 |
|
|
davidrwilliams
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Nov 15, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 434
|
|
Review Date: Jul 3, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, beautiful colour, contrasty, light and very portable, and very inexpensive for the overall image quality. Much smoother background blur than 50mm f/1.8 with much more rounding to background out-of-focus highlights.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build could be better, and could be sharper wide open.
|
|
|
Superb lens once stopped down to f/2.5 or further. Quite usable wide open and to f/2.5, but sharpness and resolution are superb once closed down a bit.
Very nice colour reproduction and contrast. AF is fast enough for most purposes, but can tend to hunt a bit under low light. The bayonet attached lenshood is very secure - I wish the 85mm f/1.8 had a similar hood design.
I'm on my third copy of this lens, but not because of any dissatisfaction - quite the contrary, after selling the first I felt regret at losing it's capabilities and re-invested. After selling the second to help finance an investment in Medium Format, I'm back into a third copy of this lens for my 20D. All three copies have had the same superb image quality, but each had their own somewhat different feel to the manual focus ... this may be a good lens to purchase locally to look at various copies to ensure you're happy with the feel of the manual focus system, as some copies can tend to be less than smooth.
Before my first 1.4, I shot with the 50/1.8 (Mk I with metal mount). The 1.8 drove me nuts - the price was great, the lens was very sharp, but the buzzy focus motor and the harsh and cluttered out-of-focus background character led me to look at the more expensive 1.4. If you consider the quality of the backgrounds to your images to be important, I feel the 1.4 is a much better choice.
I've also shot with the 50/2.5 Compact Macro, and prefer the overall image quality of the 1.4 at similar apertures, with the fast AF and low light capability of the 1.4 making this a better decision for me.
I strongly recommend this lens to anyone looking for this focal length who needs speed and/or portability.
|
|
 Jul 3, 2005
|
|
milesd
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 9, 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 30, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, nice bookeh, good resolution
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2005
|
|
gwhitegeog
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jun 23, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build quality, internal focussing, full time manual focussing (FTM). The optical quality is very good, far better than the f1.8 version. The recent price drop in Europe / UK makes the lens even better value
|
|
Cons:
|
Slightly wobbly front elment; not the absolute pinnacle of optical quality
|
|
|
I personally don't like zoom lenses (even the 'top drawer' ones) and I would rather ran a set of light, fast prime lenses any day. This lens fits the bill. I have used this lens extensively on my EOS 3 and EOS 10D - on the latter it makes a blistering 35mm equivalent 85mm f1.4 portrait lens!
Focussing is a joy and optical quality with a digital body is superb. With prime lenses, I don't think you need bother with 'L' series on the whole - I have Canon EF 24, 28, 35, 50 and 85mm primes and they are all superb ('L' series zooms, on the other hand, are worth the investment). The 50mm f1.4 is a 'must have' lens for travel and reportage and low-light photography - give me one of these rather than a slow consumer 28-70 or 28-105 zoom any day.
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2005
|
|
severin koller
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Location: Austria
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jun 16, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $320.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, (quite)silent USM, size/weight, focus range, mostly sharp from f2.0 and very sharp at f4.0-f8.0, bokeh is nice, on 1.6 crop good portrait lens, no real visible disortion, sharp but not too sharp for face and skin, good balance so to say
|
|
Cons:
|
not a real f1.4 lens but f1.8/f2.0. chromatic aberration from f1.4 to f1.8 ! sometimes even at f2.8 but only a bit. autofocus is good(speed) but not accurate(except center and top AF) > using canon 20d
|
|
So i've been using this lens for about 4 month now. I'm shooting architecture mainly and when i use the 50mm for details, i mostly use it at f8.0 and it is very sharp at that aperture.
It's the only lens beside my wide angles (12-24mm sigma, 28mm f1.8 sigma) so when i do portraits and street photos, i only use the 50mm f1.4.
I really enjoy the bokeh, especially at close-ups like: http://www.deviantart.com/view/14469266/
(taken at f1.4, iso400 and minimal focus distance of 45cm on a 1.6xcrop 20d)
The f1.4 option is not often useable. The farer i have to focus, the softer the photo is. I think it is useable up to 2meters distance but then the focus gets way to soft. So on distance apertures from f1.4 to f2.0 are not highly recommended.
I sometimes ask myself why they write f1.4 on it when it's not useable in most cases... i wish canon would offer a 50mm prime for ~700bucks that IS useable at f1.4.
