Could have either one (see previous thread). f/1.4 is backordered almost everywhere. Getting antsy. What about the f/1.8? I could have it by this weekend. Should I just wait it out for the f/1.4?
Could have either one (see previous thread). f/1.4 is backordered almost everywhere. Getting antsy. What about the f/1.8? I could have it by this weekend. Should I just wait it out for the f/1.4?
Patience. You've been cleared for the 1.4!
never used the 1.4 but the 1.8 is a great lens for the price, have taken some excellent pic with it, you could always sell it after your 1.4 comes in since Canon lenses have such great resale value, here is a sample.
Just get the 1.4 and be done with it...
The 1.8 might be the indisputable value champion for image quality, but you heart wants the 1.4, PLUS it's significantly faster. I bought my fianceeeee (spelling) the 1.4, and she LOVES it. Her kids love it. I love it. I want to try it back to back with my 1.2L, and see if there's a trade for me in the future (especially if the PCB mod hasn't fixed the focus shift issue, which I'm guessing it hasn't...)
You'll just feel better []
You know, it's funny reading reviews and reading here. Some say it's "significantly faster," while others say "you're paying $300 for 1/3 of an f-stop." Interesting how the two interpretations of those numbers exist.
I agree... there is some question as to wheather the 1.4 is worth the money (since it depends on your camera budget).
But it is without a doubt (IMO) worth the wait.
That's 2/3 of an f-Stop.
I tried it on my 30 d, and from f/1.8 to f/1.4, it was a difference of 1/160 to 1/250.
Stop action indoors, keeping the ISO reasonable dude!
*chanting*
1.4!
1.4!
1.4!
*end chant*
Yes, 1.4 it is. I will rent it in the meantime. Where is the best place to rent?
Interestingly, in Bryan's reviews, the f/1.8 is sharp when stopped down to f/2.8, and the f/1.4 is sharp when stopped down to f/2.8. If sharpness is key, you don't get anything for your money, but so many other parameters factor in that it's probably worth it - background blur should be better in almost any shot taken with the 1.4 over the 1.8, focus speed (and feel), etc.
I have the f/1.8, haven't sprung for the 1.4 yet. Don't know that I will, unless/until I have full-frame. On my 1D3, 50mm is a little long; on a 40D or similar it's a little longer still. I don't like using the 1.8 in low light, as focus hunting becomes a physical experience (imagine the little motor going errrt....errt....errrt....ert until it finally hits focus). That said, the 1.8 can take great shots at 2.8 and beyond:
[View:http://photos.templin.org/gallery/tgiving2008B/426C0007]
[View:http://photos.templin.org/gallery/DoF-example01/426C1812]
[View:http://photos.templin.org/gallery/tgiving2008A/426C0140]
[View:http://photos.templin.org/gallery/X08-esquivel/IMG_6319]
[View:http://photos.templin.org/gallery/X08-jaramillo/IMG_6315]
First two are non-flash, essentially unprocessed. Third is bounce flash, last two are multiple flashes.
We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.
Very nice pics, peety3.
The f/1.4 is better lens IMO. But the photographer is more important than the lens.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote