EOS 50mm 1.4 USM

[sibley]

I was going to upgrade from a 50 1.8 to this lens. I always thought

it was a ring-usm? I was going to use it for low-light shots during

plays musical performances. My 50 1.8 makes a load buzzing noise if

it loses its focus lock. With a micro USM how much quieter is the

50mm 1.4?

[h._p.]

At least in theory, all USM lenses should by silent. My two USM zooms certainly are.

[isaac sibson]

Micro USMs are not silent, but they are very quiet. It is certainly much quieter than the F1.8 mk I. The F1.4 should not be a problem for plays or musical performances, since it's generally only the photographer or those VERY close by who can hear the micro-USM.

[bob_bubev1]

Can't hear a thing!, It's as silent as they come, I highly recommend this lens. Best shots taken at f/2.5 and up, its very soft wide open.

regards.

[mike_shot]

for musical performances maybe you'll be better go with the 85mm f1.8 USM. Anyway the real difference between f1.4 an f1.8 is the plasticity of the expensive one. I mean plasticity not in built quality but in how it takes picture: it gives, infact, a three dimensional sense with a great sharpness. I actually own the f1.8 but i don't feel the need to change 'cause i don't love this focal range. I hope this can helps you and forgive my bad english please.

 

Mike

[sibley]

thanks for the replys, I think I will need a 50mm lens as usually I am too close to the stage!

 

thanks again

 

Jason

[johnmarsden]

the 1.4 50 mm is very quiet and a fine lens. Most noise from you shooting will come from the 'mirror slap' noises.

 

Wide open the 50mm 1.4 you can get some lovely selective focus effects

 

Focus is fast too as there's lots of light for the focusing electronics etc etc.

 

(I know this wasn't part of your question but if you've got the dollars the 28 - 135 Image stabilised is very quiet and will be very useful in low light situations. You can get a bit tighter for stage stuff. The 50 mm may be a bit too wide.)

[carl smith]

The USM 50mm 1.4 is actually fairly quiet in spite of having a micro USM. FTM is also great and its built fairly well. Its been regarded as one of the better current 50mm 1.4s, I don't know if thats true however every one I've used is pretty sharp at 1.4 and gets better as you stop down. It's certainly useable at 1.4.

[peza]

I didn't like it @f/1.4 at all. I wouln't call it sharp. Usable ? Yes. Sharp ? No. Because is quite soft at f/1.4 even AF is not that good. You are better of 85/1.8.

[d_y]

The quiet focusing of USM lenses are terrific. I can't stand the sound of my 50 f/1.8 MK1. But, you can't quibble with the results. The 50 f/1.8 is an awesome lens. I won't replace it until it breaks. Will it be with the 1.4? Maybe, but I kinda doubt it. The AF of the 1.4 did not seem better to me. And, the results wide open were not enough to make me switch. I wonder if Canon will ever implement a true ring USM motor in their 1.4? That might be worthwhile...

[steve_dunn2]

<p>Technically, micro USM - the motor itself - is as quiet as ring USM - the motor itself. Both are driven by frequencies that the human ear can't hear. The noise made by the lens while focusing is made by the mechanical bits moving - gear trains, the elements which move while focusing, etc. Micro USM needs a gear train; ring USM does not. So there's an extra source of noise in there.</p>

 

<p>That said, the 50/1.4 is pretty quiet. I don't find it substantially louder than my ring USM lenses, and its noise is certainly not a buzzing noise - more of a whoosh.</p>

 

<p>As someone else pointed out, the camera will make more noise with its mirror and shutter than the lens will. I have an Elan 7e, probably the quietest EOS body ever, and it's easily louder than the lens.</p>