Well what is this lens good for ?
I have had good experiences for portraits, low light shots (on concerts even, my best (imo) was taken with this lens ( http://www.deviantart.com/view/18711159/ ) at f2.2 and manual focus (which doesn't always work on a 20d, because the viewfinder is so small in comparison to 1d series or 35mm cameras)
It's a useful focal lenght for 1.6x crop to take photos on the street but i think also on a full frame even better.
So in short:
mostly bad experiences from f1.4-f2.0 (soft, chromatic aberration, focus is not accurate for distance). AF isn't so good (might be my 20d)
Useful f1.4 only for close ups, but then it works pretty nice.
Good for low light, small and light. Very sharp from f4.0 and best at f8.0
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2005
|
|
emiliohm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 7, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Superb quality. Extremely sharp and fantastic colours. Fast focus.
|
|
Cons:
|
I do not really find any negative aspect.
|
|
|
Before buying this lens I thought that a fix focal would put a limit to my photography possibilities, but now this is the lens I usually take everywhere. Its quality is superb and its price is really good.
|
|
|
Jun 7, 2005
|
|
Gorham
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 2, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: May 18, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $380.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Great construction, smooth USM motor, excellent metal mount.
|
|
Cons:
|
Image color is trifle 'warm'. Slow AF in low light. Small filter size.
|
|
|
I've seen user reviews across the board in this lens and think it may be on the the infamous Canon variables where you either have a honey of a lens or a bit of a dud.
For indoors with no flash, I'm just not wild about it. But I do like the 'feel' of the lens and have no problem with it with flash or outdoors.
But, I'm actually happier with my 50/1.8 in the kit, truth to tell.
|
|
|
May 18, 2005
|
|
Non Plus Ultra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 12, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 12, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
light, sharp optics, very lightsensitive
|
|
Cons:
|
a bit too much plastic for my taste, AF tends to hunt and is not really fast.
|
|
|
Everything is said... optics are great, lightweight, versatile. I wish they build it a bit more tank-quality like we are used from Canon.
|
|
|
May 12, 2005
|
|
ollram
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 21, 2004
Location: Estonia
Posts: 921
|
|
Review Date: May 10, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, Sharp, large aperture
|
|
Cons:
|
not L lens
|
|
|
An excellent lens for indoor photography (when you don't like to use flash), specially at home!
I like this lens and i recommend it
|
|
|
May 10, 2005
|
|
squirrel777
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 8, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp optics, fairly fast focus, large aperture, better than average build quality, and a small body for such good quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Terrible chromatic aberations wide open, micro USM focus motor, and is overpriced if you ask me.
|
|
|
I use this lens on my Canon 20D and Elan 7 for low light photography. My only real complaint is the problem this lens has with chromatic aberations when using larger apertures (f/2.8 and larger).
I don't like the idea that the lens has a micro USM focus motor, but at least it still has full time manual focusing. However it does focus faster than other Canon micro USM lenses like the 75-300 IS USM.
Overall I would suggest this lens for low light photography, or portrait work. I wouldn't suggest it for a walk around lens on digital though, the 1.6 crop makes the lens hard to work with for most subjects. For film though, it works excellent as a walk around lens, low light, and portraits.
|
|
|
May 8, 2005
|
|
justruss
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 5, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3641
|
|
Review Date: May 3, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Gorgeous colors, sharp wide open (my copy), f/1.4
|
|
Cons:
|
no real complaints for the money
|
|
|
I really don't have too much to add that hasn't been said before. But what stands out to me is the color that this lens produces. Saturated, crisp and beautiful. I'm comparing this to a 135L, and while wide open it's not 135L sharp (though it is fairly sharp), its color is perfect. I want to reiterate-- my copy, at least, is plenty sharp at f/1.4, I never hesitate to shoot here if I need to.
Cheers,
Russ
|
|
|
May 3, 2005
|
|
lensjunky
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 25, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 83
|
|
Review Date: Apr 26, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
the usual color contrast Blah blah, but also backrgound subject isolation at smaller aperatures, and weight.
|
|
Cons:
|
plastic body-I think, but for optics this freakin fantastic for $300? WHO CARES!!?
|
|
|
when I go out and shoot and I dont want to carry lots of equipment, or stand out like a sore thumb, I use only this lens, and get some amazing results, when you limit yourself with one focal length, your creativity starts flowing, and it shows when you get your film or dig back. I cant believe the L quality colors, contrast, and sharpnes that comes out of this lens. Canon has almost all but stopped selling the 50 f1 L because pros prefer this lens. why pay $1000 for 0.4 more, plus a pound or two in bulk.
