Help and advice for beginnersIf you don't classify yourself as being particularly expert or experienced and you have a question or problem that you need help with in the area of improving images, this is the board to get the assistance you seek.
OK, as it was my birthday yesterday, I have managed to bag myself a few quid from generous relatives.
For a while (since Ian mentioned it) I have been toying with the idea of purchasing a 50mm lens.
Specifically the one i am looking at is the 50mm f1.8, at around 70-80 pounds.
However, I have also seen an F1.4 lens but this is well over 200pounds.
So my question is this, what is the difference, and will the f1.8 be good enough to compliment my extension tubes, and for portrait photography, or should i spend the extra?
IIRC Bearface uses the cheaper f/1.8 lens and rates it highly despite the plastic mount. I almost bought it myself (hence the discussion with Bearface) but as I already have the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 (Macro) I couldn't see the point in the end.
__________________ Stuart R
Life is an incurable disease with a 100% mortality rate
Sorry Ben, I just gotta ask the question
Why do you want a 50mm and how would you use it?
I know how I'd answer that: nice bright short tele (80mm equiv approx on the 350D), perfect for portraits and low light conditions, plus extra slim DOF for when required.
The Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 is quite cheaply made and isn't USM AF (the AF is a bit noisy and not as snappy as USM lenses), but I understand it's optically good and they are inexpensive to buy.
I know how I'd answer that: nice bright short tele (80mm equiv approx on the 350D), perfect for portraits and low light conditions, plus extra slim DOF for when required.
The Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 is quite cheaply made and isn't USM AF (the AF is a bit noisy and not as snappy as USM lenses), but I understand it's optically good and they are inexpensive to buy.
Sorry Ben, I just gotta ask the question
Why do you want a 50mm and how would you use it?
Exactly for the reasons Ian said.
The f1.8 with its wide apperture will be good for taking pictures of the new addition indoors, plus I believe Ian said in the past about it being able to work very well with the extension tubes I have.
What I am really interested in, is what are the main difference between this and the f1.8, and is it really worth the extra.
After hearing that Tim uses one and has recomended it to Stuart, I am encouraged!
Also, I hopefully have some paid work next month taking shots of some doggies, so it may produce some interesting result in facial portraits of them, iwth its narrow depth of field. It would also mean I need to worry a little less about the background as that should be thrown well out of focus.
The f1.8 with its wide apperture will be good for taking pictures of the new addition indoors, plus I believe Ian said in the past about it being able to work very well with the extension tubes I have.
What I am really interested in, is what are the main difference between this and the f1.8, and is it really worth the extra.
After hearing that Tim uses one and has recomended it to Stuart, I am encouraged!
Also, I hopefully have some paid work next month taking shots of some doggies, so it may produce some interesting result in facial portraits of them, iwth its narrow depth of field. It would also mean I need to worry a little less about the background as that should be thrown well out of focus.
Fair enough, so you appreciate what you are getting into. If I was to add anything, I'd say that Tim bought the 1.8 version cos it was cheap and he needed a lens such as this for use in the studio at the time. Make no mistake, had he had the cash at the time I'm sure he would have gone for the f1.4 version.
This is what I'd do if I wanted a 50mm lens, which I don't The 1.4 version has a much better build quality and has USM, all of which is not to be sniffed at but then I may have different criteria to a lot of people. the extra stop could be useful and the bokeh with these lenses is sublime. I'm not sure but I'd suspect it has more blades in the iris, it has more lens elements too. So you can see what you are paying for. There are some more details HERE
Fair enough, so you appreciate what you are getting into. If I was to add anything, I'd say that Tim bought the 1.8 version cos it was cheap and he needed a lens such as this for use in the studio at the time. Make no mistake, had he had the cash at the time I'm sure he would have gone for the f1.4 version.
This is what I'd do if I wanted a 50mm lens, which I don't The 1.4 version has a much better build quality and has USM, all of which is not to be sniffed at but then I may have different criteria to a lot of people. the extra stop could be useful and the bokeh with these lenses is sublime. I'm not sure but I'd suspect it has more blades in the iris, it has more lens elements too. So you can see what you are paying for. There are some more details HERE
Two thirds of a stop to be accurate, Stephen
The 1.4 does have 8 iris blades compared to just 5 for the 1.8. So point highlights in the bokeh will look more geometric in shape than with the 1.4.
Fair enough, so you appreciate what you are getting into. If I was to add anything, I'd say that Tim bought the 1.8 version cos it was cheap and he needed a lens such as this for use in the studio at the time. Make no mistake, had he had the cash at the time I'm sure he would have gone for the f1.4 version.
This is what I'd do if I wanted a 50mm lens, which I don't The 1.4 version has a much better build quality and has USM, all of which is not to be sniffed at but then I may have different criteria to a lot of people. the extra stop could be useful and the bokeh with these lenses is sublime. I'm not sure but I'd suspect it has more blades in the iris, it has more lens elements too. So you can see what you are paying for. There are some more details HERE
It's worth noting that at full aperture, both the 1.4 and 1.8 have perfectly round apertures
The comment about full time manual focus is interesting for the 1.4 - from my experience of other L-series lenses, manual focus on an L-series is much more pleasant as the gearing and feel are much better. The 1.4 is not an L-series lens, but it would appear to have a focus mechanism closer to that of an L-series.
By the way, I have used the now discontinued EF f/1.0 50mm L-series - briefly! This was at the Canon HQ showroom in Tokyo when I was there in 2001. There is a picture of me taken by Phil Askey (dpreview webmaster) using this lens here:
Well that would definitely convince me if I had the cash to spend. If you were doing lots of closeups of faces etc in controlled conditions so that there would be no specular highlights in the bokeh then perhaps the 1.8 would be fine. Other wise its no contest.
Linear Mode
