50mm 1.8 vs. 50mm 1.4?

[ntinlizi]

is it really worth it to get the 50mm 1.4? what are the pros and cons of each. and is there really a difference between the USA & Japan versions? or is it basically just the warrenty? where do you buy your lenses?
thoughts welcome & appreicated!

[inkista]

Nikon or Canon?

[candleman]

i'm assuning canon based on the avatar...
i'd rather buy the 50mm f/1.8 and then use the left over to put towards saving for some other lens or gadget you may want.
as far as i know (dont really know the canon lenses well) the 1.4 has smoother bokeh because it has the extra aperture blades..
BUT, things like concept, composition, lighting & better processing, will all far outweigh what the lens could possibly add.

Basic answer.. I couldn’t justify doubling the cost for such a tiny gain (1/3rd of a stop? )

[Nicole]

It's something I'll be considering when I find out whether or not my current 50mm is able to be fixed cheaply enough to justify it... which is why I've been reading about this very same sort of issue today.

Now, given that you're Canon and I'm looking at Nikon it may or may not apply. But from what I've learned today the Nikon 1.4 version becomes sharper by about f/2.5 than the 1.8 version. So what that means to me is sharper at wider apertures rather than the extra fraction of a stop.

Of course, I've also heard that especially with the Canon the build quality is much better on the 1.4 but I'll leave that to people with Canon experience.

So there's my 2 cents worth

Oh, and I'll pop this over to the Canon forum so that it's more obvious that you're looking for a Canon lens.

[inkista]

On the Canon side, yes, the f/1.4 version has a much better build quality than the f/1.8. Also a much better manual focus ring, a distance scale, and USM. Also, eight aperture blades instead of five. Image quality-wise, though, well, judge for yourself.

[LoveDSLR]

Originally Posted by ntinlizi

is it really worth it to get the 50mm 1.4? what are the pros and cons of each.

Why should one buy the f/1.4? Some value build and fast aperture. While others value its unique signature (smoothness, good skin tone color, bokeh etc.).

I loved my Nikon 50 f1/.8 once but haven't used it for over three decades. With Canon, I'll buy the 50 f/1.2 L or Sigma 50 f/1.4 for my 5D2.

For comparision: Canon EF 50mm – F1.4 vs F1.8 MK II - photo.net

"The effect I was searching for I couldn't get with the 1.8, but got it easily with the 1.4!!!' Source: FGPhotography (Nikon upgrade) http://digital-photography-school.co...ithin-eye.html

[ntinlizi]

Originally Posted by inkista

Nikon or Canon?

oh sorry, Canon

[ntinlizi]

Originally Posted by inkista

On the Canon side, yes, the f/1.4 version has a much better build quality than the f/1.8. Also a much better manual focus ring, a distance scale, and USM. Also, eight aperture blades instead of five. Image quality-wise, though, well, judge for yourself.

see thats where im confused, some say theres no comparison, 1.4 is way better! then some say there really isnt a difference, why pay more when you dont need to? so im torn. i felt like a veggie looking at your attachment more confused then before. i think im a visual person, does anyone have a photo take with the 1.4 and 1.8 to compare?

[ntinlizi]

another thing is i have the 1.8 and the quality is so sh*ty! it has a hard time focusing and while trying to focus, sounds like its gonna fall apart in my hands. and i cant seem to get a real sharp image, aways kinda soft. i want the bokeh and soft backgrounds but want the subject to be sharp.

[inkista]

Try stopping down a little. The 50/1.8 sharpens considerably past f/2.8 (as you would see if you just played with the lens comparison thingie I linked to).

With that comparison thingie--the cooler the colors are, the sharper the lens is at that area. It's basically an MTF chart over the entire aperture range. The f/1.4 and f/1.8 lenses are laid out side by side for you. You spin the wheels on the aperture to see how the lenses perform across the aperture range. The f/1.4 is on the left, the f/1.8 is on the right; both tested on a crop-body sensor (you can switch to a full-frame sensor if you want). The farther apart the red and blue lines are, the more chromatic aberration there is. If you look, the sharpness and chromatic aberration are pretty close across the range, with a slight advantage to the f/1.4. So, if you want a ton more sharpness, I wouldn't count on getting that by going to the 50 f/1.4.

Autofocus performance, however, is probably faster with the 50 f/1.4, because it's USM, and 1/3 of a stop brighter wide open. No idea if it's more accurate, though.