its lens shade is on, the "nifty fifty", the 1.8 model, often SNAPS INTO TWO PIECES. Seriously. NOT kidding. Oh, and did he mention, when shot toward the sun, the nifty fifty often suffers from almost an entirely green-flared-ruined image? Uh, yeah... The 50/1.4 EF USM, OTOH, is one of the PRETTIEST-IMAGING 50's I have ever owned, of ANY brand, and I have owned 10 or so. The Canon 50/1.4 is an excellent tool! It is worth every single penny you pay for it.

I gave my 50/1.8 EF-II to my wife's nephew went he went to art school to study photography in Seattle; they required entrants to have a 50mm lens. I told him, "Here,you can have this, but remember, it's a total POS when shot toward the sun."

 

[Big Mike]

This was probably the most asked question on photography forums, back around 2003-2005....when people still shot film.

I agree with the posts above. I used to have the older (better) version of the 50mm F1.8, and I still upgraded to the F1.4 and have been very happy with that decision.
What I usually tell people, is to go into a camera store and hold both the F1.8 and the F1.4. Just the weight and feel of them, should tell you all you need to know.

 

[Overread]

the "nifty fifty", the 1.8 model, often SNAPS INTO TWO PIECES.

My sisters remains of her first 50mm f1.8 are somewhere in my room because it did exactly this. It's a great lens for its price, but being mass produced cheap it has some shortfallings. If you can afford and are keen with the hobby then upgrading to a more durable, better quality lens is very much advised.

Just as a note you might want to check out the Sigma 50mm f1.4 lens. It's a much newer lens and design over the current Canon edition and, as such, the Sigma has the edge in optical quality over the Canon.

 

[Jeff_M]

THIS OUGHT TO BE A STICKY!!! As the former owner of a 50/1.8 aka "nifty fifty", AKA "plastic fantastic" aka "the rubbish bokeh-er" aka "the sounds-like-a-combine-focuser", all I can say is subscuck hit basically every sour note that the 50/1.8 is capable of hitting. Buuuuuut, he left out one sour note, sort of the encore warm-up for the 50/1.8, which is called "barrel separation". The thing is literally pop-riveted together, not held together by screws...when it suffers impact while on a camera body, and MOST often when its lens shade is on, the "nifty fifty", the 1.8 model, often SNAPS INTO TWO PIECES. Seriously. NOT kidding.

funny you should mention this. A coworker of mine dropped his lens in florida. He brought it back and it looked like one of those snake in a can pranks lol

 

[subscuck]

Thanks for the props, Derrel. I also failed to mention what killed mine; jammed focus motor. I don't know if it's a common problem or not, which is why I didn't mention it. I hemmed and hawed for a couple of years about getting the Canon 1.4, and ended up getting the Sigma shortly after it was released. And I prefer to call it "Craptastic Plastic".

 

[Big Mike]

My 50mm F1.4 had a jammed up focus motor. Sent it to Canon, for $100 they replaced the focus motor/gears, cleaned it and sent it back within a week.

The one issue with the Canon 50mm F1.4 is that while it does have a 'USM' focus motor, it still has gears to drive the AF. It's not the 'Ring Type' USM focus system that you see in the higher end lenses.

 

[Dao]

Beside the AF speed, the AF feel of the 50mm f/1.4 is different from my 85mm f/1.8 and the 70-200mm f/4. The 85mm and the 70-200 zoom feel smoother when turning the focus ring.