|
|
zolbs
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 3, 2009
Location: China
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Nov 8, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Weight, Price, Bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
I'm not terribly well versed on the finer points in terms of the IQ, etc. I've only been at this for about 6-9 months.
But I am very pleased with this lens. It's given me very sharp pictures, with nice contrast, and great bokeh. It's great to take to a party, where there's low-light and I want to avoid using a flash. Friends and family love the shots..
I was also exceptionally pleased with the price, compared to some other lenses. I previously owned the 1.8, but as many have said, it does feel like a toy.. And the 1.4 clearly trumps it in every department. (But I guess for $100 for the 1.8, you can't complain too much)
Anyway, I love having a very fast prime like this.. and it has me thinking a lot about the 85, 1.8 or 100, 2.0.
|
|
 Nov 8, 2009
|
|
TezM
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jun 12, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 181
|
|
Review Date: Sep 3, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $325.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Weight, precise focus, fast focus, bokeh, value for money, sharpness
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality isn't great (much better than 1.8 II), focus makes a slight whirring noise.
|
|
For the price, this is awesome. I previously had the 50mm 1.8 and although that is alright, the 1.4 is better in every department.
I've read the stories about the softness at 1.4 but honestly, I don't really see it on mine. It suffers from a slight lack of microcontrast at 1.4 and 1.6 but it's nothing to worry about and thus far it's actually been quite appealing.
The bokeh of this lens is awesome. Not totally circular but very close and I love it. The 50mm 1.8 would make strange pentagonal blocks out of bokeh but this is smooth all the way.
In summary: for the money this thing is fantastic. The DOF is very thin so if you're doing the lock centre focus then recompose please bare this in mind.
Oh, and buy a filter for it.
|
|
|
Sep 3, 2009
|
|
bradc
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 10, 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 31, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, full time focusing, wide aperture, sharpness after f/2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
Wide open performance disappointing
|
|
This is a lens that I wanted to be really happy with, but ultimately the bonus of having f/1.4 and f/2.0 in a lightweight package didn't overcome the lack of detail and sharpness wide open. While I can stop down and get incredible sharpness out of this lens, I don't see any advantage over my L zooms in that regard. In the end I replaced this with a 60mm EF-S macro that does double duty as a macro lens, but one that is sharp wide open at f/2.8 and has USM focussing for a similar price.
Nice lens with a solid feel, I liked everything else about it other than the performance at f/1.4. If I'm going to the trouble of carrying an extra lens for use wide open, it needs to be sharp...
|
|
|
Aug 31, 2009
|
|
ersatz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 24, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 12
|
|
Review Date: Aug 24, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Relatively cheap and sharp. Good contrast, AF fairly fast and accurate.
|
|
Cons:
|
Fragile AF motor.
|
|
I try to rate lenses independent of one another at least on the 1-10 scale. But comparisons will always be drawn and I try to keep things into perspective, especially that of price, which is an important consideration to consumers.
I got this lens used for $250 which at the time was a fair price as it included a lens hood and generic HOYA UV filter. This is quite a step up from the 50mm 1.8 mkII. Build quality is much better and so are the resultant images.
Contrast is better and colors are much warmer. That alone justifies purchase over the 1.8 mkII, IMO. The AF is also faster and quieter. It does occassionally hunt in really low light. AF accuracy is also better but I still find it misses the mark, especially in low light. But, I get twice as many keepers than the 1.8 mkII. However the AF is fragile and if you happen to bump the front of the lens you can damage the AF motor. I had a lens hood on and someone walked past brushing their arm into the hood and it damaged the AF motor. It was a $150 repair. The manual focus in located mid body and is actually useable unlike the 1.8 mkII. But I grew tired of it and finally sent it in for repair.
This lens has a good half stop of sharpness over the 1.8 mkII and even on occassion a full stop especially in the corners on a FF body. But in comparison to the Canon 85mm 1.8 or the Sigma 50mm 1.4 and its sharpness is not that impressive. I've say it's roughly a stop behind either of those. Not to mention AF speed and accuracy aren't quite on par either.
The 85mm kind of spoiled me as I expected the same qualities in the Canon 50mm 1.4 and it just couldn't meet those expectations. The 85mm 1.8 is really a hidden gem.
However, I heard that the Sigma 50mm 1.4 has a sharp lens wide open. Well, it cost me $400 but it did deliver. AF while a bit noisy is damn accurate and conparable in speed. It is sharp wide open, with little CA or fringing that can plague the Canon 85mm 1.8 lens. People do complain about the Sigma's AF accruacy and mine did back focus slightly on a crop body. Sent it in only to have the same issue. Finally sent the crop body and lens in and it was calibrated properly. I would readily recommend the Sigma 50mm 1.4 over the Canon but the price difference is fairly steep too. But I have a tendncy to pixel peep and crop quite a bit so I'm a bit fussy over IQ.
