Canon 50mm 1.4 or 1.8

[autgrjd]

I have a 3 year old and another on the way. I recently got a T3i w/ the standard 18-55 kit lens and went w/ the 55-250mm added lens. I want to drop these 2 on ebay and get something better like the 28-135mm.

Thoughts on all of this?

[Rentham]

I have the 50mm 1.4 and find it to be fairly mediocre. Sometimes the AF will quit all together with an awful clunk. If I were to do it again, I'd get the 1.8 and supplement it with a good zoom that hit that focal range, or save for the f/1.2 if I were absolutely in love with the 50mm prime.

[ceremus]

I've shot a fair amount with the f/1.4 and have always been pleased with it. It's a touch soft wide open, probably a little more so than the f/1.8, but it's usually plenty sharp enough at f/2.0, even more at f/2.8.

You do have to be aware how very narrow your DoF can get with it, though. It's easy to misfocus when your DoF is only an inch or shorter. With an aperture that wide, focus shift is also a potential issue to be aware of.

[inkista]

In what ways are you looking to improve on the 18-55/55-250 twin lens kit?

The 28-135 IS USM is better, optically, but only by a hair, and you're giving up a lot of reach on both ends of the focal length scale. You won't be able to go wide angle. And the stabilization in both of the EF-S lenses is far better than the 1st-gen version in the 28-135 IS USM. It's only really a huge advantage if you plan on getting a full frame body soon. It's not faster. For that, an EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM or a Tamron 17-50/2.8 or the EF 24-70 f/2.8L USM would all be better choices.

Realize that the 28-135 IS USM was also a kit lens in its day. For film cameras.

You'd probably be better off going for an EF-S 18-135 IS, if you wanted more reach and were willing to compromise on image quality for it, or a EF-S 15-85 IS USM if you wanted better image quality and a useful zoom range on a crop body. Just my thought.

Why you're asking about swapping a 18-55/55-250 twin lens kit for a 28-135 IS USM but you've titled the thread 50/1.4 or 1.8 is another question I'd have....

[autgrjd]

Yeah, I noticed that afterward.

I guess it was a two question post. The first question was which would you go w/ 1.4 or 1.8. The second is which lens would you pick up as your replacement for kit lenses after dropping the two on Ebay...

[ccting]

Originally Posted by inkista

In what ways are you looking to improve on the 18-55/55-250 twin lens kit?

The 28-135 IS USM is better, optically, but only by a hair, and you're giving up a lot of reach on both ends of the focal length scale. You won't be able to go wide angle. And the stabilization in both of the EF-S lenses is far better than the 1st-gen version in the 28-135 IS USM. It's only really a huge advantage if you plan on getting a full frame body soon. It's not faster. For that, an EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM or a Tamron 17-50/2.8 or the EF 24-70 f/2.8L USM would all be better choices.

Realize that the 28-135 IS USM was also a kit lens in its day. For film cameras.

You'd probably be better off going for an EF-S 18-135 IS, if you wanted more reach and were willing to compromise on image quality for it, or a EF-S 15-85 IS USM if you wanted better image quality and a useful zoom range on a crop body. Just my thought.

Why you're asking about swapping a 18-55/55-250 twin lens kit for a 28-135 IS USM but you've titled the thread 50/1.4 or 1.8 is another question I'd have....

That's why i discourage first time dlsr buyer to buy kit lens.

my statements:
a) more than 60% DSLR buyers will go into the line of photography or become their life-time hobby; Otherwise they will buy compact camera

For this simple reason
a) first time DsLr buyers should buy lenses that can serve them long enough. Therefore, they should not buy kit lenses

For me,
If i am go back to the past, i will never take the kit lens, and will get 35mm f/1.8 or 50mm f/1.8.
For now, i never think of changing my vr kit lens, just utilize it until it mulfunctions...then i will buy a professional lens.
How long have you been using those kit lenses?

I think DPS should provide search for the topics to avoid redundant / similar topics.. been asked so many times by different users.

[ccting]

Originally Posted by Rentham

I have the 50mm 1.4 and find it to be fairly mediocre. Sometimes the AF will quit all together with an awful clunk. If I were to do it again, I'd get the 1.8 and supplement it with a good zoom that hit that focal range, or save for the f/1.2 if I were absolutely in love with the 50mm prime.

agree..Nikon 50 f/1.4 afs has slowest autofocus..and other lenses are much sharper than this professional lense. see the MTF curve i post in other forum, and pictures in another forum..

[inkista]

Originally Posted by autgrjd

I guess it was a two question post. The first question was which would you go w/ 1.4 or 1.8. The second is which lens would you pick up as your replacement for kit lenses after dropping the two on Ebay...

