Which 50mm?

[judeastone]

Hi guys

Decided I want a low-light lens, 50mm sounds ideal. I've got a Canon 350d (aka Digital Rebel...)

My question is, other than the obvious, what are the real differences/advantages/limitations of these three lenses?

There is a very distincy price difference, and was wondering what the trade-offs/benefits of spending the extra money, which i'm prepared to do if necessary, but won't if i don't need to..!

Canon 50mm f1.4 USM £230 (amazon link (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-Eos-50mm-F1-4-Lens/dp/B00007FWK4/sr=8-6/qid=1169853679/ref=sr_1_6/202-0185111-4563024?ie=UTF8&s=electronics))
Canon 50mm f1.8 mk2 £59 (amazon link (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EF-50mm-1-8-Lens/dp/B00005K47X/sr=8-1/qid=1169853679/ref=pd_ka_1/202-0185111-4563024?ie=UTF8&s=electronics))
Canon 50mm f2.5 macro £210 (amazon link (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-50mm-F2-5-Macro-Lens/dp/B00007FWK5/sr=8-8/qid=1169853679/ref=sr_1_8/202-0185111-4563024?ie=UTF8&s=electronics))

Hoping to make a purchase tomorrow!

Cheers

Jude

[Darren Rowse]

well - I can only speak from the experience of teh f1.4 and f1.8 as I've not played with the macro one. But both of the first two are excellent lenses.

I bought a 1.8 with my 20D because everyone said it was so good and the best value for quality lens that Canon makes (it's very reasonably priced). I agree with them - it's amazing for what it is.

The results it produces are really sharp, it's really light, it's really cheap and it is a lens I used a lot.

However - it's so light that it can feel a little 'cheap'. It's not an overly solidly made lens (feels quite plasticy) and feels more like a toy than an actual serious lens. If you can get past that - you'll love it and wonder why anyone would pay five times as much for the f/1.4.

The f1.8 isn't particularly sharp at 1.8 (as are all lenses at that end of the aperture spectrum) but is very good in it's mid range.

I was very happy with the 1.8 - but... found myself wondering how much better the f/1.4 would be. What would the extra stop be like?

So I bought one.

Initial reactions were that it was more solid, slightly bigger and felt more like a serious lens. I found it to be a fast, sharp and accurate lens. f/1.4 is amazing - however it's so fast that focussing can become an issue as depth of field is reduced a lot. You'll probably find that you wouldn't want to shoot at 1.4 anyway because it is a little soft at that end of it's spectrum and f2.8 is probably where it starts getting really good.

The 1.4 has an 8-blade aperture (the 1.8 has a 5-blade aperture) which means backgrounds are blurred a little nicer and lens flare is reduced.

The 1.4 is quieter to use and in manual focussing mode it's easier to focus (the 1.8's focussing ring is poor).

Which is the better lens? I'd say the f1.4 is better - but then it's five times the price and should be. I guess it depends upon how fussy you are and how you'll use it.

I actually have kept both. Partly because selling the 1.8 would get me very little - but partly because it'll be a good lens for kids to use and it's great when you really want to travel light.

On your 350d (which is a lighter camera than my 20d) it'll feel very light with the 1.8.

let us know what you buy and how you find it!

PS: did you know there's also a f1.2 50mm? It's very very expensive :-)

[Saralonde]

I could probably just say "Ditto" to Darren's reply and leave it at that. He said everything I would have said and more.
I also started with the 50mm 1.8 and loved that little lens. It was my first prime and it taught me a lot. Unfortunately, my little "nifty fifty" decided to stop focusing one day (I blame my husband but he maintains his innocence) and I was left with a dilemna, fix or replace. Since I used my 50 quite a bit, I went with the 1.4. Definitely a heavier lens, but I'm very happy with it.
If you are unsure how much you'd use it, go with the 1.8. At the low price you aren't out much. In fact I'd recommend it as a first lens for anyone. If you think you'll be using this lens a lot, go with the 1.4. You can't go wrong with either.
As for the 50 macro, never tried it either. I have the 100mm macro and that's a stunner for close-up portraits as well as macro.

[chrisgarrett]

Everyone should have a nifty fifty! Somebody once called it disposable, with UK prices I wouldn't exactly agree but it is certainly one of my favourite lenses even though it is hundreds of pounds cheaper than my others. The thing to do is try them out in a store. It also protects you from getting a duff copy somewhat.

[robwilliams]

I bought the 1.8 and absolutly love it. I feel the 1.8 is good enough aperture for my use and what i love about the lens is its so cheap that if it was to break i wouldnt have a heartattack. one of my favorite lens

[trelaflip]

the price difference is huge

I just ordered the 50mm 1.8 from b & h for $69 us.

[inkista]

If you think that price difference is huge, then don't look at the EF 50mm f1.2L USM. :D

[judeastone]

Hi guys,

Decided to go with the 1.4!

I had a little play in the shop, and you're right - the 1.8 did feel very plasticy and cheap! Decided I'd probably always be wondering why I didn't get the better one and wonder what I was missing out on. See it as a bit of an investment too, and hopefully it'll last me a long time! Some birthday money helped me reach the decision too!!

Thanks for all your input guys, really, really, really appreciated it! I'll get the lens tomorrow, looking forward to having a play!

[Saralonde]

Congrats you'll love it. Don't orget to post a picture or two to show us what you and your new lens can do.:)