The Canon 1.4 is vastly better than the 1.8 mkII and I would recommend it any day over the latter even given the price. But if you can get the Sigma, then that would be my recommendation. The Sigma does everything better though it is more costly. I just prefer the Sigma as it is easier to use and requires less post processing, but the Canon 1.4 is a perfectly adequate lens.
|
|
|
Aug 24, 2009
|
|
MarcyJillGood
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 19, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 919
|
|
Review Date: Aug 15, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $349.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, small, fast & sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
This is probably my favorite lens, or one of them, at least. It's the one I turn to for portraits or candid shots of people. I prefer zooms for walk-around fun, but I absolutely LOVE this lens. It's much faster than the 50mm 1.8 and, IMHO, worth the extra cost. I had the 1.8 as well, but the slow focus and noise bothered me, so I gave it to my young niece.
The build seems very solid & it feels substantial in your hands (compared to the 1.8). I have not rated the build because I hate to compare it to an L lens (the tanks).
I'm new to dSLRs, so I am certain other reviewers have better comparisons to make, but I do love this lens.
FYI - have used it mostly on my beloved XSi; recently bought a 5D Mk ii but not much experience on it yet.
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2009
|
|
hien_it
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 9, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 9, 2009
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Oh sorry, I mean 70-200mm but not 70-700.
|
|
|
Aug 9, 2009
|
|
hien_it
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 9, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 9, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness and color, USM, lightweight, compact.
|
|
Cons:
|
Micro USM, litle slower than ring USM.
|
|
I've got this lens for 3 months. This is an awesome lens which produces incredible sharpness and color. I have also a 70-700 F4 IS, and I cant tell the difference between the pictures taken with the two lens.
However, I give only 9 because of the micro-USM. It's a little slow, sometime I loose focus because that the subject move a little bit while I'm focusing.
Some pictures taken with this lens:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hien_it/tags/canonef50mmf14usm/
|
|
|
Aug 9, 2009
|
|
Michael Watt
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 21, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 28, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast apertures, pleasing background blur, relatively inexpensive,
|
|
Cons:
|
Prefer internal focusing, don't like the lens extending during focusing as this captures dust.
|
|
Canon 50mm EF f/1.4 USM Lens. I don’t know why many photographers choose a far more expensive L series lens, only to produce results that can easily be emulated by their much cheaper counterpart. I have never been impressed by the mine’s-bigger-than-your’s, so it must be better rational when it comes to optical equipment. Even if I could afford the 1.2 version of this focal length, the results I get from this lens are optically pleasing and are acceptable to me. Given the comparative apertures above 2.8 the results are similar. Apertures greater than 2.8 at close distances are difficult to use and border on the impractical for this focal length. I find this lens sharp (in the centre) wide open when the Lens plane and focal plane are parallel. Focus is fast and accurate and if needed the bright viewfinder produced by this lens permits easy manual focus. For general photography this is a highly recommended optic and preferable to the expensive 50 mm 1.2 lens. If required the eight blades and fast apertures produce a pleasing background blur to isolate the subject.
Studio results using this optic :-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mw_photography/3757813902/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mw_photography/3749415320/
|
|
|
Jul 28, 2009
|
|
juju1958
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 27, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Jul 18, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good fast AF and quiet , size and weight. VERY usable at f1.4.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
I dropped and broke my 50mm MK11 1.8 which I had been fairly happy with exept the AF ability in low light. For a while now I had pondered on whether or not to get the The 50mm f1.4 / f1.2 or maybe something wider. I had tried the 50mm f1.4 on a 30D and did not make a purchase. Then a while later having the 5D MK11 with me I tried this lens again and made the purchase. I am very happy with the results so far. Great IQ with fill in flash at f1.4 with an equally satisfying rendition of colour.
needless to say the the IQ gets very sharp as the aperture is stepped down with f8 / f13 being as sharp as my macro 100mm f2.8.
This lens is a step up from the plastic f1.8 in so many ways and well worth the higher price.
|
|
|
Jul 18, 2009
|
|
Paul_88
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 1, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $355.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, light weight and fast AF. Very good color and contrast.
|
|
Cons:
|
Micro-USM
|
|
This lens is a great lens for the price you paid. It's small, light weight and fast AF. Very good color and contrast but at wide open end, this lens is kind a soft. Micro-USM is not as fast as ring-type usm but you can't beat it at this price.
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2009
|
|
matnen
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 13, 2008
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 49
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp.Sharp.USM.Lightweight.Compact.
|
|
Cons:
|
no hood
|
|
Perfect lens for this money.Sharp, nice bokeh, natural colors, clear images.Good for portraits and walkaround shots.Accurate AF.It lives on my XTi.Highly recommended for those who start DSLR photography.This is reference lens.Right choise to replace kit lens.
I've been with it for more then a year-no regrates.Superb lens for good money.
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2009
|
|
andywang
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 8, 2009
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 11, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp only F2.0 above. Fast focusing, Value Lens
|
|
Cons:
|
Material not strong. internal focusing motor easy having problem
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2009
|
|
|
