Does 50mm f1.8==50mm f1.4 (stepped up to 1.8)?


Status
Not open for further replies.

maisatomai

Deregistered
Oct 26, 2006
357
0
0
#1
Does it work that way? A canon 50mm f1.4 lens set to use f1.8 in the DSLR will have the same performance as a 50mm f1.8 lens? Are we paying extra just to have the f1.4?
 

Jan 2, 2009
253
0
16
32
#2
Does it work that way? A canon 50mm f1.4 lens set to use f1.8 in the DSLR will have the same performance as a 50mm f1.8 lens? Are we paying extra just to have the f1.4?
i think u can find the comparison around in this forum

something like 50mm 1.4 vs 1.8...
 

Fotophilic

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2006
2,388
0
36
big tree town
#3
Lens configuration differences among the lenses may also lead to different results.

some lenses performs best when stopped down 2 stops. So a smaller aperture lens will become even smaller, if best performance is desired.

the lens coat could be different.

the AF speed could also be different.

the brightness seen in the viewfinder could also be different.
 

Dec 10, 2008
1,732
0
0
26
Pasir Ris
#4
But a f1.8 lens can't go to f1.4 now can it? Some may find the extra 2/3 stops crucial when shooting in low light, or for bokeh.
 

maisatomai

Deregistered
Oct 26, 2006
357
0
0
#5
Can we say that for f1.8 lens, the best performance is at f3.6
 

Fotophilic

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2006
2,388
0
36
big tree town
#6
No. It varies with different lens model. You may wanna visit review sites to check out the lens u are interested in. If not, by experience with the lens and some pixel peeping, u shld also be able to tell; if this issue is really impt to you. :)
 

surrephoto

Senior Member
Jan 14, 2009
3,422
3
38
27
Chinatown
www.surrephoto.com
#8
Does it work that way? A canon 50mm f1.4 lens set to use f1.8 in the DSLR will have the same performance as a 50mm f1.8 lens? Are we paying extra just to have the f1.4?
From my experience with both lenses, a good copy of 50 mm 1.4 is considerably sharper than 50 mm 1.8 both wide open.

The 50 mm 1.8 has significant halation (glowing highlights) at f1.8.
 

An drew

Senior Member
May 27, 2005
3,920
9
38
#9
Yes, you are paying extra just to have the f1.4.
The performance of 2 different lenses is seldom the same. Usually, but not always, the bigger aperture lens would be much more expensive and better made. So even when they are stopped down, they frequently have better performance. But not always, some of the sharpest lenses are 50 f2.0, and a 50 f1.2 is usually not as sharp.
 

Dec 10, 2008
1,732
0
0
26
Pasir Ris
#10
However, if you're going from 50mm 1.8 to 50mm 1.4, you're going to appreciate the improved colors of the latter:thumbsup:
 

Snoweagle

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2005
14,002
0
0
Pasir Ris, Singapore
#11
Yes, you are paying extra just to have the f1.4.
The performance of 2 different lenses is seldom the same. Usually, but not always, the bigger aperture lens would be much more expensive and better made. So even when they are stopped down, they frequently have better performance. But not always, some of the sharpest lenses are 50 f2.0, and a 50 f1.2 is usually not as sharp.
U're sure? U want to try my f/1.2 wide open?
 

grainpixel

New Member
Oct 10, 2006
532
0
0
www.pbase.com
#12
not only the aperture...f1.8 or f1.4.
You have to consider the built of the lens, the glasses used, the coatings on the glasses, the speed of the AF.

CANON will not be so stupid to just make a f/1.8 and f/1.4 exactly the same, with just the aperture differences.
 

surrephoto

Senior Member
Jan 14, 2009
3,422
3
38
27
Chinatown
www.surrephoto.com
#13
Yes, you are paying extra just to have the f1.4.
The performance of 2 different lenses is seldom the same. Usually, but not always, the bigger aperture lens would be much more expensive and better made. So even when they are stopped down, they frequently have better performance. But not always, some of the sharpest lenses are 50 f2.0, and a 50 f1.2 is usually not as sharp.
Bro, the performance different in terms of sharpness of 50 1.8 -> 50 1.4 -> 50 1.2 are certainly big... As i have said, 50 1.4 is far sharper than 50 1.8 at their largest aperture.

It may be a bad copy that you may have tried with i think is common with 50 mm 1.4.

U're sure? U want to try my f/1.2 wide open?
Snoweagle you are absolutely right...
 

limwhow

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2009
7,048
0
0
Life revolves arOnd East Coast
#15
No. Sweet spot is between f/5.6 to f/8.
It has also been said that the sweet spot for the 50 f/1.4 is at f/2.0 to f/2.2. Personally I tried and I do find that this is true in my copy of 50 f/1.4. I wonder if this experience is shared among all the other users of 50 f/1.4?
 

limwhow

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2009
7,048
0
0
Life revolves arOnd East Coast
#16
From my experience with both lenses, a good copy of 50 mm 1.4 is considerably sharper than 50 mm 1.8 both wide open.

The 50 mm 1.8 has significant halation (glowing highlights) at f1.8.
So if we were to use a 50mm f/1.2 and a 50mm f/1.4 both at f/1.4, would it be generally correct to say that the 50mm f/1.2 will be sharper in this case?
 

2ichigo2

New Member
Jul 18, 2007
444
0
0
In the East
#17
Does 50mm f1.8==50mm f1.4 (stepped up to 1.8)?
Just talk about alone the no. aperture blades in 1.8 version and 1.4 version is way different.
 

Headshotzx

Senior Member
Dec 14, 2007
5,841
0
36
25
Punggol
#18
So if we were to use a 50mm f/1.2 and a 50mm f/1.4 both at f/1.4, would it be generally correct to say that the 50mm f/1.2 will be sharper in this case?
From the countless technical reviews done and put up online for us to see... yes. Check TheDigitalPicture or Photozone.de for such resolution tests.


My 50 1.4 seems to be legendary. Wide open @ ƒ/1.4 and it's still sharper than many copies of 50 1.8II wide open. I use it wide open all the way down to ƒ/11 for studio stuff and it doesn't disappoint. I appreciate the better built and micro-USM, although the focus ring is still a bit 'scratchy' i.e. not true rear-focusing USM (or something of that sort). Above that, I get better background blur due to the number of blades, a better pattern of flare that I can incorporate into my shots without most of the image being washed out, and veeeery slightly better color reproduction.
 

Last edited:

liarliar

Deregistered
May 13, 2007
629
0
0
#19
If those still not sharp buy f1 or f0.8 loh ;)
 

surrephoto

Senior Member
Jan 14, 2009
3,422
3
38
27
Chinatown
www.surrephoto.com
#20
From the countless technical reviews done and put up online for us to see... yes. Check TheDigitalPicture or Photozone.de for such resolution tests.


My 50 1.4 seems to be legendary. Wide open @ ƒ/1.4 and it's still sharper than many copies of 50 1.8II wide open. I use it wide open all the way down to ƒ/11 for studio stuff and it doesn't disappoint. I appreciate the better built and micro-USM, although the focus ring is still a bit 'scratchy' i.e. not true rear-focusing USM (or something of that sort). Above that, I get better background blur due to the number of blades, a better pattern of flare that I can incorporate into my shots without most of the image being washed out, and veeeery slightly better color reproduction.
Sad but true, as the brother/sister lenses of 50 mm 1.4 USM (namingly the 28 mm 1.8 and 85 mm 1.8) feature real Ring-type USM instead of the lousier micro-usm.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom