I've had the 1.8 and the 1.4. No doubt they are both a great lens however I have stuck with the 1.4. 3 reasons: 1. The build quality is so much better, it feels like you are putting a nice lens on your camera rather than a toy lens. 2. Quiet and quick focusing thanks to the usm motor. 3. Low light performance for AF and image quality is better albeit marginally. Treat yourself, treat your camera.
I am shooting events with 50mm f1.8. Sometimes people are joking about smallest lens on a biggest DSLR (1D mkII), but they don't complain about final pics. Great lens for 60€.
Interesting video. I had the 1.8 for almost two years now. I thought about upgrading to 1.4 but cancelled that plan after seeing this video. But eventually I bought the 1.4 usm. In terms of image quality there's not much of a difference. The 1.4 has a dreamy look wide open. The 1.8 looks more natural wide open. 1.4@2.0 is still a bit dreamy in the corners, but the centre sharpness is better than the 1.8@2.0. At 2.8 or narrower both are pretty sharp but again the 1.4 is very slightly sharper. Overall IQ-wise the 1.8 is a great choice and the IQ alone doesn't justify the upgrade. Nevertheless I keep the 1.4 and sold the 1.8 - here's why: - The AF of the 1.4 isn't faster as the AF of the 1.8 in bright daylight, but in low light situations and even on e very cloudy day my 1.8 did a lot of focus hunting - and often after some back and forth it was not spot on. In those situations the 1.4 is much more reliable. I had some otherwise great portrait shots where the 1.8 AF was slightly off - that's annoying. That was the main reason for the upgrade. - On an APS sensor I don't really want to go beyond ISO1600. ISO3200 is tolerable at times but not desirable. So 2/3 stops more light can make a difference even if you sacrifice IQ. It's okay because centre sharpness is still good almost wide open. To me the centre sharpness of the 1.4@1.6 is about the same as the 1.8@2.0 - Sometimes I shot short video clips to use as transitions that make photo presentations more interesting. Pulling focus with the 1.8 is not just a PITA. It's close to impossible (especially when you want to use follow focus). It's much better with 1.4 - although it's anything but the smoothest USM MF Ring I used so far. Bottom line: if you are satisfied with the 1.8's AF and you don't need 2/3 stops more light, keep the 1.8. If $1000 don't scare you off get the new 2014 Sigma 50/1.4A - it's incredible - it eats all canon 50mm for breakfast - at once. Even wide open it offers an IQ that up until now was only available for photographers who paid $4K for the Zeiss Otus.
I have both, and the 1.4 is a lot sharper wide open with a lot less colour fringing and better microcontrast. It was worth the extra money, in my opinion.
The canon 50mm 1.8 is by far the most popular lens of all times from all manufacturers. It has the best value for money. Great sharpness and bokeh for just 100 dollars.💵 The next lens that every canon dSLR user should buy after the default kit lens. A real investment. Nikon doesn't have an equivalent lens at this price. One of the reasons canon is leader in dSLRs.
The 50mm 1.8 is not supposed to have its focus wheel turned when set to AF. you can really damage the motor, I've learned that the hard way, just FYI. Great videos Matt, and thanks for all your effort.
I bought the 1.4 for one reason. Flickr has groups for everything and is an amazing resource. The group for the 'nifty fifty' had quite a few images of broken or damaged lenses, many owners were claiming that it was their second or third lens. In the group for the 1.4 there were (at the time) no images of broken lenses. I'm not in the habit of breaking lenses, but thought the more sturdy build was the way to go.
Gonna be using my DSLR mostly in video for filmmaking. Is the 50mm 1.8 too noisy for quiet scenes? Is it worth spending four times the amount for the 1.4? The 1.8 seems to perform really well for the price (also just a beginner) it's just the sound of the lens focusing putting me off to be honest...thoughts?
your 1.8 focuses SO MUCH faster than mine! could it be my camera? (450d) maybe some dust got into the focus mechanism? what focusing point did you have selected for the focus test?
The reference prime lens for Canon is the 135 mm f/2 L :-) Very sharp, nice colors & bokeh, well-built, focusses very quickly, focusses very close, etc. etc. The 35 mm f/1.4 L is also very good and problem free as well. In the 50 mm length, the 50 mm f/1.4 is the best buy IMO (performance / handling is good, it is compact and light), but the AF mechanics break often so we, Canon aficionados as you call it, are desperately waiting for an upgrade to this lens.
Matt, just a quick question, will it be good if i invest on 1.4? I been long contemplating to get one. I was thinking to get one decent standard zoom lens or the 100mm f2.8l for close up/food/portrait photography. What do you think?
