I have both, and the 1.4 is a lot sharper wide open with a lot less colour fringing and better microcontrast. It was worth the extra money, in my opinion.
I've had the 1.8 and the 1.4. No doubt they are both a great lens however I have stuck with the 1.4. 3 reasons: 1. The build quality is so much better, it feels like you are putting a nice lens on your camera rather than a toy lens. 2. Quiet and quick focusing thanks to the usm motor. 3. Low light performance for AF and image quality is better albeit marginally. Treat yourself, treat your camera.
I am shooting events with 50mm f1.8. Sometimes people are joking about smallest lens on a biggest DSLR (1D mkII), but they don't complain about final pics. Great lens for 60€.
The 50mm 1.8 is not supposed to have its focus wheel turned when set to AF. you can really damage the motor, I've learned that the hard way, just FYI. Great videos Matt, and thanks for all your effort.
I bought the 1.4 for one reason. Flickr has groups for everything and is an amazing resource. The group for the 'nifty fifty' had quite a few images of broken or damaged lenses, many owners were claiming that it was their second or third lens. In the group for the 1.4 there were (at the time) no images of broken lenses. I'm not in the habit of breaking lenses, but thought the more sturdy build was the way to go.
I've seen quite a few comparison videos of these 50mm primes. And clearly this is the best of all those videos. Does a very objective test. I was swaying towards the 1.4, but now i think the 1.8 is also something to be considered. Thanks for posting.
The reference prime lens for Canon is the 135 mm f/2 L :-) Very sharp, nice colors & bokeh, well-built, focusses very quickly, focusses very close, etc. etc. The 35 mm f/1.4 L is also very good and problem free as well. In the 50 mm length, the 50 mm f/1.4 is the best buy IMO (performance / handling is good, it is compact and light), but the AF mechanics break often so we, Canon aficionados as you call it, are desperately waiting for an upgrade to this lens.
Thanks for the review Matt. I have the 1.8 and I'm happy with it (although I had to adjust the micro-focus feature in my camera body because I was experiencing some focus deviation). Between f6.3 and f8 this lens is amazingly sharp.
Interesting video. I had the 1.8 for almost two years now. I thought about upgrading to 1.4 but cancelled that plan after seeing this video. But eventually I bought the 1.4 usm. In terms of image quality there's not much of a difference. The 1.4 has a dreamy look wide open. The 1.8 looks more natural wide open. 1.4@2.0 is still a bit dreamy in the corners, but the centre sharpness is better than the 1.8@2.0. At 2.8 or narrower both are pretty sharp but again the 1.4 is very slightly sharper. Overall IQ-wise the 1.8 is a great choice and the IQ alone doesn't justify the upgrade. Nevertheless I keep the 1.4 and sold the 1.8 - here's why: - The AF of the 1.4 isn't faster as the AF of the 1.8 in bright daylight, but in low light situations and even on e very cloudy day my 1.8 did a lot of focus hunting - and often after some back and forth it was not spot on. In those situations the 1.4 is much more reliable. I had some otherwise great portrait shots where the 1.8 AF was slightly off - that's annoying. That was the main reason for the upgrade. - On an APS sensor I don't really want to go beyond ISO1600. ISO3200 is tolerable at times but not desirable. So 2/3 stops more light can make a difference even if you sacrifice IQ. It's okay because centre sharpness is still good almost wide open. To me the centre sharpness of the 1.4@1.6 is about the same as the 1.8@2.0 - Sometimes I shot short video clips to use as transitions that make photo presentations more interesting. Pulling focus with the 1.8 is not just a PITA. It's close to impossible (especially when you want to use follow focus). It's much better with 1.4 - although it's anything but the smoothest USM MF Ring I used so far. Bottom line: if you are satisfied with the 1.8's AF and you don't need 2/3 stops more light, keep the 1.8. If $1000 don't scare you off get the new 2014 Sigma 50/1.4A - it's incredible - it eats all canon 50mm for breakfast - at once. Even wide open it offers an IQ that up until now was only available for photographers who paid $4K for the Zeiss Otus.
