I read recently -- I think on the main photo.net q-and-a forum -- someone's opinion that the Canon 50 mm f/1.8 feels and handles better than the 50 mm f/1.4. Anyone else prefer the f/1.8 lens?

-- Michael Fuhrmann (fuhrmann@interlog.com), February 22, 1999

Answers

I very much doubt it. The only advantage of the 50/1.8 is in price and weight (though weight isn't much of an issue). The 1.4 is faster, sharper, USM, has distance and DOF scales and in all respects is a better lens.

-- Bob Atkins (bobatkins@hotmail.com), February 23, 1999.

note: the old version of the 50 1.8 has distance and dof markings too. the new one does not.

the 50 1.4 is equal or better in every way. it costs 4 times as much, however. is it 4 times better? it wasn't for me, so i got an (old verion) 50 1.8.

P.S. if i had to choose between the 50 1.4 and the new version 50 1.8 i might have chosen the 1.4. thankfully there's plenty of used 50 1.8s around to buy.

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), March 16, 1999.

And I have read articles saying that, optically, the old version of the 50 1.8 is better!

-- Luis Santos (lsantos@pobox.com), April 23, 1999.

I have the original 50/1.8 and absolutely love it. I've compared the focusing speed of this lens to my 28-105 USM and 100/2 USM, both of which have ring-type USM. I have to say the little 50 focuses almost as quickly and accurately when mounted on my EOS 5 as the USM lenses, although with a bit more noise. I'm sure the 1.4 version is better in some respects (slightly faster, better build, somewhat sharper in the MTF curves), but in terms of absolute value (performance:cost) the 1.8 is a clear winner.

-- Mike Dunsmore (mkdunsmore@earthlink.net), April 26, 1999.

As far as I know, the new 50/1.8 has exactly the same optics as the old 50/1.8 , they're just in a different package. Any differences in optical quality are likely either due to sample-to-sample variations or uncertainties in testing procedures.

-- Bob Atkins (bobatkins@hotmail.com), April 26, 1999.

I just bought an EOS-5 with the 50mm f/1.4. If I had it to do over again, I'd probably get the 1.8 (although I haven't used one). I got the 1.4 for the extra stop, and the USM. However, it turns out that 1.4 is not a ring-style USM, it "Micro-USM" which isn't as fast or quiet. I think I'd rather have got the 1.8 to have a 50mm, and then used the extra $220 towards another lens. I do like what I've seen from it so far, so I'm not too distressed.

-- Rob Meyer (rob@bigdis.com), April 30, 1999.