Which f/1.4 mm? - DPChallenge Forums

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

01/28/2009 12:11:47 AM · #1

Guys,

Which mm if I want 1.4 speed?

- 35mm
- 50mm

I currently have the 350D, so am inclinded to go for the 35mm, but a part of me thinks I should go for the 50mm in prep for the day I get a full sized sensor. Recently I've been a bit frustrated with the noise I get when shooting in low-light conditions. Short-term I think the solution lies in a faster lens.

All thoughts and comments appreciated.

faidoi

Pentax K10D

01/28/2009 12:25:33 AM · #2

So what do you think is wrong with the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II? Tough to answer your question without knowing.

01/28/2009 12:33:24 AM · #3

The focus is waaaay too slow and unreliable. So much so that I rarely have it with me.

Edit to add some extra 'a's to way.

Message edited by author 2009-01-28 00:33:48.

01/28/2009 12:39:53 AM · #4

Originally posted by PaulE:

The focus is waaaay too slow and unreliable. So much so that I rarely have it with me.

Edit to add some extra 'a's to way.

The 50F1.4, is faster then the 50F1.8 and quieter too. However I've had several 50's and sell them as they dont meet my needs. I've shot with the 35F1.4 and I'd chose it over the 50F1.2, 50F1.4, or 50F1.8 any day of the week.

Matt

Jdroullard

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

01/28/2009 12:48:40 AM · #5

Originally posted by PaulE:

The focus is waaaay too slow and unreliable. So much so that I rarely have it with me.

Edit to add some extra 'a's to way.

it's the same on my 50mm 1.4

Jessi

Mamiya 645Pro TL

Mamiya 80mm f/2.8

01/28/2009 12:51:52 AM · #6

I've messed with the 50 f/1.4 and it is a fabulous lens...it works really well on a crop sensor. 85mm equiv is lovely.

Can't say anything about the 35mm...I think that you'd get some distortion? maybe? because it's so wide...I struggled a bit with how short the 50mm was.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/28/2009 12:54:11 AM · #7

I use my 100m macro lens for portrait shots, but often find this forces me away from my subject. This is one reason why I am thinking 35mm. Do you folk think the extra cost is worth it?

seasaw

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

01/28/2009 01:00:28 AM · #8

I sold my 50mm f1.8 for the same reasons as you, and purchased the 50mm f1.4. It works much better in all respects than the f1.8 but is quite soft wide open. Gets sharp at 2.0 and very sharp at 2.8.

I have no experience with the 35mm, but Bryan Carnathan has good info on both these lenses at www.the-digital-picture.com

He purchases every one of the lenses he reviews, and uses them professionally.

The Digital Picture 35mm f1.4 Review

The Digital Picture 50mm f1.4 Review

Bryan is pretty good about answering questions via email:
Info@The-Digital-Picture.com

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/28/2009 01:02:00 AM · #9

Originally posted by MattO:

Hi Matt - could you please elaborate. Why? What aspects of the 35mm do you value most? What annoys you with the various 50mm?

Nullix

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

01/28/2009 10:07:46 AM · #10

Hello?

35mm f1.4 = $1,200

50mm f1.4 = $325

Are they in the same legue?

breadfan35

Nikon D3

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

01/28/2009 10:18:31 AM · #11

I'd get the 35, but that fits my shooting style. I wish Nikon had a 35 f/1.4...

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/28/2009 10:34:44 AM · #12

Get the 35 f1.4 if you have the money. If not get the 50 f1.4.

Be warned though that if you start shooting that "L" glass, every "non-L" lens will seem to fall short.

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/28/2009 11:11:09 AM · #13

Another option...

look on ebay for a "super takumar" 50mm F1.4 and an m42 to EOS adapter ring. i paid $60 to get both when i bought mine. It'll be manual focus and you set the aperture on the lens, but for portraits it works fine. You shoot in Av and it works great. With a friend we tested mine head to head with the Canon f1.4 and f1.8 50mm lens and the takumar was the sharpest.

And, the glass is radioactive so it has a certain cool/danger factor :)

Ann

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

01/28/2009 11:58:30 AM · #14

I'm not sure what you're planning on using the lens for, but for portraits, I would think the 35mm would be a bit short, even on a crop sensor. For closeups, it will have a tendency to distort (big noses and chins).

Mephisto

Nikon Coolpix A

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

01/28/2009 12:08:22 PM · #15

Originally posted by Ann:

that's right. i noticed that as an obvious, when i shot my first protraits with my mamiya and the 80mm lens which is an equivalent of approx. 48mm on a full frame body.
the head shots just didn't seem right, especially if you shoot from a sloped angle. the focal lenght is good for full body shots though, especially if you're in a tight studio space or for environmental portraits/street photography.
but yeah for head shots the 50mm is probably better on the crop sensor if not even the 85mm. i love mine (nikkor) for portraits, really fabulous lens, think the canon is comparable in overall IQ and built quality.

eta: just saw you didn't really mention anything about portraits in your OP.
if it's a lens especially for low light situations you're looking for then get the 35mm. remember that you can shoot at approx. "1/focal lenght" sec. without getting blur from camera shake...my low light lens is the sigma 20mm 1.8 and i love it.

