Charles Morris
(K=5969) - Comment Date 5/14/2003
|
usually the f1.8 will be as sharp as the f1.4. sharpness is not the driving force behind the faster aperture. the .4 numerical difference is actually 2/3 of a stop differnece in light gathering power.
good reason to get the f1.4 lens:
lower light photography.
stronger build.
the option to have shallower depth of field.
better handling as a manual focus lens. (wider focus ring not at the very front of the lens)
the big front element looks cooler.
good reasons to get the f1.8 lens:
light weight.
low cost.
small size.
ease of replacement. (you won't worry or cry as much about using and possibly ruining a $70 lens in the rain as you would a $300 lens in the rain)
the f1.4 lens does in fact seem to be a more solidly built lens. nikon has the same issues, f1.8 for $108 vs f1.4 for $269. i chose the 50mm f1.8 because the few times i do low light photography, i have a very sturdy tripod, and for shallow depth of field i rarely need that kind of control in a "normal" lens and would rather have the additional money for an 85mm f1.8 for portraiture and that offers tighter DOF by virtue of the longer focal length.
go look at the canon lenses though. i think the front filter threads rotate on the f1.8 and they don't on the f1.4 if you like ot use polarizers or effects filters that may make the choice for you.
2cents@large
|
|
|
|
Matej Maceas
(K=24381) - Comment Date 5/16/2003
|
I use the f1.8 and I'm quite satisfied with it, so in your place I would rather spend the difference in cost on a second lens. I haven't experienced any problems with the filter threads.
|
|
|
|
Martyn Brearley
(K=186) - Comment Date 5/16/2003
|
Just to confirm, the EF 50mm 1:1.8 II has a non rotating 52mm front thread. It's great little lens, nice sharpness and is currently sitting on my D30.
Enjoy
|
|
|
|
Matthew Winchar
(K=66) - Comment Date 10/25/2003
|
Get the Canon 50mm 1.8 Mark ONE, it is much better built, it has a REAL focusing ring and the AF is faster and quieter. I just traded my newer MKII for an older MKI and I'm very happy with the decision. Check ebay for it.
|
|
|
|
Dave Holland
(K=13074) - Comment Date 10/26/2003
|
I have neither, but saw a detailed review on photo.net, as follows:
http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
Scott Miki
(K=671) - Comment Date 10/28/2003
|
The MK 1 has the metal mount, and the MK II is plastic, correct?
I too have been up against this choice, so I opted for the 50mm 1.8, and spent the $250 I saved to buy a really sweet Lexar compactflash card and some printing paper. And I bet that no-one can tell the difference. Remember those ads that say, "If you can't tell the difference, why should we?"
|
|
|
|
. .
(K=2743) - Comment Date 10/30/2003
|
the 1.8 feels too flimsy..unless you really want to save money..go for the 1.4, its also is more contrasty..i believe..
|
|
|
|