Thanks for the vid. I have a video background, but am diving into DSLRs and photography, and the 1.8 was always going to be my first lens focus. Your comparison combined with the price points, make me feel better about the decision.
being large aperture lenses a low light test would be great as I personally use lenses like the 1.4 as a star trail lens but would love to have seen comparisons. Great review though, thanks and keep em coming.
Need to see a comparison of image sharpness as well as a low light test. The 1.8 hunts and shutters like it's on a turbulent flight in anything but ideal light in my experience. I can't wait to replace it with a 1.4 and the price is coming down on that now because Canon will be putting out a 1.4II shortly.
This is so awesome. I was just milling over which lens to buy. and this was really informative. I hope you didn't have to buy all these lenses, because I would love to see more of these videos.
I'm happy you confirmed what I already knew, since my budget it's not big enough for 1.2 I went for the 1.8 since from what I could tell by seeing pictures from both online there wasn't a significant difference.
Nice review. I upgraded from the 1.8 to the 1.4 as its a lot less noisy and it hunts less, but the main reason is that I've broken 2 1.8s and the much better build quality really shows if you handle both lenses. The other interesting thing was said by a camera repairer, who mentioned that a fairly common problem was that 1.8's got stuck on the camera due to the plastic mount
HI Matt very helpful I have the 1.8 and had been wondering about upgrading to 1.4. I now know there is no reason to !! Now the 1.2 would be awesome but crazy price !! I'll stick with my Nifty Fifty !! Thanks !!
Thank you man!!! This is what I was looking for to see! I have 50mm 1.8 and now I want to upgrade to 1.4 so I wanted to see all this performances! Thanks again!
I wish you did a low light test. I had the 50mm 1.8 II and it was horrible for grabbing focus in low light compared to the 1.4 and 1.2 even on my 1ds mk2. The 1.8 was fatiguing for me. I recommend it to beginners because of the price point, but most shooters who've used a lot of gear would most likely use the 1.4 professionally for the smoother bokeh, usm and better low light focusing abilities without the price of the 1.2
hi there. i really learn a lot with your videos.. i only have my kit lens and a canon 75-300 usm 3 WITHOUT I.S... the 75-300 is quite not good for me because it deosnt have an is so im a little bit regretting on getting that lens. now.. im not a professional. i just love taking photos of places i have been to.. and now i need a 50mm lens for our product shooting.. would you recommend this 50mm 1.8 for me? and oh.. i have this crappy 1100d from canon.. but as of now i dont need those pros.
Matt, the f/1.8 is NOT designed to manually adjust the focus while in AF mode. You'll risk ruining the motor. Only USM lenses are designed to allow manual focus adjustment.
2 things about the 1.8. First, it has 5 aperture blades, not 6. Second, the motor inside the 1.8 is not USM, so of course, it focuses louder and if you keep overriding it, that would burn out the motor. It is simply not designed for overriding like those with USM. But the 1.8 is actually worth more than what it costs. Nice review as always, subscribed!!!
Thanks matt i am a wedding photographer in the uk and own both 50m1.8 and 1.4. I can say sharpness there is not much in it but in low light the 1.4 blows the 1.8 out of the water for focus speed. The 1.8 does focus to be honest but hunts a lot. And i find the 1.4 doesnt miss focus wide open has much :)
there's rumors of a 50mm 1.8 IS, but Canon charges like $500-1000 more for just the IS feature on their newer prime lenses so we'll have to see! I think one priced in between the 1.8 and 1.4 with IS would be great. And like the others have mentions I didn't know the 1.8 had manual override? I'm pretty sure it doesn't.
I really deals with the camera being used, not the lens. I have a Rebel XSi which hunts for focus at low light with the 50mm 1.8, but my Canon Elan IIe can grab focus fast with the 1.8 in the same lighting conditions thanks to it having an dedicated IR light. A lens can't fix the limit of the camera body's technology.
I'm upgrading from 1.8 to 1.4... I loved the 1.8 in terms of image quality vs price and tought me a lot but it really is like taking a toy from your lense bag, that's one reason. other is the extra light you can get (would be my fastest lense so far) but in practical terms and reason 3, will be to use it at 2.8 for shallow depth and very sharp subjet in focus...