50/1.4 vs. 50/1.8 II is basically a question of what you're willing to spend extra money on.

The 50/1.4 has USM, is 2/3 of a stop faster, has better build quality, better manual focus features (better MF ring, and a distance scale), but the image quality is pretty much on a par between the two lenses, and the price difference is larger than the price of the 50/1.8 II. Which one you want is up to you.

You could also go for the pricepoint midway between the two, and look for a used older 50/1.8 Mark I, which is optically identical to the Mark II, but has build quality, MF ring, metal mount, and distance scale, like the 50/1.4. Doesn't have USM, though.

As for the replacement, unlike ccting, I tend to tell newbies to get the kit lenses, because there's a chicken-and-the-egg problem going on, here. Until you actually shoot with dSLR lenses, you don't know what dSLR lenses you want. The 18-55 kit lens is offered at a discount when kitted with the body. It's about $100 cheaper in a kit than purchased alone. So, the entire price of the lens is about $70. That's nothing when it comes to spending on lenses. And while it's not the best lens in the world, it can take great pictures, it can teach you about small apertures, image stabilization, and focal lengths. It covers all your vacation snapshot needs of the person-in-front-of-landmark variety, and there is no cheaper way to go wide angle on a crop body.

Against $1000+ L lenses that were designed for film, the kit lens is far less expensive as a mistaken choice. Nearly everyone will eventually replace the kit lens, but the world of walkaround zooms is probably THE most populous category of lenses, and the choice is bewildering. And you'll be pelted with a lot of different recommendations for what lens you should get--and in reality, the only person who knows what lens to replace the kit lens with is you: what and how you shoot, how you frame, what working distances you like, what lighting conditions (or lighting) you shoot under or with, and above all, budget---these all affect what the ideal lens for you is going to be. The goal here is not to find the best lens. It's to find the best fit for you and what you shoot.

In the meantime, the kit lens gives you something to shoot with out of the box, and can teach you about just about everything you probably won't want in a walkaround lens, as well as a few things you will. To me, the 18-55, 55-250, and 50/1.8 II is the perfect "training wheels" triple. For less than the cost of a single good mid-range lens, you've equipped yourself all the way from wide angle to telephoto, and with the ability to distinguish the pros and cons of zooms vs. primes, wide angle vs. telephoto, stabilized vs. unstabilized, and fast vs. slow.

Just me, but I wouldn't dump the twin kit. I'd keep it, use it, and when it actually began to frustrate me, then I'd find myself with a better idea of what I'd actually want: an ultrawide to go wider, a faster lens to shoot in darker conditions, something sharper, something longer, something with USM, a prime or whatever.

When you have to ask what lens to get, chances are good you're not yet ready to buy a lens. If you'd already known what lens to get, you'd have purchased the camera body and just bought the right lens.

One more thing. The kit lens is limited. It's soft, (compared to lenses that cost five times as much). But it's not crap. You can still take good pictures with it. Post processing, stopping down to f/8, these things can make it look a helluva lot more expensive. Knowing how to use your gear is the first step before upgrading gear. Technique issues will follow you from camera to camera and from lens to lens. Before upgrading, make sure it's the gear, and not you that's getting in the way.


Canon 50D. EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 kit lens (non-IS, softer earlier version of lens).
@18mm, f/8, 1/60s. handheld.

[gturner]

On the 50mm 1.8 vs 1.4 question...

I have had both, but only appreciate them once I moved to full frame.
The 1.8 drove me dilly with its slow and noisy focusing. It really hunts in medium low light and the manual ring is so small it is very hard to use. I ended up donating it to a family member.

I then went a year or so until I bought the 1.4. The IQ is not massively different, it is not a touch on the 24-70 2.8 I have at 50mm, BUT it is far more user friendly than the 1.8, it is small and easy to use as a walk about on the street with out attracting attention. (24-70 with a hood is not subtle)

For portraits on a crop frame, either model is good. For a walkaround/ general use lens, look at a 35mm.

[veritasimagery]

Originally Posted by ccting

That's why i discourage first time dlsr buyer to buy kit lens.

my statements:
a) more than 60% DSLR buyers will go into the line of photography or become their life-time hobby; Otherwise they will buy compact camera

For this simple reason
a) first time DsLr buyers should buy lenses that can serve them long enough. Therefore, they should not buy kit lenses

Where do you get those statistics?

And a first time buyer is better served with a kit lens. As a beginner they will not know what focal lengths will serve them best. And it is a much lest costly mistake to use the kit lens then to buy an expensive "pro" lens that they may never really use.

So, for me, +1 on inkista'a post.