fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

       2       3       end
  

Archive 2005 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}

  
 
charlesk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


Always wanted to do this. Preliminary test of an indoor subject, looking at sharpness, contrast and bokeh. All shots on the 5D, f/1.8, 1/180s, ISO 100, AF.

First, the whole shots, so you can see how they look subjectively.

Canon 50mm f/1.8 II:
http://www.pcguide.com/t/50test_5018_full.jpg

Canon 50mm f/1.4:
http://www.pcguide.com/t/50test_5014_full.jpg

Canon 50mm f/1.0L:
http://www.pcguide.com/t/50test_5010_full.jpg

Here's a crop comparison, near the center-bottom:
http://www.pcguide.com/t/50test_cropcomparison.jpg

Here's a bokeh comparison, which frankly, surprised me:
http://www.pcguide.com/t/50test_bokehcomparison.jpg



Dec 07, 2005 at 09:16 PM
charlesk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


My observations...

#1. The 50/1.8 II has much more DOF than the other two lenses at the same aperture. This probably helps with its reputation as being very sharp for its size and cost. Overall it held up VERY well compared to its more expensive brethren.

#2. Because of the vaguaries of AF at low apertures I have to call the crop comparison close to a draw. What is most noticeable to me is the much greater contrast on the f/1.0L. Also notice how much better it handled the hot area near the letters "TE" in "INTERCOM"

#3. The bokeh comparison surprised me, as the cheapest lens had the roundest highlights.

#4. The L lens seems to be longer than the other two. --c



Dec 07, 2005 at 09:18 PM
trentchau
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


first of all thank you for doing the test.

Second of all... I think I could buy a 50mm 1.4 and be quite happy.



Dec 07, 2005 at 09:28 PM
eeprete
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


C,

Man, you were focused on your work. 13 missed calls. Did you forget to pick up the phone?

Interesting comparison. When I opened the thread, at first I though it was another baby monitor. . The little bargain held it's own, but I think most of us knew that already. But good comparison, nontheless.

-Ed



Dec 07, 2005 at 09:29 PM
Liquidpics
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


Now that your selling your 1.0...I'll take off yours hands! This is a great post! The missed calls is hilarious! How representative of the mind set of a photographer engrossed with his equipment!


Dec 07, 2005 at 09:49 PM
BrianP
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


charlesk wrote:
My observations...

#3. The bokeh comparison surprised me, as the cheapest lens had the roundest highlights.
--c


This shouldn't surprise you. The 50 f/1.8 was wide open. The diaphram wasn't shut at all...of course it will produce the roundest highlights.

The 50 f/1.0L had to be stopped down the most.


I think you should dump your 50 f/1.4 and 50 f/1.0L (cheap) and keep your 50 f/1.8!

BTW: I will offer to help you, and I will pick up that f/1.0 lens (of course the price should indicate that it is in the same league optically as the f/1.8!)



Dec 07, 2005 at 09:55 PM
CVickery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


Wouldn't the 50/1.8 have the roundest bokeh since it's wide open? The other two lenses are stopped down and the number and shape of the aperture blades play a role in the shape of the bokeh. Wide open there is no effect from the blades. I suspect that if we were examining the bokeh at say f2.0-2.8 the results might be different.

Nice test though. Makes me wonder if I should have given up my 50/1.8 Mk1 for the 50/1.4.

Thanks for posting this.
Cal



Dec 07, 2005 at 10:02 PM
charlesk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}



This shouldn't surprise you. The 50 f/1.8 was wide open. The diaphram wasn't shut at all...of course it will produce the roundest highlights.

Of course. Makes sense. (Serves me right for trying to think at this hour. )

I have to admit, the 13 phone calls weren't during the test. My phone is stupid and thinks a call is "missed" if you pick it up on a different extension.

I think the 1.0 actually performed very well in this test, given that people say it is less sharp than the others. I also think the 1.4 is the 'sweet spot' in the range; it has advantages over the 1.8 that go beyond image quality. --c

c



Dec 07, 2005 at 10:05 PM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


charlesk wrote:
#3. The bokeh comparison surprised me, as the cheapest lens had the roundest highlights.


But, the 1.0L had the smoothest OOF discs by far. The 1.8 had some hard edges to its OOF disks. BTW, the roundness was achieved because the 50/1.8 was wide open, meaning that the aperture blades were fully retracted and not within the light path. I can see the value of the 1.0L.



Dec 07, 2005 at 10:05 PM
jmauro
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


I agree with 10DFT. While the highlights you cropped look good on the f/1.8 M2, you'll notice that they have quite well defined edges. This was one of my biggest turn-offs with this lens, the bokeh was very distracting!


Dec 07, 2005 at 10:22 PM
charlesk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


Not only that.. but look in the full shots, in the 1.8 background you can make out the pattern in the drapes, but not in the other two. It has more apparent DOF at the same aperture. --c


Dec 07, 2005 at 10:24 PM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


All I know is that I want the 50/1.0. I hope that tomorrow morning, I don't still want it.


Dec 07, 2005 at 10:34 PM
BrianP
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


The 50 f/1.8 looks very slightly underexposed in comparison with the other two 50s. If you combine this with the fact that more is in focus, it makes you wonder if it is truly f/1.8.


Dec 07, 2005 at 10:48 PM
Matthew Kieren
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


I wish the 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro could be thrown into this mix to see how it holds up. Of course you'd have to increase all of them to f/2.5, but I'd still love to see that comparison.




Dec 07, 2005 at 10:52 PM
charlesk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


Brian, it was f/1.8 -- and the point made earlier about the bokeh would seem to confirm it. Could just be a slight amount of "rounding error" in that f-stops are discrete increments while the lenses themselves obviously are not exact in how much light they let in.

Matthew, that's one lens I haven't gotten my hands on yet.

Just for fun... --c



Dec 07, 2005 at 11:02 PM
maxim_me
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


after reading this test, think i will get out and buy a couple more of f1.8 just to satisfy myself what a splendid bargain i have )




Dec 07, 2005 at 11:08 PM
phuang3
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


From the picture, 50/1.0L has more CA than its two brothers. As I know, the 1.0L has bad reputation at large aperture.


Dec 07, 2005 at 11:41 PM
Pondria
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


Thanks Charles !
Let me double check. All 3 shots on the top thread were taken @ f/1.8. And yet, the DOF varies among them ?



Dec 08, 2005 at 12:00 AM
mickr7an
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


I'm not a fan of tests like this. I carry out real world tests on my lenses. I think there is very little to be learned about these lenses from these photos - although I'm obviously in the minority here. Pictures of people's telephones, lens boxes or newspapers are fine if that 's what you want to take photos of. But for, example, if you the kind of photographer that would take a shot of a jazz band in a smoky, dimly lit club these photos won't show how beautifully rendered the scene will be with the 50L or even the f/1.4 compared to the f/1.8. A dreary plastic phone in poor home lighting would look pretty much the same photographed with a cheap zoom.


Dec 08, 2005 at 12:17 AM
Pondria
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · Test: 50/1.0L v 50/1.4 v 50/1.8II {ck}


mickr7an wrote:
..., if you the kind of photographer that would take a shot of a jazz band in a smoky, dimly lit club these photos won't show how beautifully rendered the scene will be with the 50L or even the f/1.4 compared to the f/1.8.....


Do you have shots to support this claim ?




Dec 08, 2005 at 12:28 AM
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

       2       3       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account