Use this lens exclusivly for a couple of shoots and you will rethink your dependence on zooms.
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2005
|
|
jazzy17
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 3, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 102
|
|
Review Date: Apr 25, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
excellent image quality, affordable at new lens price
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality (focus ring has some 'give')
|
|
|
Well worth upgrading from the f1.8 version for improved build quality. The biggest improvement comes in picture quality... this lens is amazing and does indeed deserve a red strip on it.
I have used this lens for available light portraits and low light concert/gig photography and it has proven to be a fantastic lens. For indoor portraits things may get tight on physical space in smaller location especially if you are using a crop sensor camera.
If you have no other prime in your kit make sure this the one you do have. If I pay any other compliments I will just be repeating what others have already have said... read them and believe them.
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2005
|
|
dan212
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 21, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 99
|
|
Review Date: Apr 21, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
tack sharp and fast
|
|
Cons:
|
it isn't a zoom - golly
|
|
|
This lens is just so good compared to the best that the "L" zooms can offer. I have "L" zooms but this is better. The build quality isn't the same but zooming isn't alchemy. You compromise to zoom. I used to shoot 35mm mostly wtih a Nikon 105/2.8. This 50/1.4 is great for available light and moderately long on a 1.6 crop digital camera. It is a great available light lens. The 85mm 1.8 is also great, and matches what my 35mm eyes are used to, but the 1.4 speed lets you take available light shots without silly ISO speeds at great resolution. As you go longer that speed translates into shallow DOF and perfect focus is necessary. I have a Canon 20D. I can focus manually exactly where I want, but even the 20D can't automatically figure out where subject sharpness matters and drop off doesn't bother the eye.
The 50/1.4 doesn't have the same build quality as the "L" series, but it is an insane bargain and the budding photographer would do well to add it to their kit and learn to use it before zooming. Zooms are a guilty pleasure and a crutch. YES - I HAVE three "L" zooms, but I like available light shots and the best stuff I have gotten is with the 50/1.4 and the 80/1.8 both add up to less than a 24-70/2.8 (which I have)
The ability to shoot at 1.4 counts for a LOT.
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2005
|
|
cprofit
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 556
|
|
Review Date: Apr 18, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great bokeh, shallow DOF, weight, size.
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit slow focusing and not too sharp at f/1.4.
|
|
|
I love this lens - a definite must have in every camera bag. Beautiful bokeh, amazing DOF and great low light performance.
I knew the negatives going in, and love it. People say it is light and has a poor build quality, which I disagree with. Just because something is heavy doesn't make it durable - I design structures for a living.
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2005
|
|
Hecate
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 13, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 17
|
|
Review Date: Apr 15, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Bitingly sharp. Light. Fast.Good colour. Good bokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
It doesn't have a red stripe around it.
|
|
If Canon didn't produce a 1.0 lens, this is the standard lens that would have the red stripe round it. I got mine slightly used, sold by some poor fool who thought that 50mm lenses were old tech and wanted a zoom. It's brilliant for everyday photography, and superb at low light. Because of it's lightness you can hand hold at speeds you wouldn't think possible. If was given a choice of only having one lens in my collection, this would be it because the quality means that even if you really needed a short telephoto, you'd still be able to do a selective enlargement with minimal loss of quality. Of course, me going out with just one lens is completely in the realms of fantasy 
|
|
|
Apr 15, 2005
|
|
Offline
|
|
Review Date: Apr 13, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $309.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, Fast, Sharp, Color, Detail, Fast quite AF, bag for the buck.
|
|
Cons:
|
Hood could be a bit larger at the bottom to get access of cap better
CA @ 1.4 indoors need preparation to avoided
|
|
|
This is a stellar lens for the money and is well worth the admission price.
Takes traffic high resolution pictures with detail that rivals any CS lens IMHO.
There is a bit of CA in low light indoor shots and can be avoided and the hood could be a bit larger at the base to get the lens cap off easier but other wise a gem.
AF is fast and quite and goes with me on every outing.
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
380
|
1139239
|
May 8, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
92% of reviewers
|
$319.59
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
7.94
|
8.72
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
