Camera Labs

Hi ,

I'm really pondering about which lens I should buy. The 50mm f/1.4 or the much much cheaper f/1.8 II.

I know the 1.8 has far worse build quality than the 1.4.The 1.4 is faster , has better bokeh and has USM. I've also read that the 1.4 controls flare better than the 1.8. But does that justify the cost that is 3 times as high as the 1.8 ?
I really don't know. Gordon , please help me out. Which lens would you choose ?

Bart

Hi Bart, that's a great question, but one for which I don't currently have a definitive answer as I've not tested the f1.4 version. The f1.8 is certainly very good for the money and you can see resolution results with it in our 10 megapixel group test here:

www.cameralabs.com/features/10Megapixel ... ge4b.shtml

As for the build and other aspects, you've really answered that for yourself. The f1.8 is a budget starter lens, whereas the f1.4 is a higher-end 'upgrade' model with superior build quality, faster and quieter USM focusing, a proper manual focusing ring and of course that faster aperture. If you're really serious and can afford it, I'd go for the f1.4 myself. But the f1.8 is great value for anyone who wants to complement a standard zoom with something better suited to low-light photography.

Or you could remortgage and get the 50mm f1.2 L!

Here are some links to USA prices anyway for comparison...

Canon 50mm f1.8

Canon 50mm f1.4 USM

Canon 50mm f1.2 USM L

Does anyone have any of these lenses and care to comment?

I'm also considering doing some reviews in the future of fixed focal length lenses. Which Canon models would everyone be interested in seeing?

Gordon

Thanks for the reply Gordon.

I'd like to see the canon ef 100mm f/2.8 USM macro tested in the future.


P.S. In which country do you live ?

Hi Bart, I'm British but relocated from London to New Zealand last year.

Whare are you?

Gordon

Ah , I already thought you were British.

I live in Belgium. Lived there since I was born.

Hi Bart, off-topic I know, but I do miss our occassional Eurostar trips to Brussels or Bruges to enjoy your fabulous food and beer!

That said, there are a couple of places to get Belgian beer down here in New Zealand, and the giant green-lipped mussels are wonderful!

Gordon

I use nikon for a number of reasons. But.... the Canon 50mm 1.4 lens would almost get me to sell my Nikon gear and purchase a canon setup.
At 1.4 it's totally useless, but starting from 2.0 it gains andgains and gains. It might also depend on what scenes you prefer to shoot, me... I do Art, I shoot art and architecture, often in dimlit museums and cathedrals. Taking the crop factore of 1.6 into account it emerges into a 80mm lens beyond comparison, great for details, the actual rendition is almost film-like, the current Nikon 1.4 50mm which I have is a good lens but no comparison to the canon 1.4.... it is truely a magnificent lens for it's price.

How do I know all this when I shoot Nikon, ... my collegue has a D30 with this lens it is magnificent, focusses fast and precise, absolutely no need to manually focus and like I said starting at 2.0 the images are very very good. Stop down to 5.6 or 8 and i don't believe you will find another lens like it.

Canon also has a very good 85 1.4mm, and lets be frank, the only advantage digital has over analog is low-light photography, so one should stop messing around with 4.5-5.6 zoomlenes which are useless because of speed and image quality, the advantages can be got out of fast prime lenses. Just imagine shooting at 2.0 at 800asa and achieving absolute noise free images .....

And as for belgian beer ... my favorite is westmalle triple followed by Kasteel beer, both pretty strong but with an excellent taste.... Westvleteren is also very good but hard to get.