Hey there, if you need some test images for the 50 1.4 write me a msg. The image resolution of the 1.4 at 4.0 and 5.6 is extremely good. Honestly, buy the "niftyfifty" and save some money for the 24-105 F4.0 L IS USM, it is by far the most versatile glass of canon. There are many used lenses on ebay because it is the most used lense by any press girls and guys all over the world.
Turboshotshaper hello , thanks for the pointers, i actually contemplating on getting a 1.4, i think it is the most suitable lens for me right now. but how does 24-105 react in terms of focus? i got a friend using 6d with 24-105 and the focusing can be real slow, not to mention pic quality
I've seen quite a few comparison videos of these 50mm primes. And clearly this is the best of all those videos. Does a very objective test. I was swaying towards the 1.4, but now i think the 1.8 is also something to be considered. Thanks for posting.
Thanks for the review Matt. I have the 1.8 and I'm happy with it (although I had to adjust the micro-focus feature in my camera body because I was experiencing some focus deviation). Between f6.3 and f8 this lens is amazingly sharp.
Just moved over from NIKON and bought a 70d. Will the 1.8 have issues focusing while shooting video? Likewise will the 1.4 have issues? Thanks so much for the wonderful video!!!!!!
the 1.8 is a plastic toy. sometimes your get a decent copy, sometimes not. the canon 50mm 1.4 is a much better lens. but, i would suggest you get the sigma 50mm 1.4 instead. you can get it under $400 and it is great. every once in a while you may get a lemon, but it should be easy to exchange it.
That was a good review, but the one thing I was hoping to see was a shoot-off in low-light conditions. I would think that one possible reason to buy the f1.2 would be for improved shooting in low-light.
Thank you man!!! This is what I was looking for to see! I have 50mm 1.8 and now I want to upgrade to 1.4 so I wanted to see all this performances! Thanks again!
hey matt..great reviews....iam using sony a6300.looking for the perfect portrait lens..and one for landscape..and one for multi purpose use...what are the best lenses out there... thank you.
Matt, the f/1.8 is NOT designed to manually adjust the focus while in AF mode. You'll risk ruining the motor. Only USM lenses are designed to allow manual focus adjustment.
I'm happy you confirmed what I already knew, since my budget it's not big enough for 1.2 I went for the 1.8 since from what I could tell by seeing pictures from both online there wasn't a significant difference.
I've had the 50/1.8 mk I (metal mount and distance window), 50/1.4 and 50/1.2 at the same time for a while, but have since sold the 1.4 though. The 1.8 is a fine lens, but in RL especially if you use Servo AI on moving subjects, it is slower to track and that's when it starts hunting. The 1.4 is a bit faster under those conditions, but when it loses track it starts fluttering. The 1.4 can have a nervous looking bokeh at times. The 1.2 has the best AF performance tracking moving subjects and under lower light conditions. But you have to watch that mid day sun. At a real pinch the 1.8 mk 2 is nice, but I'd go for the 1.4 instead. But the original 1.8 that's a different matter. Very sharp and a good (well 1980s) type build. If you can find one (look for people selling old EOS film cameras) buy it. I bought mine in mint condition together with a user grade EOS film body for EUR 7,- The 1.2 is one of my favorites, but not as great as the 85/1.2 which is in a class of its own. Never tried the the 1.0 Had a Nikon 1.2 for a while, that was interesting.
Exactly what I was thinking. Watch as he forces the focus ring. Good review otherwise but people say the 1.8 is prone to breaking. Prob only under force (like in this video!). Even if it did snap you can buy another and still be way under budget compared to the 1.4.
hi there. i really learn a lot with your videos.. i only have my kit lens and a canon 75-300 usm 3 WITHOUT I.S... the 75-300 is quite not good for me because it deosnt have an is so im a little bit regretting on getting that lens. now.. im not a professional. i just love taking photos of places i have been to.. and now i need a 50mm lens for our product shooting.. would you recommend this 50mm 1.8 for me? and oh.. i have this crappy 1100d from canon.. but as of now i dont need those pros.
being large aperture lenses a low light test would be great as I personally use lenses like the 1.4 as a star trail lens but would love to have seen comparisons. Great review though, thanks and keep em coming.
I have the 1.8 MK I and have had the 1.8 MK II as well as used a 1.4. the difference between the 1.8's and 1.4 is barely recognisable in IQ and the focus speed is the same in both. The only thing you really loose with the 1.8 is the USM motor, but to be honest it focuses so fast that you barely notice it unlike in say a non-USM telephoto. The MK I 1.8 has superior build quality so if you can find one buy it but if not the IQ between the two 1.8's is the same.
