50mm 1.8 vs 50mm 1.4 - DPChallenge Forums

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

04/22/2006 04:19:17 PM · #1

Hello people,
I got Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II, it is really a nice sharp lens i got.
my question is: what is the more advance features with 50mm 1.4 rather than USM and f/1.4?
should i get one or my 50mm 1.8 is enough?
and i have another question, if the money is not an issue, what do you people think of camera 1Ds markII?

Message edited by author 2006-04-22 16:20:37.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

04/22/2006 04:21:15 PM · #2

Have a look at this thread... good info there comparing the 50/1.8 and 50/1.4.

Edit:
The 1DsII is an incredible camera, nothing bad to say about it. It's also a large, heavy instrument. It may see an update this Fall, but that's not certain.
For less than half the $$$$, the Canon 5D provides very nearly the same image quality in a lighter package. Some of the 1-series features, like weather sealing and 45-point AF are missing from the 5D; the AF performance of the 5D is damn good, however, and the weather sealing is only a necessity when shooting in highly inclement environments.

Message edited by author 2006-04-22 16:25:06.

Chiqui

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

04/22/2006 05:36:17 PM · #3

Comparing the 1.8 to the 1.4 is like comparing apples and oranges. The 1.8 is a great lens for the money but it can't compare to the 1.4. It really is unfair to compare them because the 1.4 is a few hundred dollars more expensive and meant to be a much better lens. I have a 1.8 and I love it, I do not feel the need for a 1.4. I say save yourself some money and keep the 1.8.

June

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

04/22/2006 05:42:20 PM · #4

I have used both the 1.8 and the 1.4. As far as actual image quality is concerned, there is no difference. The 1.4 lens creates less depth of field, but other than that, the chromatic abberations from low light photography are about the same between both lenses. The 1.4 has the USM which gives you a quiter focus motor, but its not noticeably faster than the 1.8 model. Having owned both lenses, for the most part I would not be able to tell the difference between images made with one or the other.

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

04/22/2006 05:49:41 PM · #5

my buddy that has the 1.4 use to have the 1.8 as well. He said the biggest difference other then the slightly larger aperture and faster focusing was that the bokeh on the 1.4 is much better and that was reason enough for him to buy it.

Also note that in our 50mm shoot out the auto focus on the images taken with the 1.8 was not as sharp as often as the 1.4 was. So I'd say in the moderate lighting we were in the focus on the 1.8 was not as accurate or consistent.

So my $.02, the 1.8 is a great lens for the $$ and everyone with an EOS should own one. But... if you do a lot of portrait work or use the 50mm a lot for other things, $350 for the 1.4 is still a pretty good deal considering the quality of the lens.

hankk

Canon EOS-5D

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

04/22/2006 11:46:42 PM · #6

Originally posted by kirbic:

The 1DsII is an incredible camera, nothing bad to say about it. It's also a large, heavy instrument. It may see an update this Fall, but that's not certain.
For less than half the $$$$, the Canon 5D provides very nearly the same image quality in a lighter package. Some of the 1-series features, like weather sealing and 45-point AF are missing from the 5D; the AF performance of the 5D is damn good, however, and the weather sealing is only a necessity when shooting in highly inclement environments.

There are a couple of other features that are nice, but everyone values each feature differently. For example, some may like the 8.5 frames per second of the 1DMII vs the 3 FPS of the 5D. Some may need to have the backup capability of the 1DMII (the CF and SD cards can be written in parallell--the chances of two cards failing are much less than one card failing.) I've heard that the 1DMII has a better build quality. You have to pay about $200 more for the battery grip to get a vertical shutter release on the 5D...

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

04/23/2006 07:44:05 AM · #7

Thank you all people for replies
in fact i got 24-70mm f/2.8L USM for portrait, what do you think of it
and i got also 85mm f/1.8 USM, is it good enough as well?
with these, should i need 50mm f/1.4 or that are enough for now?
sorry for these alot questions

KevinRiggs

Canon EOS-1Ds

04/23/2006 08:21:32 AM · #8

hankk has mistaken the 1D Mark II for the 1Ds Mark II (the little "s" makes a difference). The 1Ds Mark II is a 16.7mp body that shoots about 4fps. The 1D Mark II is an 8.2mp body that shoots approximately 8.5fps. The 1Ds Mark II is built to compete in quality and pricing with medium format cameras used by professional photographers who command large fees for their work and whose work may be placed under greater scrutiny. The 1D Mark II is generally used by sports photographers or perhaps professionals who are more moderately priced given their local area. These are generalizations and I'm sure that many people on this board could point out an example here, there or whereever that defies these general conventions but based on usage people talk about on sites like DPC, Fred Miranda or SportsShooter I think you'll find that these generalizations are pretty true to form.

