Picture soft at f1.8 for 50mm prime

[Whowillbe]

Hi people

I know that lenses produce softer images when wide open. But I find that the image I got at f1.8 is too soft to be acceptable... is this normal???

Anyway I want to post the images for you guys to see. How do I do that???

[nickmak]

Originally Posted by Whowillbe Hi people I know that lenses produce softer images when wide open. But I find that the image I got at f1.8 is too soft to be acceptable... is this normal??? Anyway I want to post the images for you guys to see. How do I do that???

Firstly, the 50mm f1.8 is a cheap alternative to its more expensive f1.4 brother (I own the f1.8) and the f1.4 is also soft at f1.4. It is normal for that lens to be soft wide open and its DOF is so shallow at that level very little of the picture will be in focus.

To post images, put in a [IMG]___________________.jpg[\IMG] (Fill in the blank with your link.)

[n0d3]

Its normal for this lens to be soft when wide open as Nick has mentioned. Its tack sharp at around f4 and above.

[ricohflex]

the leica summicron f2 50mm is not soft at f2.

[fw007]

well if u want to be strict about it, no lens is soft. they're all made of hard metal.

[erwinx]

the quality of 50 f/1.8 varies from sample to sample since its a cheap lens and the QC isn't really that strict, if you get a good sample, it will be pretty ok at f/2 and very sharp at f/2.8.

i was lucky to get a good sample of a 50 f/1.8...

[Stoned]

I'm quite sure Nickmak got a bad copy of the 50/1.4 too. I definitely got better than average sharpness from the 50/1.4 i used even when wide open. It does get sharper at f2 but not by much.

[nickmak]

Originally Posted by Stoned I'm quite sure Nickmak got a bad copy of the 50/1.4 too. I definitely got better than average sharpness from the 50/1.4 i used even when wide open. It does get sharper at f2 but not by much.

I don't own the f1.4 version. I have the f1.8. lol... For my f1.8 it is soft around f1.8 but it is still acceptable.

[Belle&Sebastain]

Originally Posted by nickmak I don't own the f1.4 version. I have the f1.8. lol... For my f1.8 it is soft around f1.8 but it is still acceptable.

both my copies, 1.8 or 1.4 is not soft at their widest, lucky i guess

[jsbn]

Originally Posted by Whowillbe Hi people I know that lenses produce softer images when wide open. But I find that the image I got at f1.8 is too soft to be acceptable... is this normal??? Anyway I want to post the images for you guys to see. How do I do that???

Erm... f/1.8 50mm tack sharp images?

I dun expect really sharp images with a wide open lens... Except for Ls?

[Stoned]

Let me list 5 non-Ls with wide open sharpness

50/1.4
85/1.8
135/2.8
50/2.5
35/2

Kickass lenses, but non-L

[moos blues]

you want a sharp 50mm? 50mm 2.5 macro. THATS sharp, used open or not, =) it's twice the price of 1.8 in the 2nd hand market, and 2 times less than a 1.4.... but it's

[varf]

Originally Posted by moos blues you want a sharp 50mm? 50mm 2.5 macro. THATS sharp, used open or not, =) it's twice the price of 1.8 in the 2nd hand market, and 2 times less than a 1.4.... but it's

i can second that.

this test photo was taken at f/2.5, iso200 with the 50mm f/2.5 macro:


this is a 100% crop from the original:

[erwinx]

Originally Posted by varf i can second that. this test photo was taken at f/2.5, iso200 with the 50mm f/2.5 macro: this is a 100% crop from the original:

looks about the same as my 50 mm f/1.8 at f/2.8.

[nightwolf75]

ermm... folks. without any pics from Whowillbe, isn't it a moot point to talk abt which lens is sharper/sharpest?

as nickmak (btw, where the heck are u, nick??), at f1.8 the DOF of the 50mm/f1.8 is very very shallow. however, pls dun mistaken it for softness (2 different matters). this question has been discussed b4 in the past, without a conclusion IIRC.

btw, moos blues & varf - a macro lens is designed to be sharp. the optics inside ur 50mm macro are very very different from 50mm/1.8 or 50/1.4, IIRC from the lens book. so, not a really fair comparison. a few of us had a very interesting discussion on sat during petf69's shoot abt the merits and pitfalls of shooting people with a macro lens.

[Reflection]

Yeah...i think there's some serious confusion here regarding soft/DOF.

[megaweb]

@f1.8 , DOF is shallow.

Try to test some shots in auto and manual focus

[varf]

Originally Posted by nightwolf75 btw, moos blues & varf - a macro lens is designed to be sharp. the optics inside ur 50mm macro are very very different from 50mm/1.8 or 50/1.4, IIRC from the lens book. so, not a really fair comparison. a few of us had a very interesting discussion on sat during petf69's shoot abt the merits and pitfalls of shooting people with a macro lens.

personally i'd include the f/2.5 macro in the comparison list simply because of its fairly reasonable pricing compared with the f/1.4, and decent sharpness wide open. i'm guessing that pitfalls for people photography would probably include sharp != flattering and slow AF 'hunting' (presuming you AF) due to the range of focal distance?

i apologize if the posted image seems to emphasize DOF at f/2.5 instead of its sharpness, as unfortunately i don't have a sample f/2.5 image handy that shows how sharp it is without the exaggerated shallow depth-of-field effect.

[Zplus]

50mm f1.8 should be pretty sharp wide open... but DOF is very very narrow at f1.8. Check if you have any front and back focus....

[Whowillbe]

Guys, thanks for all the advice...

Here are the pictures... notice the speaker cover... I took the picture at the minimum focusing distance.

f1.8
[IMG]http://gallery.punggol.org/album48/IMG_0372.jpg[\IMG]


f2.8

[IMG]http://gallery.punggol.org/album48/IMG_0373.jpg[\IMG]