I'm after one of these in the first quarter of next year for an indoor shoot where I'm going to be needing a faster lens than those I already have. As it will be used 'seldom' really I don't want to go spending a fortune on it but at the same time want it to be of decent quality.
Now the 50mm f/1.4 is quite pricey in comparison to the 50mm f/1.8 II I notice, but I also recall reading somewhere that it was the Mk1 that was a bit plasticky...........or was it the Mk2??? Anyone throw a bit of light on this please? :-*
I have the MK II and it has a nick name of 'plastic fantastic'.
It is plasticy in its feel and appearance - but please do not let that put you off.
My 5D MkII loves it and your 7D will be just as happy to see it bolted on to the front.
For such a cheap lens, IQ is amazing and the f1.8 is more than enough for low light.
I'll find a shot i took with it last Sunday. Iso was at 25600 but none the less - it will show the lens in action.
(http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/albums/userpics/normal_50mm%20low%20light.jpg) (http://cameracraniums.com/gallery/albums/userpics/50mm%20low%20light.jpg)
Here it is - oh how LR has improved my ability to find a picture!
Anyway, take away whether or not it is a great portrait etc - the noise of 25600 is clearly visible but this was taken at 1/50th @ f5.6.
I think you'll agree i had room to drop the iso a couple of stops to get rid of the noise - but my flash was playing up so i just opted for high iso as a rescue option!
Also the f1.8 would have taken out the back ground better.
Quote from: picsfor on December 18, 2009, 03:03:28 PM
Also the f1.8 would have taken out the back ground better.
Thanks for that Andrew although I'm not quite sure what you mean by your last sentence as you mention the words
'would have' . That was an f/1.8 image .....yes?
The shot was taken at 1/50th second at f5.6 with an iso of 25600. That is an 'out of the box shot'. No tweaking done as yet.
So, if i'd opted for an aperture of f1.8 i could have dropped the iso down to 3200 or 1600 whilst still holding on to the 1/50th second shutter value.
Less noise, more blurred background.
This really was an available light only shot. My flash was playing up and i couldn't ask them to sit there and pose forever...
On your 7D i think you would have the option to come down to an iso of 3200 under the same conditions comfortably- and probably pushed for 1600 if shooting raw.
Quote from: picsfor on December 18, 2009, 03:31:04 PM
So, if i'd opted for an aperture of f1.8 .
Alles klar :-*
I've never used one, but iq is allways praised, build quality is what you would expect for the money. The mk2 has the plastic mount, the mk1 has a metal mount. Moast posts I have seen favour teh mk2, I guess for af, although its not said to be great on either. Having said all that I will get one one day just to see what all the fuss is about and it would be handy to have 1.8 at gigs.. If I get one and really like it I then may look at the 1.4 for better build and af, bit only if I think I need it over the 1.8
Thanks oRGie, always nice to get more than one opinion. :tup:
I have the 50mm f1.8MkII - its actually not mine - on long term loan!
I've just been trying to find some shots taken with it at or close to wide open - and I'm struggling!
It's actually not a lens I particularly like - I have it for being fast and often a useful FL - though I much prefer the 85mm f1.8, from an IQ perspective, AF Speed and focal length (I don't like 50mm particularly!)