Tired of 50mm f/1.8 II, considering f/1.4

[rubsh_kaboor]

My primary lens with 300D is EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS. It's great for

outdoors, but I find it too slow for indoors/night time portrait

use, especially when photographing my primary subject (who is 15

months old and always moving ;-).

 

So a few months ago, I started using 50mm f/1.8 (ISO 400, generally

at f/2.2). The speed improvement was great and I didn't have much

trouble due to the lack of zoom. Unfortunately, I experienced a

consistent softness in my images. Almost all my images were out of

focus. This forced me to get rid of the lens.

 

Now I'm thinking about f/1.4. My question is: did I have a bad

experience with f/1.8 due to

 

a) inherent lack of depth of field at such wide apertures (in which

case f/1.4 won't help), or

 

b) somehting to do with the cheapness of f/1.8 (e.g. non-USM motor),

which prevents it from accurately focusing on the subject. Is it

true that f/1.4 can focus more accurately?

 

I'm hoping that it's the latter. Any hands on experience will be

greatly appreciated.

 

BTW, I generally shoot indoors at ISO 400 and bounce 420EX flash off

the ceiling.

 

Thanks in advance,

[andrew robertson]

Wide open, both the 1.4 and 1.8 Canon EF 50mm lenses perform identically. The DOF is

razor thin, and ultra fast Planar type lenses (which both are) benefit from stopping down.

 

I get exceptional results from my 50mm f/1.8 II stopped down just a bit. The same was

true of the Mk. I version I owned before, and the MTF charts and block diagram show the

1.4 to be literally identical albeit a tad larger.

 

The 1.4 would be nice for the extra 2/3rds of a stop, and the USM, but I wouldn't expect

anything but the most subtle improvement optically especially wide open.

[c_b_arunkumar]

At f/8 you can hardly tell the difference between the two though the 1.4 is sharper and at f/1.4 the DOF is so low that it may hardly matter. Mostly i use the 1.4 at 2.8! rarely at f/2. That said the bokeh of the 1.4 is superior. The pictures from this lens just feels so much better than those from the 1.8 its kind of intangible except for the bokeh.

 

For the ISO 400 bounce flash type shooting you are doing you may not see much difference at all. If you just shoot to make 6x4 prints then stick with the 1.8. If you are really serious about your stuff and want to do available light portraits in darkish areas, then maybe you should shift to the 1.4 you wont regret it!

[yakim_peled1]

>> Unfortunately, I experienced a consistent softness in my images. Almost all my images were out of focus.

 

Softness and out of focus are completely different problems. What did you experience? Have you searched? This is really a FAQ and there are thousands of threads on this exact question.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[damian_tinsley]

Do remember that as the DoF is so thin, the actual size of the autofocus sensor being used (which is larger than the area of the square in the viewfinder) can have quite an effect on the focussing. I have found that if I open the 50mm f1.4 fully (or have it at 1.8) then the focus is crucial, and there is sometimes a tendency for the autofocus system to latch onto something a few inches in front of the desired focus point. I am happy that this is not the dreaded 'back focus' problem, and I am pretty convinced it is a function of a paper thin DoF and a sensor that is simply focussing on something slightly closer. Other commentators on this forum have said that given a choice of subjects within the area of any given AF sensor, it will tend to focus on the closer one. This can be something outside the small square on the viewfinder.

 

The long and short of this is that I think you are very unlikely to solve this problem by switching to the f1.4 variant, and as it does cost some more money, you will almost certainly be disappointed. Having said that it IS a great fast lens, and razor sharp as well.

 

Best of luck, but IMHO you ought to persevere with the f1.8 mkII unless you really WANT the f1.4. In which case be happy, but don't kid yourself that it's going to cure a problem which relates more to understanding the technicalities of your camera rather than an inherent issue with equipment capability. (I know that my 20D and 17-40 is much more limited by the ineptitude of the person behind it (me) than by the Canon engineering department)

 

Damian

[gareth_harper]

"Unfortunately, I experienced a consistent softness in my images. Almost all my images were out of focus. This forced me to get rid of the lens. " "somehting to do with the cheapness of f/1.8 (e.g. non-USM motor), which prevents it from accurately focusing on the subject."

 

To be blunt it sounds if you don't really know what you are doing.

First, despite it's ropey build quality the 50mmf1.8 is a superb lens, I mean superb.

 

Wide open just about all lenses get soft(er). F1.4 or f1.8 with a 50mm lens leaves you with an extremely narrow depth of feild. Your focusing at f1.8 needs to be absolutely spot on. Also while it may be called 'auto-focus' you have to tell the camera exactly what you want it to focus on, and make sure it has done exactly that.

 

Finally I see no reason why you would want to shoot at f1.8 when using a flash gun and 400asa film.

[paul hart]

<<This forced me to get rid of the lens>>

 

Which means there's no point telling you to persevere with it. Your problem wasn't the lens, but you've sold it anyway. You're not going to go out and buy another, so just get a 1.4; it's a superb lens.

[les]

You have to get to know every lens you use. YMMV, but every lens I buy takes pictures well below any reasonable expectations...until I learn how to use it properly. This is also applicable to your 50/1.8.

I am not kidding and the others will probably tell you the same thing: almost every lens is different and requires different technique - which I first "discovered" when trying to use 400mm lens, while having previous experience with 200mm at the most.

It is easy to blame the lens. Sure, lemon glass happens now and then, but I start thinking that really not that many lens have "quality problems" or are inherently bad designs.

 

I had lots of problems with my 50/1.4 - until I realized it was all my fault. About the most important thing to remember is the 1/f rule for shutter speed, and DOF chart (which I started carrying with me all the time now). Nothing new, but amazingly effective ;)

[rob_murray]

If you have a flash bounced off the ceiling why are you

trying to shoot wide open? Stop it down to F8 and get some

nice shots with some slow film.

