Canon 50mm 1.4 or 1.8?

[ewp19]

Hello all!

I am an amateur photographer and also a student. My budget for camera equipment is very low, but I can save up for something that's really worth it, and with the holidays coming up I might have some extra spending money. My gear currently consists of a Canon Rebel T3i, the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-250mm lens.

So to the point: Should I buy the Canon 50mm f/1.8 or the 50mm f/1.4? The money really isn't a problem. I can buy the 1.8 at the moment, but could also easily save up for the 1.4. Is there a big advantage of the 1.4 over the 1.8?

I know that it is better constructed and I have heard that the autofocus is faster and more accurate. I'd like to buy equipment that will last me a long time, but I'm not necessarily rough with my camera and equipment I currently own.

Is the 50mm 1.4 truly worth the extra money?

Thanks in advance,

Emily

[Tito87]

Welcome to DPS. I don't mean to be rude, but I'd suggest that you use the search function. This question has been asked way too many times.

[ewp19]

Sorry about that, I am new here.

I did conduct a search, but was not able to find a direct answer to my question. Any input would be helpful and appreciated. (Or even a link to a post where this question has been asked before and answered.)

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by ewp19

Sorry about that, I am new here.

I did conduct a search, but was not able to find a direct answer to my question.

Going back just a page in this forum:
Canon 50mm 1.4 or 1.8

[Preeb]

Although I have neither, I've read a lot of posts and comments about both, and most users seem to agree that the 50mm f1.8 is one of the best buys going. Unless you desperately need that extra f-stop, I'd save the money and get the 1.8.

[Lisa_Mc]

I have the 1.8. I got it because I wanted an affordable lens that had a large aperture for my poorly lit house.

It does the job but it does hunt for focus at times. It's kinda plasticy, if that sort of thing bothers you, and is also a bit noisy.

Bokeh is nice on it though.

I used manual focus last night to get some Christmas tree bokeh and found that the focus ring is very thin and not as comfortable to use as other, larger focus rings.

The 1.4 is about $325. If it's a lens you think you will use a lot, I'd spring for the 1.4.

[inkista]

Whether or not additional cost is "worth it" is relative. It depends on a lot of things, which differ from shooter to shooter, not the least of which is how big the budget is. To me, $200 price difference between lenses is relatively minor. To you, $200 could be a very substantial sum to part with. And that would make the final call on "worth it" different.

To me, if you place importance on the following factors, then the price difference could be worth it:

• Silent, fast autofocusing (USM)
• An extra 2/3 of a stop on the maximum aperture (f/1.4 vs. f/1.8)
• Additional features for manual focus use (good manual focus ring, distance scale)
• Build quality (metal mount vs. plastic mount)
• Better corner-to-corner sharpness on a full-frame camera

If none of those factors mean anything to you, then it probably isn't.

If most of those factors mean something to you, but you'd prefer a feature/cost compromise, you could look on the used market for the EF 50mm f/1.8 Mark I. It has the manual focus features and a metal mount, but not the USM or (obviously) the f/1.4. It is optically identical to the Mark II. It goes for around $200, last I saw, and is relatively hard to find.

There is also the fact that some crop-body shooters find 50mm to be too tight, particularly when used indoors and prefer a slightly wider lens. So, to me, the 50/1.8 II is a good training wheels lens because it's so cheap that if it's not a good fit, you haven't wasted a lot, and you still have a small light, trashable toy for poor man's macro games and travel. But the 50/1.4 USM is probably better purchased if you know 50mm is the focal length you definitely want.

[ErikUngerPhotography]

Originally Posted by inkista

To me, if you place importance on the following factors, then the price difference could be worth it:

• Silent, fast autofocusing (USM)
• An extra 2/3 of a stop on the maximum aperture (f/1.4 vs. f/1.8)
• Additional features for manual focus use (good manual focus ring, distance scale)
• Build quality (metal mount vs. plastic mount)
• Better corner-to-corner sharpness on a full-frame camera

If none of those factors mean anything to you, then it probably isn't.

As always, inkista always beats me to the punch. In the long run, you will be better off spending the extra cabbage for the 1.4. For me, the build quality and focus ring were enough to sell me on the 1.4.