Well I have been looking for awhile now at both of those lenses. I do like the f/1.4 version quite a lot because it's better build and much better autofocus but I am not sure if I want to spend almost 4 times more on a lens I MAY not use very often. As you guys already know that I am mostly into landscape/cityscape and night cityscape photography so I am not sure if a 50mm prime will be any good for those shots. I will probably use the 50mm for occasional indoor and outdoor close up shots of objects or people. I am also thinking about getting the Sigma 10-20mm lens within the next two months so I don't know if the 50mm will be a good complement to those very wide zoom lenses I will own in the near future. Oh and I read somewhere that the f/1.4 version has full time manual focus which the f/1.8 doesn't so is it really a big deal? I have so far been using autofocus only except for a few test shots lol but I kinda wonder if I become better at taking pictures and gain more knowledge in the future will I be using the manual focus a lot?

50mm 1.4 doesent have manual focus all the time, even it has usm, the usm motor in it is pretty old and doesent have that function. But imo its not really important, personally if i manual focus ill just turn af off, even tho i could change the focus with af on, because af might start hunting around when you try to focus manually and its pretty fustrating. Reason you should manual focus is if its so dark that af doesent work, nothing else really. 50mm 1.8 has pretty crappy af in dark, i dunno how much better 1.4 version is in this matter, but its surely better(because 1.4 and better af enyway). If you think you wont be using 50mm much then go with the 1.8 version, its pretty good too.

50mm is not good for land scapes, you need a wide angle for them, unless you take some special shots. Indoors 50mm is good for up to shoulders portraits mostly on crop camera.

hmm so how old is the f/1.4 version? Maybe Canon will update it soon
Well it's mainly the huge difference in price that makes looking very hard at the f/1.8 version but if it turns out crappy I'll just get the better lens later lol after all it's only like a hundred bucks.
hehe I thought all the pro photographers use manual focus but I guess I was wrong ^^ . Well I have only had problem autofocusing while shooting in low light a few times in the past but lately I have kinda noticed that when I try to focus on the shadow areas while shooting directly into the sun would make my camera having hard time to autofocus as well... I kinda wonder if it's my camera or the lens I was using. Anyway thanks for the advice I will probably get the f/1.8 version sometime next week

I dunno how old the 1.4 is, but the age doesent really matter since one of the best lenses are way older. 1.8 isnt crappy on other than the build quality, af isnt that good in dark(but bit better than kit lens still), bit better contrast on 1.4, af is loud and there is bit more ca and flare on 1.8 than 1.4. I dont understand why some people say that af on 1.8 is slow, imo its quite fast and really fast for non usm lens. Iq on 1.8 is good, but 1.4 is slightly better.

When you use af in dark, try to find some spots with more light where you focus, if there are eny.

Some people on net seem to say that the 1.4 has full time manual focus over ride, but iv heard meny people say that there isnt, so dunno really.

hmm so which of those old lenses is one of the best in your opinion?
lol yeah some people say a lot of things online even though they aren't entirely true but whatever lol. I am aware of the crappy build of the f/1.8 version but I don't think I have heard anyone in this forum complain about it since I am sure lots of people in here have that lens. I have read about those short comings of that lens compared to the more expensive f/1.4 lens but I think I will try to keep an open mind about it and see for myself how crappy or good it really is . Oh and one more question though. Do you think that tiny f/1.8 lens will fit nicely on my 40D or will it feel weird on a large body? I am sure it will fit perfectly on my film camera course it's quite small even smaller than the Rebel series ^^ .

Well old zeiss lenses are really geat, allso hasselblad lenses are really really good, but theyr not for that kind of cameras.

I dont think 50mm 1.8 looks weird even on 1d mkI, that is really a monster camera. Allso 1.4 isnt that much larger than 1.8, atleast if you compare to 1.2. You should test both lenses in shop and then deside if the build quality, 1.4 and little bit of iq is worth the extra price on 1.4 version.

Imo this looks more weird than small lens on big camera and 40d isnt even that big imo

Oh! I thought you were talking about those older Canon EF lenses . Well I have never seen those zeiss and hasselblad lenses so I doubt I will ever use those in the future either.
hahaha I kinda laughed at your picture there I mean that is one hilarious looking lens camera combo. Well I've seen a picture of a huge telephoto lens attached to a Rebel XTI body somewhere and it really looked like that the XTI was just some kind of small extension of that lens ^^
and I see how HUGE the 50mm f/1.2 L is it's really weird that lenses of the exact same focal length could vary sooooo much in size



I have kinda sorta found my 40D being too big and heavy sometimes especially when I was carrying stuff lol probably because I am either a wimp or have small hands xD

This post was edited by Futurama on Mar 26 2009 05:49pm

1.2 needs to be larger because it needs to open more wide than 1.4, so it needs bigger diameter for the lens and more glass in it. Somehow that lens looks quite small in that pic i posted, allso that camera looks funny with the 50mm 1.2

I have another question for ya lol hope you don't mind. I have heard that the background blur isn't as nice with the f/1.8 because it has less uhh aperture blades or whatever so I am wondering is the numbers of those blades important when I want to buy a good lens?
hmm you probably should have faced the lens a lil bit towards you when you took that picture then the lens would probably look quite a bit bigger . Say, do you have any telephoto lenses? It would be fun to see a huge ass telephoto lens attached to that camera. Oh and what camera is it?

well here you can see the difference on 1.8 and 1.4 bokeh balls

1.8


1.4


the difference comes because 1.4 has more blades, so the bokeh balls are more round.

only lenses i got is that 24-105mm f/4 is and 50mm f/1.2, that camera is eos 300 film camera. Oh yea allso i got this lens, but it naturally wont fit in canon dslrs