Message edited by author 2009-01-28 12:41:06.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

01/28/2009 12:31:28 PM · #16

if you can afford the 35 ... then you can afford both the 35 and 50

buy them both

01/28/2009 01:35:24 PM · #17

Originally posted by Nullix:

Hello?

35mm f1.4 = $1,200

50mm f1.4 = $325

Are they in the same legue?

Regardless of price, the answer will always be no. :D

Matt

01/28/2009 01:35:59 PM · #18

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Get the 35 f1.4 if you have the money. If not get the 50 f1.4.

Be warned though that if you start shooting that "L" glass, every "non-L" lens will seem to fall short.

Except the 85 F1.8 :D

Matt

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/28/2009 01:39:48 PM · #19

Originally posted by PaulE:

Originally posted by MattO:
The 50F1.4, is faster then the 50F1.8 and quieter too. However I've had several 50's and sell them as they dont meet my needs. I've shot with the 35F1.4 and I'd chose it over the 50F1.2, 50F1.4, or 50F1.8 any day of the week.

Matt

Hi Matt - could you please elaborate. Why? What aspects of the 35mm do you value most? What annoys you with the various 50mm?

The 35F1.4L and the 24F1.4L are both fabulous lens. If you have an oppurtunity to borrow/rent/steal one for a day glue it to your camera and you will understand. The focus speed, the bokeh, and the colors are just amazing.

The 50MM even though its suppose to have the same Focus motor and should have the same focus speed as the 85 F1.8 cant touch it, even on a 1 series. Its notoriously soft or front focuses, I've had three brand new ones two went back, one went to Canon to fix. The colors and accuracy of the lens just annoy me, its also a focal lenth that just doesnt fit my style. Its not as long as my 85, and its not wide enough to be used as a wide lens like the 35 or 24 are.

Matt

Spork99

OM System OM-1

01/28/2009 02:36:56 PM · #20

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Get the 35 f1.4 if you have the money. If not get the 50 f1.4.

Be warned though that if you start shooting that "L" glass, every "non-L" lens will seem to fall short.

Except the 85 F1.8 :D

Matt

Maybe, but the 85 f1.2 is in its own realm.

eric-sorensen

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

01/28/2009 05:18:07 PM · #21

Originally posted by MattO:

I used the 85 f1.8 for years, then got the 85 f1.2L - the non-L definitly falls short. Not as short as the 35mm f2 vs 35L or 50mm f1.8 vs 50L, but a noticable increase in image quality and much less DOF (if you want it)

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

01/28/2009 07:57:30 PM · #22

Originally posted by eric-sorensen:

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Get the 35 f1.4 if you have the money. If not get the 50 f1.4.

Be warned though that if you start shooting that "L" glass, every "non-L" lens will seem to fall short.

Except the 85 F1.8 :D

Matt

I used the 85 f1.8 for years, then got the 85 f1.2L - the non-L definitly falls short. Not as short as the 35mm f2 vs 35L or 50mm f1.8 vs 50L, but a noticable increase in image quality and much less DOF (if you want it)

For my needs the L falls short. Focus speed of the F1.2L is abysmal at best. The 85F1.8 and a 1 series can keep up with College level sports. The 1.2L has trouble keeping up with toddlers. :D

Matt

eric-sorensen

Canon EOS-5D

01/30/2009 10:12:12 AM · #23

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by eric-sorensen:

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Get the 35 f1.4 if you have the money. If not get the 50 f1.4.

Be warned though that if you start shooting that "L" glass, every "non-L" lens will seem to fall short.

Except the 85 F1.8 :D

Matt

I used the 85 f1.8 for years, then got the 85 f1.2L - the non-L definitly falls short. Not as short as the 35mm f2 vs 35L or 50mm f1.8 vs 50L, but a noticable increase in image quality and much less DOF (if you want it)

For my needs the L falls short. Focus speed of the F1.2L is abysmal at best. The 85F1.8 and a 1 series can keep up with College level sports. The 1.2L has trouble keeping up with toddlers. :D

Matt

Sorry, Matt - I was refering to portraiture, which is all I use my 85L for. With Portraits, the 85L produces a noticably better image than the f1.8 version. For portraits, the 85L's focus accuracy is much more important than it's focus speed.

I've shot some indoor basketball, and that is where I pull out the 85 f1.8 - you are right, the 85L can't follow running kids very well.

Eric