artofseeing Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 Is this possible? I did a comparison recently and was greatly surprised by the results. I repeated the test several times and saw the same results. Do I have a bad lens? Look at my test at..http://www.thezeal.com/photography/2004/11/battle-of-50mms.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher. Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 The main difference to me looks like you sharpened the macro in PS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_linn Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 You should not be surprised at these results. 50mm "normal" lenses are not at their best at their closest focusing distance. Your test looks like it was takens at the very closest setting on the 50/1.4. If most of your photography is at this working distance the 50/1.4 is not your best choice. Before discarding the lens, you might re-test at 10 meters or more at f8 or f11 where the 50/1.4 will probably be optimized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tan Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 I have the 50/2.5 macro and never had a 50/1.4. I got the macro version because everyone is saying that the 50/1.4 is soft wide open, a little better at f2.8 but still not as good as the 50/2.5 which is tack sharp even wide open. So this is no surprise to me at all. The 50mm/2.5 is noisy and AF speed is slow, but it's incredibly sharp and distortion-free. Just picked up the 1:1 life size converter for this lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beauh44 Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 I agree with Bobby. The 50mm 2.5 CM is one of - if not the - sharpest lenses that I own. And I've got a few nice ones. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camilla Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 No surprise to me. I have both. The macro is sharper, the 50/1.4 gives nicer bokeh and is less noisy when that matters. I use them for different purposes, and woudn't part with either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuppyDigs Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 I have both lenses and the EF 50 2.5 CM is sharper than the EF 50 1.4 USM at F2.8. Yes, it's razor sharp wide open.In fact, it's even better at 5.6, although I can't see much difference beyond that. Plus, the 50 2.5 can stopdown to F32. Of course the 50 2.5 is virually distortion free at all distances whereas the 50 1.4 has plenty of barrel distortion below 2 meters. Strangely the 50 2.5 has better AF in low light and a smoother and finer MF ring (albeit thinner). I think the EF 50 2.5 CM is among Canon's sharpest lenses. However, the 50 1.4 is still excellent and sports F1.4 for murky light images. Sometimes the light’s all shining on me. Other times I can barely see. - Robert Hunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borge_doskeland Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 I compared two of each of these lenses at f4 to a 50mm f1.8 MkI: http://shutterboard.com/upload/free/50_1.4_vs._50_2.5_vs._50_1.8_mki_.jpg I found them to be equally sharp at f4 and sharper than the 50mm 1.8 MkI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now