How so? The lens is where you control the amount of light that reaches the sensor through your aperture and shutter settings. If it were indeed my camera and not the lens, then that would mean shopping for lenses with wider possible apertures is a waste?
I've had the 50/1.8 mk I (metal mount and distance window), 50/1.4 and 50/1.2 at the same time for a while, but have since sold the 1.4 though. The 1.8 is a fine lens, but in RL especially if you use Servo AI on moving subjects, it is slower to track and that's when it starts hunting. The 1.4 is a bit faster under those conditions, but when it loses track it starts fluttering. The 1.4 can have a nervous looking bokeh at times. The 1.2 has the best AF performance tracking moving subjects and under lower light conditions. But you have to watch that mid day sun. At a real pinch the 1.8 mk 2 is nice, but I'd go for the 1.4 instead. But the original 1.8 that's a different matter. Very sharp and a good (well 1980s) type build. If you can find one (look for people selling old EOS film cameras) buy it. I bought mine in mint condition together with a user grade EOS film body for EUR 7,- The 1.2 is one of my favorites, but not as great as the 85/1.2 which is in a class of its own. Never tried the the 1.0 Had a Nikon 1.2 for a while, that was interesting.
That was a good review, but the one thing I was hoping to see was a shoot-off in low-light conditions. I would think that one possible reason to buy the f1.2 would be for improved shooting in low-light.
Cheers Matt. I tried to make a reasonable explanation for such a price hike in the 1.2 over the 1.4 outside of weather sealing, but failed. They couldn't make it a 9 blade for that price? lol. In this kind of lens where all three can do the job superbly, it really comes down to construction, so I'm with on Canon making a metal USM 1.8 that is maybe $200-250. At least then the cost can be justified.
Exactly what I was thinking. Watch as he forces the focus ring. Good review otherwise but people say the 1.8 is prone to breaking. Prob only under force (like in this video!). Even if it did snap you can buy another and still be way under budget compared to the 1.4.
The 2 years I had a 60D, I was really ready to switch to Nikon, especially since they brought out the 70-200 f/4. But now that I've upgraded to my 5D 3 I happy with that. And I'd definitely get a 6D for the pop-up flash(If it had one). And it's low-light performance ehehe
I think your conclusion is bang on. The cheapie 50 1.8 is tinny, but for the price it's great. I have it on a full frame camera, and it takes better shots than I do. If I had the bucks I'd buy the 1.2, but why? I'm no pro. Thanks for a good review.
Actually the 1.4 is less then 3 times the price of the 1.8 (at least where i live) and there are other reasons to get it, like FTM, FF compatible and the same 58mm filter thread as the kit lens, so all of the filters you already have will work, more accessible focus ring, etc.
I have the 1.8 and its really good, but I'm considering getting the Sigma 1.4, from what Ive been reading its supposedly better than the canon equivalent and is {kinda} close to the 1.2 performance, at least in pic quality! OH and awesome vid. keep the canon videos coming :)
Nikon Guy, I am travelling to Kashmir, India in Mid-April. Because of security reasons on the flights, I may not be able to carry both the lenses I have (18-55 & 55-200). I use Nikon D60 and will like to capture pictures of nature. Pl advice as to which lense shall I carry. ----Anil
can you give a tutorial on reproduction ratio... and separately the pieces of glass and elements. what does is all really mean, in human terms. i speak to my lenses but they don't answer back. Specs specs specs... like you new website.
by the way, I totally agree, from everything that I hear....the 1.2 is NOT worth the extra aperture. Sure, it takes a nice picture from what I could tell, but defintely not worth over $1000 more than the 1.8, which takes decent pictures in it's own right. I say 1.4 if you're a professional (better build quality) - 1.8 for hobbyist
Hi Matt, I have the 1.8 plastic fantastic for over a year now and I´m not that impressed with it to be honest. The image quality is as you described it but the more you use the lens, the worse it performs in terms of focussing-speed. These cheap lenses are built to only last a few years and I already have problems with the little motor inside the lens. New there might only be a litte difference between the three lenses, but the next lens for me is the 1.4, because it is better build. Thanx
I love my 1.8 but if you're doing video you really need the 1.4 or the 1.2 due to the fact that the 1.8's manual focus ring is SOOO sensitive as it turns only 90 degrees compared to the 180 degrees on the others. That is if you like to shoot with low aperture of course...