If you want one helluva digital SLR body and money is no object then pickup the 1Ds Mark II. No other digital SLR today exceeds its specs and having the first version of this body and having seen the 2nd I can say that this body is amazing. I've shot with the original 1Ds, the original 1D and the 5D. I'd get any of these (1Ds Mark II, 1D Mark II or 5D) depending on what I wanted. The 5D will produce fine pics but in a studio setting either I simply don't know how to post-process the images (possible) to get the same quality out of the 5D's images as the 1Ds or the images are simply a little softer.

On your more recent note

Originally posted by UAE_Guy:

in fact i got 24-70mm f/2.8L USM for portrait, what do you think of it
and i got also 85mm f/1.8 USM, is it good enough as well?

The 24-70 is a great portrait lens especially considering the 1.6x crop factor of the 350D. The 85 f/1.8 is an outstanding lens, too. The bokeh on it is comparable to the EF 70-200 f/2.8 L lens but without the weight. Great for headshots.

Kev

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

04/23/2006 08:43:08 AM · #9

Thank you Kevin for addition information about 1D series and 5d, I know the spec from websites and magazines of photography easily. for sure i am thinking of 1Ds Mark II only, and i am not a sport shooter.
I added a lens 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM to my wish list, and i will buy it in a proper time i hope, just i didn't try to buy from the net before as it is much cheaper from local markets about 30 - 60%.
so after all, should i add 50mm 1.4 or i think what i got are enough?

Message edited by author 2006-04-23 08:43:57.

hankk

Canon EOS-5D

04/23/2006 04:48:28 PM · #10

Originally posted by KevinRiggs:

hankk has mistaken the 1D Mark II for the 1Ds Mark II (the little "s" makes a difference).

Sorry, I did confuse them. Haven't gotten much sleep lately. And I dream about the 1D MII (I shoot sports sometimes).

Originally posted by KevinRiggs:

The 5D will produce fine pics but in a studio setting either I simply don't know how to post-process the images (possible) to get the same quality out of the 5D's images as the 1Ds or the images are simply a little softer.

There's been some discussion that the 5D does a bit more noise reduction than the 1DsMII at the expense of sharpness. See //www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page21.asp (of course, you had mentioned 5D vs 1Ds, not 1DsMII, but it could be the same noise reduction vs. sharpness issue)

Message edited by author 2006-04-23 16:49:18.

coolhar

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

04/23/2006 06:11:05 PM · #11

Originally posted by UAE_Guy:

UAE_Guy, you need to stop buying equipment and start going out and using it. Experience will tell you when your photography needs more or better tools.

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

04/24/2006 05:28:21 AM · #12

UAE_Guy, you need to stop buying equipment and start going out and using it. Experience will tell you when your photography needs more or better tools. [/quote]

How much pics should i toake to reach the limits upgrading tools? 1000 pics? 5000 pics? i took more than 10000 pics and i still i didn't satisfy with most pics as i need something more professional to get better pics maybe in quality or maybe in view frame [I think you know the difference between full frame and corp factors cameras]
thats all

coolhar

04/24/2006 05:41:04 AM · #13

Originally posted by UAE_Guy:

How much pics should i toake to reach the limits upgrading tools? 1000 pics? 5000 pics? i took more than 10000 pics and i still i didn't satisfy with most pics as i need something more professional to get better pics maybe in quality or maybe in view frame [I think you know the difference between full frame and corp factors cameras]
thats all

Well, you haven't shared any of your work here so I can't tell if you have outgrown your current collection of lenses yet. I was just trying to say that new and better stuff will not necessarily make you a better photographer but practice probably will. Enjoy the equipment you have, learn it well, and you'll know when it's time to upgrade.

What kind of photography do you like doing best?