Nice review. I upgraded from the 1.8 to the 1.4 as its a lot less noisy and it hunts less, but the main reason is that I've broken 2 1.8s and the much better build quality really shows if you handle both lenses. The other interesting thing was said by a camera repairer, who mentioned that a fairly common problem was that 1.8's got stuck on the camera due to the plastic mount
Thanks matt i am a wedding photographer in the uk and own both 50m1.8 and 1.4. I can say sharpness there is not much in it but in low light the 1.4 blows the 1.8 out of the water for focus speed. The 1.8 does focus to be honest but hunts a lot. And i find the 1.4 doesnt miss focus wide open has much :)
Thanks for the vid. I have a video background, but am diving into DSLRs and photography, and the 1.8 was always going to be my first lens focus. Your comparison combined with the price points, make me feel better about the decision.
Nikon Guy, I am travelling to Kashmir, India in Mid-April. Because of security reasons on the flights, I may not be able to carry both the lenses I have (18-55 & 55-200). I use Nikon D60 and will like to capture pictures of nature. Pl advice as to which lense shall I carry. ----Anil
This is so awesome. I was just milling over which lens to buy. and this was really informative. I hope you didn't have to buy all these lenses, because I would love to see more of these videos.
How so? The lens is where you control the amount of light that reaches the sensor through your aperture and shutter settings. If it were indeed my camera and not the lens, then that would mean shopping for lenses with wider possible apertures is a waste?
Nice video...What about "focus shift" I have been hearing about with the 50mil 1.2? I have been considering the Sigma 50mm 1.4 ART lens because of the focus shift issue...Your thoughts? Thanks......Philip
Focus shift, I've had two 1.2Ls and the first one (early batch) I never got right. With my original 5D I could not get persistent in focus results around f/2-f/4 especially. I had both lens and body adjusted by CPS, but it didn't completely solve the issue. What worked best was not using the center AF point, but use one of the surrending ones. Finally I gave up and bought a 5D2 so I could try MA. That seemed to make things worse, so after going through another round of CPS adjusting, I was offered a replacement lens by Canon. That replacement 1.2 is a much more consistent lens, it may still have a slight shift, but nothing out of the ordinary. So your mileage may vary depending on camera and lens combination, and your particular copy of the lens. You are unlikely to buy an early batch 1.2, unless you buy used. My advice would be to look for later batch lenses. That said, the 50/1.2 is a very nice lens and one of my most used primes.
Ruy Horta Thanks for the info...I mainly use a 5D III and use a 70D for backup. I wouldn't mind getting one of these 50mil 1.2s, so thanks for the info....it's helpful. Philip
I used to have 50mm F4 twice and it broke down and to got it fixed it cost me over £100 to get it fixed so I decided to invest on the 50mm F1.2L two years ago and is was a good idea
there's rumors of a 50mm 1.8 IS, but Canon charges like $500-1000 more for just the IS feature on their newer prime lenses so we'll have to see! I think one priced in between the 1.8 and 1.4 with IS would be great. And like the others have mentions I didn't know the 1.8 had manual override? I'm pretty sure it doesn't.
HI Matt very helpful I have the 1.8 and had been wondering about upgrading to 1.4. I now know there is no reason to !! Now the 1.2 would be awesome but crazy price !! I'll stick with my Nifty Fifty !! Thanks !!
Need to see a comparison of image sharpness as well as a low light test. The 1.8 hunts and shutters like it's on a turbulent flight in anything but ideal light in my experience. I can't wait to replace it with a 1.4 and the price is coming down on that now because Canon will be putting out a 1.4II shortly.
Well what about the image quality? And is 35mm good for potraits or 50mm. By good i mean the usability like we cant use 50 all the time given the spape constraint. Are there any such problems with 50mm compared to 35mm? Can they be traded off for the price gap between the two. Thank you. And it would be great if u make a video of it because i find that a trending topic on many forums.
I think your conclusion is bang on. The cheapie 50 1.8 is tinny, but for the price it's great. I have it on a full frame camera, and it takes better shots than I do. If I had the bucks I'd buy the 1.2, but why? I'm no pro. Thanks for a good review.
