Monteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 30 Posted (5 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3141 times:
I am wondering if I can get some advice ont he EF 50mm range of lenses and which one would be best...
I've read the reviews and have decided the EF f/1.8 or the f/1.4 are the two to choose from. The f/1.2L is too costly and the reviews deem it rather soft for the price.
The f/1.4 is approximately 3 times the cost of the f/1.8 but the reviews comment that it is worth it. Whilst the f/1.8 is very sharp, the overall performance is deemed to justify the price.
My question is whether there is REALLY that much difference between the two lenses? Price isn't an issue but obviously if there isn't much difference between the two then I won't spend the extra money.
Does anyone have either of these lenses and can you give me an opinion on them?
Monteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 30 Reply 6, posted (5 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3104 times:
Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 3): There is a reason the 1.4 is 3x the price of the 1.8, its a combination of build quality and better glass. I know what i would choose.
Yeah agreed. Considering I intend on putting this lens into some pretty rough places it might be best to go with the 1.4.
Quoting PhilGil (Reply 4): The 1.4 is definitely built better, has full-time manual focus and seems to have fewer focus problems than the 1.8 (although you read complaints about the focus accuracy of both lenses).
Monteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 30 Reply 10, posted (5 years 10 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3019 times:
Quoting SNATH (Reply 7): This review of the 1.4 has a good discussion of the pros and cons between the three options (1.8, 1.4, and 1.2).
Thanks very much. That was quite helpful. Certainly better than any other online reviews I had seen.
Quoting Samuel32 (Reply 8): but if you really can use 50mm more often then get the 1.4.
Quoting Manc (Reply 9): I'd go for the 50 1.4 as I did have a play with both lens before I went for the 1.2L.
Ta. I don't have the $1500 for the f/1.2L but I guess i am happy to spend the extra for the f/1.4 if only to get the wider aperture and build quality.
The next question is whether anyone knows anywhere online where I can get it cheap (and if they ship to Australia or Canada)? I've looked on eBay and would like to avoid that (i.e. grey market/used issues plus if I get a soft copy I'd like to know Canon will actually fix it).
SNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3238 posts, RR: 24 Reply 15, posted (5 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2954 times:
BTW, I've also been shopping for a fast prime and was considering the 50mm f/1.4. However, I'm worried it'd be a bit too long on the XTi and I was actually considering the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM instead:
SNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3238 posts, RR: 24 Reply 17, posted (5 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2903 times:
Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 16): an't comment on the lens itself but significant focal length difference. Are you after something shorter or something capable at night?
Yes, basically I wanted something wider than 50mm on a 1.6 crop body (which is equivalent to, what, 80mm?) to make it a more general purpose lens (I thought that 80mm is kinda long). The 30mm of the Sigma seemed about right...
...but I read a bit more about the Sigma 30mm, as well as its Canon "competitor" the EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, and neither seems to be as sharp as the 50mm f/1.4 (especially on the edges). The Sigma has also been reported to have autofocus issues (not all copies, but quite a number apparently). The 50mm is getting great reviews for excellent overall performance and is cheaper than both the other two. So, I might just have to live with the longer focal length and step a bit further back.
Anyway, I hope you didn't mind me bringing this up on your thread...
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.