Thanks for your effort... this video should be useful for anyone in the market for a Canon 50mm. The 50mm 1.8 is a nice performer and great for most people's needs, but I feel that a working pro work benefit with the 1.4's better built quality.
Plastic fantastic hehehe How does 1.8 in term of video recording? I am using it primarily for video blogging (set on a tripod). Do you have test footage for 1.8? Thank you for the great review. I had fun watching it =)
your 1.8 focuses SO MUCH faster than mine! could it be my camera? (450d) maybe some dust got into the focus mechanism? what focusing point did you have selected for the focus test?
I will reiterate what others have said here; don't turn the focus ring on the 1.8 when set to AF, you are grinding against the focus motor when you do that.
I looked at all three nad would have loved the 1.2L but ended up buying the Sigma f1.4 DG EX. A little bit more expensive than the Canon f1.4 but way better in my opinion. Try the Nikon fit Sigma Matt.
NOO! Don't turn the focus ring on that f/1.8 in AF mode!! It sent shivers down my spine! But great video :-)
The 1.8II does not have manual focus override. if you try to turn it in AF mode, you are fighting the servo and can damage the lens.
Best 50mm review! I have 1.8 and was thinking about 1.4 but your review save me 400 bucks. Thank you! ))
I have both, and the 1.4 is a lot sharper wide open with a lot less colour fringing and better microcontrast. It was worth the extra money, in my opinion.
i just get tokina 35 mm fix and it is AMAZING! ))
And I got the 70-200 f/2.8 IS L II and it is amazing as well. What's your point?
ftpaddict
my testing shows 1.8 sharper at 1.8 than the 1.4 at 1.8
Most likely due to sample variation. Perhaps you got a very good copy of the 1.8 and a bad one of the 1.4, or I got the reverse.
I've had the 1.8 and the 1.4. No doubt they are both a great lens however I have stuck with the 1.4.
3 reasons:
1. The build quality is so much better, it feels like you are putting a nice lens on your camera rather than a toy lens.
2. Quiet and quick focusing thanks to the usm motor.
3. Low light performance for AF and image quality is better albeit marginally.
Treat yourself, treat your camera.
Please do not turn the focus ring on the 1.8 when it's in AF-Mode. Do it a few times and you will destroy your focusmotor.
what is the focus ring?
Nevermind I understand what you said
this guy and another guy said you dont on this lens. or at least that your meant to be able to?
I am shooting events with 50mm f1.8. Sometimes people are joking about smallest lens on a biggest DSLR (1D mkII), but they don't complain about final pics. Great lens for 60€.
The 50mm 1.8 is not supposed to have its focus wheel turned when set to AF. you can really damage the motor, I've learned that the hard way, just FYI.
Great videos Matt, and thanks for all your effort.
I bought the 1.4 for one reason. Flickr has groups for everything and is an amazing resource. The group for the 'nifty fifty' had quite a few images of broken or damaged lenses, many owners were claiming that it was their second or third lens. In the group for the 1.4 there were (at the time) no images of broken lenses. I'm not in the habit of breaking lenses, but thought the more sturdy build was the way to go.
Very helpful video thank you my friend
I've seen quite a few comparison videos of these 50mm primes. And clearly this is the best of all those videos. Does a very objective test. I was swaying towards the 1.4, but now i think the 1.8 is also something to be considered. Thanks for posting.
Never stop doing what you do. Informative and humorous... Much appreciated.
The reference prime lens for Canon is the 135 mm f/2 L :-) Very sharp, nice colors & bokeh, well-built, focusses very quickly, focusses very close, etc. etc. The 35 mm f/1.4 L is also very good and problem free as well. In the 50 mm length, the 50 mm f/1.4 is the best buy IMO (performance / handling is good, it is compact and light), but the AF mechanics break often so we, Canon aficionados as you call it, are desperately waiting for an upgrade to this lens.