I have owned a Canon EF 50mm F1.8 MK 1 version for about 30 years and never needed anything with a wider aperture The MK 1 version has a thick metal bayonet mount a tighter focus ring and a distance scale for manual mode and not the self disintegrating barrel of the mark 2 nor the constant AF faults of the MK or the STM ( you will find loads of them for spares repairs on eBay or other site I am not worried about the older type of AF motor nor the slightly tight MF focusing ring that needs a proper photographer to use it or because there is a longer focusing travel from close to 10 foot after hat it's as quick as any newer lenses
I will reiterate what others have said here; don't turn the focus ring on the 1.8 when set to AF, you are grinding against the focus motor when you do that.
I'm upgrading from 1.8 to 1.4... I loved the 1.8 in terms of image quality vs price and tought me a lot but it really is like taking a toy from your lense bag, that's one reason. other is the extra light you can get (would be my fastest lense so far) but in practical terms and reason 3, will be to use it at 2.8 for shallow depth and very sharp subjet in focus...
Did i mentioned it has the best buildquality? .It is weathersealed. .it has a ground and polished aspherical lens element wich cost a fortuyn.The 85mm 1.2 has also and thats why both lenses so expensive.
I bought the 1.8 this week as my first lens after the kit one and I can't believe the quality images I'm getting with a lens this cheap. One thing I did notice is the focusing is nosier and slower than my 18-55 stm kit lens.
Plastic fantastic hehehe How does 1.8 in term of video recording? I am using it primarily for video blogging (set on a tripod). Do you have test footage for 1.8? Thank you for the great review. I had fun watching it =)
I wish you did a low light test. I had the 50mm 1.8 II and it was horrible for grabbing focus in low light compared to the 1.4 and 1.2 even on my 1ds mk2. The 1.8 was fatiguing for me. I recommend it to beginners because of the price point, but most shooters who've used a lot of gear would most likely use the 1.4 professionally for the smoother bokeh, usm and better low light focusing abilities without the price of the 1.2
Help the uninitiated... You say that at f8 the 1.2 is more beautiful. I don't see a difference. What are you looking at? I'd like to be able to see what the trained eye sees.
Thats messed up, i wasn't even watching the video. Had it running in the backround, and I HEARD you joke dropping the lense and my heart STILL stopped. :D
Thanks for the review but you didnt mention two VERY important things. 1. The difference in performance in regards to shooting in dark lighting. 2. The fact that the f1.8 does not perfectly fit the full frame sensor cameras (5d or 1d) without getting black corners. I loved the song plastic mr. fantastic though lol
I bought the 1.8 a while ago and the 1.4 a few days ago. Yes, it costs more. But in my opinion the image quality and autofocus are better. Also you have the manual override, which the 1.8 DOES NOT have. You can override the AF but you'll screw up the lens. For the price of the 1.8 you'll get amazing quality, but the 1.4 is even better.
2 things about the 1.8. First, it has 5 aperture blades, not 6. Second, the motor inside the 1.8 is not USM, so of course, it focuses louder and if you keep overriding it, that would burn out the motor. It is simply not designed for overriding like those with USM. But the 1.8 is actually worth more than what it costs. Nice review as always, subscribed!!!
by the way, I totally agree, from everything that I hear....the 1.2 is NOT worth the extra aperture. Sure, it takes a nice picture from what I could tell, but defintely not worth over $1000 more than the 1.8, which takes decent pictures in it's own right. I say 1.4 if you're a professional (better build quality) - 1.8 for hobbyist
Mat, you are wrong on your reply I think... Canon EF 50/1.8 and Tamron 90/2.8 are two lenses with a lot more focusing issues, especially in low light, at least on the 5Dmk2. The lens is a part of the problem, it isn't.just the AF sensor. Other lenses generally perform AF better. I.m pretty sure it isn't imagination.
Hi Matt, I have the 1.8 plastic fantastic for over a year now and I´m not that impressed with it to be honest. The image quality is as you described it but the more you use the lens, the worse it performs in terms of focussing-speed. These cheap lenses are built to only last a few years and I already have problems with the little motor inside the lens. New there might only be a litte difference between the three lenses, but the next lens for me is the 1.4, because it is better build. Thanx
Actually the 1.4 is less then 3 times the price of the 1.8 (at least where i live) and there are other reasons to get it, like FTM, FF compatible and the same 58mm filter thread as the kit lens, so all of the filters you already have will work, more accessible focus ring, etc.
Cheers Matt. I tried to make a reasonable explanation for such a price hike in the 1.2 over the 1.4 outside of weather sealing, but failed. They couldn't make it a 9 blade for that price? lol. In this kind of lens where all three can do the job superbly, it really comes down to construction, so I'm with on Canon making a metal USM 1.8 that is maybe $200-250. At least then the cost can be justified.
