06-15-2010, 03:22 PM
Hi.
I had both lenses, two 50/1.8 and one 50/1.4. The AF of the 50/1.8 was a bit inconsitent, especially in low light conditions.
It was my first large aperture lens, so it's possible that was my fault.
I found a good offer for a 50/1.4 and I bought it. It's autofocus is certainly better, also in low light. Regarding its sharpness, I found the 50/1.4 @1.4 as sharp as 50/1.8 @1.8. As Klaus stated, the 50/1.4 is better than the 1.8 at 1.8 setting (at least my copy).
At the end of the day I'm very satisfied and it's almost always mounted on my 40D (so APSC camera and not FF).
There are two things that I would stress:
1) the AF is a bit fraile (there are a lot of fault reports) because of the micro-USM (not ring USM) and because of the moving plastic tube is fraile. It would be better to store the lens at infinite setting (when the moving tube is completely retracted inside the lens barrel)
2) the AF ring has 2-3mm play. I mean that if you move the focus ring, for the first 2-3 mm you will not observe any effect...then the focus mechanism starts to move and you'll see the focus point change. This is a bit annoying if you intend to use it in manual focus mode (or you use full time manual focus feature)
Regarding the bokeh, the 50/1.8 is bad (except at 1.8), the 1.4 is better, even if I prefer (especially if light source are present on the background) to colse a bit (around f/2) in order to avoid circles with glowing borders at background.
I feel the bokeh @1.8/2 a little better and creamy than @f/1.4
EDIT: Sorry, I missed the post where you told us that you bought the 50/1.4.
Enjoy your new lens, I'm sure you will not regret it.
I had both lenses, two 50/1.8 and one 50/1.4. The AF of the 50/1.8 was a bit inconsitent, especially in low light conditions.
It was my first large aperture lens, so it's possible that was my fault.
I found a good offer for a 50/1.4 and I bought it. It's autofocus is certainly better, also in low light. Regarding its sharpness, I found the 50/1.4 @1.4 as sharp as 50/1.8 @1.8. As Klaus stated, the 50/1.4 is better than the 1.8 at 1.8 setting (at least my copy).
At the end of the day I'm very satisfied and it's almost always mounted on my 40D (so APSC camera and not FF).
There are two things that I would stress:
1) the AF is a bit fraile (there are a lot of fault reports) because of the micro-USM (not ring USM) and because of the moving plastic tube is fraile. It would be better to store the lens at infinite setting (when the moving tube is completely retracted inside the lens barrel)
2) the AF ring has 2-3mm play. I mean that if you move the focus ring, for the first 2-3 mm you will not observe any effect...then the focus mechanism starts to move and you'll see the focus point change. This is a bit annoying if you intend to use it in manual focus mode (or you use full time manual focus feature)
Regarding the bokeh, the 50/1.8 is bad (except at 1.8), the 1.4 is better, even if I prefer (especially if light source are present on the background) to colse a bit (around f/2) in order to avoid circles with glowing borders at background.
I feel the bokeh @1.8/2 a little better and creamy than @f/1.4
EDIT: Sorry, I missed the post where you told us that you bought the 50/1.4.
Enjoy your new lens, I'm sure you will not regret it.