I have the 1.8 and am happy with it. If it needs to be replaced, it's cheap enough to not be a concern. Thanks for the comparison video!
not sure what you are asking
Dear Mark, realy good Video but I would prefer some low light tests in the future
Thanks for the review Matt. I have the 1.8 and I'm happy with it (although I had to adjust the micro-focus feature in my camera body because I was experiencing some focus deviation). Between f6.3 and f8 this lens is amazingly sharp.
Interesting video. I had the 1.8 for almost two years now. I thought about upgrading to 1.4 but cancelled that plan after seeing this video. But eventually I bought the 1.4 usm.
In terms of image quality there's not much of a difference. The 1.4 has a dreamy look wide open. The 1.8 looks more natural wide open. 1.4@2.0 is still a bit dreamy in the corners, but the centre sharpness is better than the 1.8@2.0. At 2.8 or narrower both are pretty sharp but again the 1.4 is very slightly sharper. Overall IQ-wise the 1.8 is a great choice and the IQ alone doesn't justify the upgrade. Nevertheless I keep the 1.4 and sold the 1.8 - here's why:
- The AF of the 1.4 isn't faster as the AF of the 1.8 in bright daylight, but in low light situations and even on e very cloudy day my 1.8 did a lot of focus hunting - and often after some back and forth it was not spot on. In those situations the 1.4 is much more reliable. I had some otherwise great portrait shots where the 1.8 AF was slightly off - that's annoying. That was the main reason for the upgrade.
- On an APS sensor I don't really want to go beyond ISO1600. ISO3200 is tolerable at times but not desirable. So 2/3 stops more light can make a difference even if you sacrifice IQ. It's okay because centre sharpness is still good almost wide open. To me the centre sharpness of the 1.4@1.6 is about the same as the 1.8@2.0
- Sometimes I shot short video clips to use as transitions that make photo presentations more interesting. Pulling focus with the 1.8 is not just a PITA. It's close to impossible (especially when you want to use follow focus). It's much better with 1.4 - although it's anything but the smoothest USM MF Ring I used so far.
Bottom line: if you are satisfied with the 1.8's AF and you don't need 2/3 stops more light, keep the 1.8. If $1000 don't scare you off get the new 2014 Sigma 50/1.4A - it's incredible - it eats all canon 50mm for breakfast - at once. Even wide open it offers an IQ that up until now was only available for photographers who paid $4K for the Zeiss Otus.
Gr8.... Uh help me out.... Thanks for this explaination.....
great review! i own a 50 1.8 II and its been with me throughout my travels and event its made out of plastic, it held up its own.
So when's Nikon going to come out with a 50mm f/1.2 AF-S already? I saw the patent for it.
Should have reviewed the 50mm Zeiss f/2 makro - by far my favorite 50mm.
Thanks for the vid.
I have a video background, but am diving into DSLRs and photography, and the 1.8 was always going to be my first lens focus. Your comparison combined with the price points, make me feel better about the decision.
Hi Matt, I own the 1.8 and 1.4. I love both of them.
Thanks for the review Matt. I'm getting the 1.8.
being large aperture lenses a low light test would be great as I personally use lenses like the 1.4 as a star trail lens but would love to have seen comparisons. Great review though, thanks and keep em coming.
Need to see a comparison of image sharpness as well as a low light test. The 1.8 hunts and shutters like it's on a turbulent flight in anything but ideal light in my experience. I can't wait to replace it with a 1.4 and the price is coming down on that now because Canon will be putting out a 1.4II shortly.
This is so awesome. I was just milling over which lens to buy. and this was really informative. I hope you didn't have to buy all these lenses, because I would love to see more of these videos.
Great video. I am newer to photography, but I feel a lot more at east with buying the 1.8 and not feeling like I might be throwing my money away.
I'm happy you confirmed what I already knew, since my budget it's not big enough for 1.2 I went for the 1.8 since from what I could tell by seeing pictures from both online there wasn't a significant difference.