[tracktikz]

i own the 1.8 and it never let me down~ ^^

[jim_larson1]

<i>If you have a flash bounced off the ceiling why are you trying to shoot wide open? Stop it down to F8 and get some nice shots with some slow film.</I>

<p>

This is the second comment along the same line. . . To me, F1.8 and bounce flash says "single person portrait". I shoot this all the time. I would step up to F5.6 or F8 for a group shot (and probably grab a wider lens)

[craig_bridge]

"a consistent softness...almost all ... images out of focus" with 300D and 50mm f/1.8.

 

My guess is NONE OF THE ABOVE and your real problem has nothing to do with the quality of your equipment, but your ability to make effective use of it.

 

Portrait work with an effective 90mm lens (50mm times 1.6 crop factor) at typical subject distances with apertures wider than f/5.6 (and you were 2.5 stops wider at f/2.2) won't have enough DOF. At f/2.2, if you are using auto focus and you aren't locked on the eyes, the optimal focus plane won't be where you need it and you will be luck to get 1 usable image out of 100.

 

The flash to ceiling to subject distance is much much greater than lens to subject distance for a 15 month old subject. Try a flash bounce card or an off camera flash bracket. At ISO 400 at max flash sync shutter speed, I'm surprised that f/2.2 isn't way over exposed. Given that it wasn't, the most likely situation is that the primary light source was ambient and the shutter speed was less than the max flash sync speed so motion blur was a likely contributer.

 

You sold your 50mm lens way too soon! If you really want to learn, you need to turn off all the automation and experiment using static subjects like a set of wooden blocks (your primary subject will enjoy them too) and bracket aperture and focus and subject distances. It is sad in this digital age that the cost of running these experiments and the time between pressing the shutter and getting the results back that so few have the patience to learn.

[kevin m.]

To call the 50 f1.8 "superb" begs a dictionary check of that word. It's damn good for the money, and no excuses necessary by f2.8, but wide open it's no match for any rangefinder 50 I've used. Plus, its five aperture blades make a perfect pentagon of any oof point light source in the frame.

[jeremy_tok]

But many people are coming from P&S's. They P then S and when the results aren't what they want, they junk their gear!

 

(What, you mean photography is something you have to learn? No way -- my camera's automatic!)

[mormegil]

I'm a little iffy on this lens. I have one, and my girlfriend has one, and we both have the same problem - a slight front focus. I know it's not the camera, because my other lenses are fine. I tested it on one of those focus charts at an angle.

 

I sent mine back to the Irvine center, but it came back with no work done. Perhaps I'll try again, but until then, I'm using it at 2.8.

[Spearhead]

I have both and don't find much difference, image-wise, between the two of them. I bought the 1.4 because the 1.8 focusing was too slow for shooting boxing, but otherwise I would have just used the 1.8. I agree that it sounds like you need to figure out what you're doing.

[gareth_harper]

"To call the 50 f1.8 "superb" begs a dictionary check of that word. It's damn good for the money, and no excuses necessary by f2.8, but wide open it's no match for any rangefinder 50 I've used. Plus, its five aperture blades make a perfect pentagon of any oof point light source in the frame."

 

The oxford dictionary defines superb as 1. excellant, 2. magnificent or splendid.

And that's exactly what the EF50mmf1.8 is.

 

Rangefinder lenses are often sharper than SLR lenses because the lens sits closer to the film plane. Also a number of rangefinder lenses are optimised to be at their sharpest wide open.

Certainly there is doubt that my ?70 EF50mmf1.8 is sharper than my ?1000 EF24mmf1.4L. I think that makes it superb.

[markubig]

Rubsh,

 

What mode are you shooting in? I had the same experience as you with my 50/1.4USM. I am still new to photography and was shooting in Av mode at approx. f/2.2. This was giving me "extremely" slow shutter speeds (which I didn't realize until later). The result was blur because anything handheld slower than 1/60s will give you the blur (sometimes mistaken as appearing soft). The shallow DOF didn't help either, as anything just outside the plane appeared out of focus.

 

Shooting in M mode and keeping my shutter speed at 1/60 or faster vastly improved my shots. If the child is running around, you might just want to consider using a flash, faster shutter speeds (1/125) and smaller apertures (f8ish)to stop the movement and keep him (her?) in focus.

 

I have since sold my 50/1.4 not because i was unhappy with it but because I haven't used it as much to justify keeping it's cost ($300), so now I use my Tamron 28-75/2.8 all the time. If i'm going to get another 50mm prime, it's probably going to be the 1.8 because the difference in quality doesn't justify the difference in cost (at least for my puposes).

 

Good luck!

 

~mark

[gareth_harper]

That should have been.......Certainly there is doubt that my 70 quid EF50mmf1.8 is sharper than my 1000 quid EF24mmf1.4L. I think that makes it superb.

 

I forgot the pound sign doesn't work on these forums. Oh a quid is a pound sterling by the way.

 

Mark, if you select AV mode with the flash on, the camera will expose for ambient light, all the flash will do is fill in the shadows. It's called fill in flash in this mode. It's very handy outside on bright sunny days where you get those heavy shadows.

 

You need to be in the Manual or the P mode. In the P mode the camera will detect the lack of light and expose with the flash, you'll notice it usually goes for 1/60th f4 all the time. In the M mode the flash will cut out when it detects that the film is exposed. You can then use whatever f stop you want, just make sure you are getting the green light on the flash. If the ambient light is low you can also do wee tricks like dragging the shutter to create a background blurr, as the effect of the flash is to freeze everything.

 

Just read the manual and experiment as well as refering to forums.