| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/23/2008 11:47:16 AM · #1 |
Was thinking about buying the 50mm 1.8. But I'm wondering if the 1.4 is worth the extra money.
Top desire is sharpness, and some macro capability would be nice. Are there after market lenses that are as good or better?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:51:12 AM · #2 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
Top desire is sharpness, and some macro capability would be nice. |
Get a 100mm 2.8 macro then. Super sharp and 1:1 macro.
ETA: or the 60mm 2.8
Message edited by author 2008-10-23 11:53:36.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2008 12:22:39 PM · #3 |
| I second the nomination for the 100mm f2.8 macro. Awesome lens. Nice and sharp, fantastic macro capability. If you don't really need macro and would rather go back to your 50mm options, I can't say for sure. I have the f1.8, and it's a decent lens (and a great buy for the money), but it's not a fantastic lens. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 12:23:17 PM · #4 |
| The 1.4 is marginally sharper at the corners than the 1.8. This is likely to be less of an issue on a crop sensor. The most usable f/stop (ie. before it gets soft) is probably 1/3rd stop lower or so, I'd have to revisit the charts. The biggest difference, I think, is the 1.4 is USM and the 1.8 is geared focus and is loud and slow. I have the 1.8, but since all of my other lenses are USM, I hate it. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 12:23:36 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
Was thinking about buying the 50mm 1.8. But I'm wondering if the 1.4 is worth the extra money.
Top desire is sharpness, and some macro capability would be nice. Are there after market lenses that are as good or better?
Thanks! |
Yes. I think it is worth it. The f/1.8 feels and behaves like it is a childs toy. I've had mine break twice after minor bumps while walking around. Slow to focus, noisy, and a pain to manually focus. I love my 1.4. Much better build, and it focuses more accurately than my prior f/1.8 version. It does takes nice pictures when stopped down, although I was never happy with it wide open. So if you want it for the wide aperture, go for the 1.4. The 50mm f/2.5 macro is 1:1 when used with an extender. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 12:25:49 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by bspurgeon:
...and a pain to manually focus... |
Oh yeah, I forgot about that. Forget manual focus! |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 01:27:06 PM · #7 |
I eventually upgraded to the 1.4, but the 1.8 works awesome. If you're unsure of the focal length, get the 1.8. If you know you want (and will often use) a 50mm - go for the 1.4.
 
Message edited by author 2008-10-23 13:28:09. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 01:47:28 PM · #8 |
The 50/1.4 is worth the extra cash, IMO, though it is certainly a matter of personal preference and opinion. Perhaps the biggest difference is the bokeh; the 1.8 is rather ugly in that regard, the 1.4 has pretty nice, smooth bokheh. The 1.4 is also sharper at equivalent f-stops and is definitely better built... though I really wish they would update it to USM and eliminate the extending front element.
ETA: with an extension tube or two, the 1.4 does a decent job for macro work
Message edited by author 2008-10-23 13:48:19. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 01:59:18 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
The 50/1.4 is worth the extra cash, IMO, though it is certainly a matter of personal preference and opinion. Perhaps the biggest difference is the bokeh; the 1.8 is rather ugly in that regard, the 1.4 has pretty nice, smooth bokheh. The 1.4 is also sharper at equivalent f-stops and is definitely better built... though I really wish they would update it to USM and eliminate the extending front element.
ETA: with an extension tube or two, the 1.4 does a decent job for macro work |
I just want to second that opinion about the harsh bokeh of the 1.8. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 02:05:53 PM · #10 |
3rd
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by kirbic:
The 50/1.4 is worth the extra cash, IMO, though it is certainly a matter of personal preference and opinion. Perhaps the biggest difference is the bokeh; the 1.8 is rather ugly in that regard, the 1.4 has pretty nice, smooth bokheh. The 1.4 is also sharper at equivalent f-stops and is definitely better built... though I really wish they would update it to USM and eliminate the extending front element.
ETA: with an extension tube or two, the 1.4 does a decent job for macro work |
I just want to second that opinion about the harsh bokeh of the 1.8. |
|
|
|
|
10/23/2008 05:52:48 PM · #11 |
How about a 4th! I love my 85 f/1.8 for the bokeh and my new 50 f/1.4 is just as pleasing, smooth, and essentially round.
Originally posted by hopper:
3rd
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by kirbic:
The 50/1.4 is worth the extra cash, IMO, though it is certainly a matter of personal preference and opinion. Perhaps the biggest difference is the bokeh; the 1.8 is rather ugly in that regard, the 1.4 has pretty nice, smooth bokheh. The 1.4 is also sharper at equivalent f-stops and is definitely better built... though I really wish they would update it to USM and eliminate the extending front element.
ETA: with an extension tube or two, the 1.4 does a decent job for macro work |
I just want to second that opinion about the harsh bokeh of the 1.8. |
|
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/16/2025 04:10:23 AM EDT.