A while ago I came across something called SLR Magic. They offer a 50mm f/0.95 lens for Canon, iirc. Nice one to test maybe?
I'm thinking to buy a analog camera and pick up the canon 50mm 1.8... What do you think, Matt?
the vignetting....is that only on a full frame sensor? What was used for the test? Just curious.
Nice review.
I upgraded from the 1.8 to the 1.4 as its a lot less noisy and it hunts less, but the main reason is that I've broken 2 1.8s and the much better build quality really shows if you handle both lenses. The other interesting thing was said by a camera repairer, who mentioned that a fairly common problem was that 1.8's got stuck on the camera due to the plastic mount
One of the best RUclips video qualities. Can you tell us what you are using ?
HI Matt very helpful I have the 1.8 and had been wondering about upgrading to 1.4. I now know there is no reason to !! Now the 1.2 would be awesome but crazy price !! I'll stick with my Nifty Fifty !! Thanks !!
very educational and also quite funny with your remarks. Thanks for the tutorial
Thank you man!!! This is what I was looking for to see! I have 50mm 1.8 and now I want to upgrade to 1.4 so I wanted to see all this performances! Thanks again!
Why it is hard for Canon and Nikon and other lens manifactures to build 50mm with Image stabilization? I can't figure out that :/
Great comparison! Thank you Matt!
Awesome video and commentary 👌
The 1.8 is pretty much the only lens I use on my EOS 300 film body, great combo, you won't be dissapointed!
I wish you did a low light test. I had the 50mm 1.8 II and it was horrible for grabbing focus in low light compared to the 1.4 and 1.2 even on my 1ds mk2. The 1.8 was fatiguing for me. I recommend it to beginners because of the price point, but most shooters who've used a lot of gear would most likely use the 1.4 professionally for the smoother bokeh, usm and better low light focusing abilities without the price of the 1.2
hi there. i really learn a lot with your videos.. i only have my kit lens and a canon 75-300 usm 3 WITHOUT I.S... the 75-300 is quite not good for me because it deosnt have an is so im a little bit regretting on getting that lens. now.. im not a professional. i just love taking photos of places i have been to.. and now i need a 50mm lens for our product shooting.. would you recommend this 50mm 1.8 for me? and oh.. i have this crappy 1100d from canon.. but as of now i dont need those pros.
just wondering how long did you have the 1.4 i hear lots of horror stories about the auto focusing breaking right after a year
Matt, the f/1.8 is NOT designed to manually adjust the focus while in AF mode. You'll risk ruining the motor. Only USM lenses are designed to allow manual focus adjustment.
Hey what is that Nikon guy doing with these Canon lenses?
There's a 50mm f/1.2 af-s patent on Nikon Rumors, that's where I got it from.
2 things about the 1.8. First, it has 5 aperture blades, not 6. Second, the motor inside the 1.8 is not USM, so of course, it focuses louder and if you keep overriding it, that would burn out the motor. It is simply not designed for overriding like those with USM. But the 1.8 is actually worth more than what it costs. Nice review as always, subscribed!!!
Thanks matt i am a wedding photographer in the uk and own both 50m1.8 and 1.4. I can say sharpness there is not much in it but in low light the 1.4 blows the 1.8 out of the water for focus speed. The 1.8 does focus to be honest but hunts a lot. And i find the 1.4 doesnt miss focus wide open has much :)
there's rumors of a 50mm 1.8 IS, but Canon charges like $500-1000 more for just the IS feature on their newer prime lenses so we'll have to see! I think one priced in between the 1.8 and 1.4 with IS would be great. And like the others have mentions I didn't know the 1.8 had manual override? I'm pretty sure it doesn't.
I really deals with the camera being used, not the lens. I have a Rebel XSi which hunts for focus at low light with the 50mm 1.8, but my Canon Elan IIe can grab focus fast with the 1.8 in the same lighting conditions thanks to it having an dedicated IR light. A lens can't fix the limit of the camera body's technology.
