... shot of a jazz band in a smoky, dimly lit club ...
Well, see...
This is Vermont. We don't have any of those here.
Seriously, this was just a quickie test I did because that's what I had around. But I don't think it is all that unrepresentative. When I use my 50/1.4, I use it because the light is low, and in that situation I use it mainly for indoor stuff and usually at close range. A jazz club would be a neat place to take shots but it would be hard to do a controlled test there. --c
Yeah, I'm waiting for one of our propeller-headed friends to take a crack at that. Pondria wrote:
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 ?
The Canon 50/1.4 is one of those lenses you love to hate. I tested the 50/1.4 against a bunch of Zeiss lenses and it did quite well. It's optics aren't bad at all, it's the build quality which makes it feel cheap. The Canon 50mm F2.5 macro is supposed to be a landscape monster on FF.
One of my main issues is AF speed, what has been anyone's experience with AF using these lens'. Personally I find my 1.4 much quieter but am unsure if it is faster? Using it wide open it sure has less DOF which makes AF harder, but does it focus faster
I have to wonder if the depth-of-field is much different, or is it the way that the lens renders bokeh. I'd love to see what an optical engineering type has to say on this subject.
In the meantime, I'll stand by and lust after that 50/1.0L.
Other than minor focal length (and actual vs. indicated aperture) variations there shouldn't be any differences in DOF.
Personally I think the f/1.8 comes off the big winner in this test and the f/1.0L the big loser. What's all that red around the L's highlights? Is that CA? Anyway, the bokeh of the f/1.4 looks very close to the L's, and the f/1.8 seems to win on sharpness and contrast.
My conclusion based on *this* test: If you want bokeh and build quality, get the f/1.4, if you want sharpness and an incredible bargain, get the f/1.8, if you really need apertures below f/1.4 or just have a terminal case of L-ephantiasis, get the f/1.0.
John - re landscape shots with the 2.5 macro, I did limited testing with cheap adapters against 2 x Olys Zuiko and the Distagon 1.7, the Canon 50 macro was very very good wide open, now I have got better adapters for the Zuiko lenses I want to retry these, but the link below is the far right edge analsysis at very high pixel peeping on a 1DsII (ie the orange rectangle in full image shot)
I am not sure why the Macro lens results came out so blue when RAW conversion was identical. Come spring I intend to re run all my lens comparisons. The Distagon started to show it's strength from F8 with more zing and contrast, and yes the tests were done 1 week apart and light conditions constantly changed, (hence washing on the line in the Zuiko shot only!). The macro lens detail is amazing right throughout the aperture range, but the images appear flatter in contrast even accounting for the blue cast.
But when you have both the 1.8 and 1.4 on the counter in the camera store, you realize why thhey are priced differently, and I think that the 1.4 is one of the greatest deals in Canon's lineup/ with a metal body and a red ring they could call it 50/1.4L and I would believe it!
the optical formula for these lenses is apparently so simple that any difference in image quality would seem minimal .. in fact the 1.8 is the most pleasing to my eye.
cheers,
Mike
I agree Ryan, the OP should take that 50/1.0 puppy someplace where it will shine. I wanna hear (or imagine) the giant sucking sound it was designed make, on even the slightest amount of light on the edges of a black hole.
#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.
Laugh.. never bothered to count. Not nearly as many as some people here, but the number changes constantly so it seems like more.
I sent this 50/1.0L to my friend Gary (an FMer who is a total 50/1.0L freak!) This lens is similar to one he used to have. Here's a shot he took with it (f/1, 1/100s, 1Ds2)...
