> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Singh, > Sarbjit (S.) > Sent: 12 January 2005 23:24 > To: [email protected] > Subject: EOS Which 50mm lens is the sharpest ? > > > I am looking for a sharp (& affordable) lens to use on > my D20. I already have a 28-105USM and 100-300USM. Looks > like a 50mm lens will fit my needs. Please advise which > 50mm Canon lens below is the sharpest. > > 1.) Normal EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Autofocus Lens $ 309.00 > > 2.) Normal EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens $ 74.00
I can only help you decide between these two. I have a 1.4, and have used a friend's 1.8 to help me make my decision when buying one. Here are the reasons I bought the 1.4 over the 1.8 1. I do a lot of candid ambient light photography. The 1.4 has a faster AF with USM and obviously lets in more light. 2. My father has a FD 50mm f1.4 lens, and I grew up with it. Its the best lens I have ever seen. I feel the EF 50mm f1.4 is nearly in the same class (the FD is better made). I feel it will last me for many years. The 1.8 is a cheaper plastic lens which may or may not last long. On the other hand, you can buy five of them. 3. This is the point I haven't seen anyone mention - bokeh. The 1.4 has more aperture blades than other lenses, including the 1.8. This leads to much better, aesthetically pleasing bohek (out of focus background highlights) in my photographs. Very satisfying. 4. I didn't want to buy a cheap lens and then crib about it later. 5. The 1.8 has no distance markings. No DoF information. The 1.4 has a scale under glass, including an infrared indicator. You can prefocus it by hand if you don't want to keep the camera at your nose all the time. 6. The motor on the 1.8 is noisy. If I wanted to take photographs of my son sleeping, the focussing would wake him up (the beeping on my camcorder can wake him up, the motor on the 1.8 is noisier). The 1.8 still made a good impression. It was difficult to decide. Here is why it took so long for me to decide. 1. The 1.8 is very nice and cheap. I would worry less about it. 2. Its really small and light. Put it on a Rebel class camera and it almost becomes a compact point and shoot. You can take it everywhere. Very appealing. 3. The photo quality is very similar. 4. Its really small and light. Both the lenses have the capability for low light shooting and low DoF. When my daughter was born I was able to take tons of photographs on ISO 400 (B&W film), even at night, indoors, without exposing her to bright flashes. Even if I do use a flash indoors, I can use it as a fill in flash, instead of the main source of light, and get better photographs all the time. You can't do this with slower lenses, definitely not with f3.5-xx zooms. The DoF was not a problem till I got two children. Now I have to be a little more careful if I want to get both of them in focus. Cheers, Shashvat ============================================================================== This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you received this message in error please delete it and notify us. If this message was misdirected, CSFB does not waive any confidentiality or privilege. CSFB retains and monitors electronic communications sent through its network. Instructions transmitted over this system are not binding on CSFB until they are confirmed by us. Message transmission is not guaranteed to be secure. ============================================================================== * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