I'm upgrading from 1.8 to 1.4... I loved the 1.8 in terms of image quality vs price and tought me a lot but it really is like taking a toy from your lense bag, that's one reason. other is the extra light you can get (would be my fastest lense so far) but in practical terms and reason 3, will be to use it at 2.8 for shallow depth and very sharp subjet in focus...
I guessed which photo was from which lens, I feel happy now :D
Thank you for making this video. I have a better understanding of which lens is best for me.
4:28. Wow, was always uncertain about this claim, but I finally got to see it.
How so? The lens is where you control the amount of light that reaches the sensor through your aperture and shutter settings. If it were indeed my camera and not the lens, then that would mean shopping for lenses with wider possible apertures is a waste?
I've watched so many of your videos, I feel like I know you. Thanks for all the helpful, awesome videos. HUGE HUGE HELP!!
I've had the 50/1.8 mk I (metal mount and distance window), 50/1.4 and 50/1.2 at the same time for a while, but have since sold the 1.4 though.
The 1.8 is a fine lens, but in RL especially if you use Servo AI on moving subjects, it is slower to track and that's when it starts hunting.
The 1.4 is a bit faster under those conditions, but when it loses track it starts fluttering. The 1.4 can have a nervous looking bokeh at times.
The 1.2 has the best AF performance tracking moving subjects and under lower light conditions. But you have to watch that mid day sun.
At a real pinch the 1.8 mk 2 is nice, but I'd go for the 1.4 instead.
But the original 1.8 that's a different matter. Very sharp and a good (well 1980s) type build. If you can find one (look for people selling old EOS film cameras) buy it. I bought mine in mint condition together with a user grade EOS film body for EUR 7,-
The 1.2 is one of my favorites, but not as great as the 85/1.2 which is in a class of its own.
Never tried the the 1.0
Had a Nikon 1.2 for a while, that was interesting.
As someone with a misfortune for breaking expensive things, I love how you wave your hand around with the 1.2!
I have the 50mm 1.8. Cheap at £90. Does the job, although it's like a 75mm on a cropped sensor. The cropped bit confuses me a tad.
Didn't know that you went to Sapa
Good job , Thanks for sharing this video.
Great video. Thanks a lot for making this!
Great review. Thanks for making it.
That was a good review, but the one thing I was hoping to see was a shoot-off in low-light conditions. I would think that one possible reason to buy the f1.2 would be for improved shooting in low-light.
Cheers Matt. I tried to make a reasonable explanation for such a price hike in the 1.2 over the 1.4 outside of weather sealing, but failed. They couldn't make it a 9 blade for that price? lol. In this kind of lens where all three can do the job superbly, it really comes down to construction, so I'm with on Canon making a metal USM 1.8 that is maybe $200-250. At least then the cost can be justified.
I just picked up the 1.8 today went to shoot and I must say I love it
The 1.8 has not manual focus override... You're gonna crack your motor!
Really? ...so what does the a switch on the side that says "AF/MF" do?
I believe 2 versions came out, one has manual focus, the older ones do not.
He means overriding in autu focus which you only can in USM/Ultrasonic motors.
The 1.8 definitely has no manual override in auto mode.
Yes, you can do it, but you pretty much fight against the motor.
Exactly what I was thinking. Watch as he forces the focus ring. Good review otherwise but people say the 1.8 is prone to breaking. Prob only under force (like in this video!). Even if it did snap you can buy another and still be way under budget compared to the 1.4.
Is coma a full stop and full stop a coma on your keyboard ?
The 2 years I had a 60D, I was really ready to switch to Nikon, especially since they brought out the 70-200 f/4. But now that I've upgraded to my 5D 3 I happy with that. And I'd definitely get a 6D for the pop-up flash(If it had one). And it's low-light performance ehehe
I think your conclusion is bang on. The cheapie 50 1.8 is tinny, but for the price it's great. I have it on a full frame camera, and it takes better shots than I do. If I had the bucks I'd buy the 1.2, but why? I'm no pro. Thanks for a good review.
this helped, thanx, leaning towards the 1.2L
smallfaucet don’t we all... 😂😂
Actually the 1.4 is less then 3 times the price of the 1.8 (at least where i live) and there are other reasons to get it, like FTM, FF compatible and the same 58mm filter thread as the kit lens, so all of the filters you already have will work, more accessible focus ring, etc.
I have the 1.8 and its really good, but I'm considering getting the Sigma 1.4, from what Ive been reading its supposedly better than the canon equivalent and is {kinda} close to the 1.2 performance, at least in pic quality! OH and awesome vid. keep the canon videos coming :)
Mister fully plastic, really fantastic. :D Tutu tutu tutu....
id love to see low light tests on these lenses as one of the main benefits is supposed to be low light performance ive heard
Nikon Guy,
I am travelling to Kashmir, India in Mid-April. Because of security reasons on the flights, I may not be able to carry both the lenses I have (18-55 & 55-200). I use Nikon D60 and will like to capture pictures of nature.
Pl advice as to which lense shall I carry.
----Anil
can you give a tutorial on reproduction ratio... and separately the pieces of glass and elements. what does is all really mean, in human terms. i speak to my lenses but they don't answer back. Specs specs specs... like you new website.
by the way, I totally agree, from everything that I hear....the 1.2 is NOT worth the extra aperture. Sure, it takes a nice picture from what I could tell, but defintely not worth over $1000 more than the 1.8, which takes decent pictures in it's own right. I say 1.4 if you're a professional (better build quality) - 1.8 for hobbyist
Hi Matt,
I have the 1.8 plastic fantastic for over a year now and I´m not that impressed with it to be honest. The image quality is as you described it but the more you use the lens, the worse it performs in terms of focussing-speed. These cheap lenses are built to only last a few years and I already have problems with the little motor inside the lens.
New there might only be a litte difference between the three lenses, but the next lens for me is the 1.4, because it is better build.
Thanx
Focusing? Low light performance is more a sensor issue. My name is Matt btw.
I love my 1.8 but if you're doing video you really need the 1.4 or the 1.2 due to the fact that the 1.8's manual focus ring is SOOO sensitive as it turns only 90 degrees compared to the 180 degrees on the others. That is if you like to shoot with low aperture of course...
Closest focus - hocus pocus. Great review. I've got he 1.8. I think I'll play with it a bit more now.
Good job. This is quality content.
It didn't look like the shots of your model were in sharp focus... am I wrong?
Thanks Matt.
Thanks for your effort... this video should be useful for anyone in the market for a Canon 50mm. The 50mm 1.8 is a nice performer and great for most people's needs, but I feel that a working pro work benefit with the 1.4's better built quality.
Great video!
Plastic fantastic hehehe
How does 1.8 in term of video recording? I am using it primarily for video blogging (set on a tripod). Do you have test footage for 1.8?
Thank you for the great review. I had fun watching it =)
I wouldn't recommend a fast aperture for video blogging
How do you deal with focus shifting as you stop down the lens?
Thanks for the great review
Love the videos, and as a Canon user, its nice when you do reviews and videos on Canon gear. Cheers ;)
Oh and a proud 1.8 owner here ;)
your 1.8 focuses SO MUCH faster than mine! could it be my camera? (450d) maybe some dust got into the focus mechanism? what focusing point did you have selected for the focus test?
I will reiterate what others have said here; don't turn the focus ring on the 1.8 when set to AF, you are grinding against the focus motor when you do that.
if you can't determine it on a webcompressed 1080p then what would be the point attempting to do it in the video.
dear matt, not focusing, just overall low light tests :D
and sorry for calling you mark, don't know why I called you that name
so......dont try to focus in autofocus on the 1.8? :)
Matt, I thought you were a Nikon guy!? Why do you test Canon lenses? Do you get them for free?
Higher end 50mm F1.8 = Canon EF 50mm F1.8 I (not II). It has a metal mount and great build quality.
que camara y lente se uso para grabar este video... gracias
I looked at all three nad would have loved the 1.2L but ended up buying the Sigma f1.4 DG EX. A little bit more expensive than the Canon f1.4 but way better in my opinion.
Try the Nikon fit Sigma Matt.