-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
50mm F/1.4 softer at F/1.4?
- Thread starter codeninja
- Start date
ioannis
Veteran Member
Yes it is just like almost every othe 35mm lens. I only use it as a last resort when nothing else is possible at ISO 1600. This is at 1/10s handheld without sharpening or noise reduction. I did use a flash but it did result in some shadows and I couldnt bounce it of the black roof.... These are the cases that I use f/1.4. Anything between f2.8 and f/11 is very sharp .
Yiannis
' Now the trumpet summons us again--not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we are-- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, 'rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation'--a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.'
http://www.pbase.com/ystasino
Almost every lens needs 'stopping down' to some extent to get the best results.
Some lenses still perform very well too. I find my copy of the 50/1.4 is still pretty good at 1.4, very good by f2 and great by 2.8.
I'll take pretty good and 1.4 over good/very good and noisy/shaky pictures.
http://public.fotki.com/wibble/public_display/
Some lenses still perform very well too. I find my copy of the 50/1.4 is still pretty good at 1.4, very good by f2 and great by 2.8.
I'll take pretty good and 1.4 over good/very good and noisy/shaky pictures.
--
http://public.fotki.com/wibble/public_display/
Simon Courcha
Senior Member
Most lenses will be softer wide open rather than stopped down. However, what matters is whether you lens is 'acceptably' soft.
My 50mm f/1.4 has quite severe edge softness at 1.4 which extends significantly into the frame. This reduces as you close the aperture, and is largely gone by 2.8. Do you have a case of general softness or rather edge softness?
Simon C
http://www.eyematter.com
My 50mm f/1.4 has quite severe edge softness at 1.4 which extends significantly into the frame. This reduces as you close the aperture, and is largely gone by 2.8. Do you have a case of general softness or rather edge softness?
Simon C
http://www.eyematter.com
mklasen
Well-known member
Wouldn't the (1.6) crop factor reduce some of the 'wide open 1.4' softness effect? (I would assume that on a full frame camera, the softness would be worse by comparison).
ioannis
Veteran Member
This may have been the case if the 50mm f/1.4 was softer at the corners than in the center. While there might be a little bit of that going on remember that at f/1.4 the corners would likely be out of focus anyway. But the problem at f/1.4 is overall softness not corner softness. So what you are describing is would only result in a small difference and there is always the debate as to whether the quality of the image in a cropped field of view is the same as that of full frame for the equivalent FOV.
--
Yiannis
' Now the trumpet summons us again--not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we are-- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, 'rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation'--a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.'
http://www.pbase.com/ystasino
Same with mine. I was just wondering since people usually refer to 50mm f/1.4 when they talk about razor sharp lens. By no means, it's still very usable at f/1.4, just not that super sharp. I guess, it's ok judging from replies.
photonutbug
Well-known member
My 50 1.4 behaves exactly what you describe below.
Kind of soft at 1.4 and starts to improve from 2.5 and up.
But it still captures a lot of detail compared to 50 1.8 at the same stop and also gives one stop advantage. Here is what I mean -
If take a shot with 50 1.8 say set at 1.8 at 125 I can take to same shot with 50 1.4 set at 1.8 but with speed of 180.
So there is good advantage and bokeh is lot better.
Kind of soft at 1.4 and starts to improve from 2.5 and up.
But it still captures a lot of detail compared to 50 1.8 at the same stop and also gives one stop advantage. Here is what I mean -
If take a shot with 50 1.8 say set at 1.8 at 125 I can take to same shot with 50 1.4 set at 1.8 but with speed of 180.
So there is good advantage and bokeh is lot better.
Heechee
Leading Member
I did some test shots earlier with a film camera, and 50 1.4 was a bit soft all over. It wasn't about the edges. Of course I'm not sure the shot was exactly in focus, but if it was misfocused, it wasn't much misfocused.
If memory serves, 50 1.4 at f2 was about equally sharp as 17-40L at f4.
Of course, I suggest you consult some 'real' lens test rather than trust my personal tests that you can't verify.
If memory serves, 50 1.4 at f2 was about equally sharp as 17-40L at f4.
Of course, I suggest you consult some 'real' lens test rather than trust my personal tests that you can't verify.
This is not true. If you set two lenses at the same aperture, the shutter speed with both lenses - regardless of the maximum aperture - will be the same.
Absolutely MatW. Nor is it a one-stop advantage is any way, shape or form.
photonutbug
Well-known member
I have both 50 1.8 II and 50 1.4 and I am not making this up. This is what I have noticed in my controlled tests and you may or may not agree.
What you guys are saying and agreeing to is theoretically true but in practiice I do get one stop advantage with 50 1.4. This may have to with a larger glass on 50 1.4.
What you guys are saying and agreeing to is theoretically true but in practiice I do get one stop advantage with 50 1.4. This may have to with a larger glass on 50 1.4.
I recently bought a 50mm f1.4 and experienced the same thing as you described above. Here are some comparison shots I took of this lens at various apertures.
http://imageevent.com/leongfm/misc/50mmf14lenstest
Let me know if my copy is acceptable especially at f1.4 where the photo is very soft and has a dream-like feel to it. BTW, I also have a 50mm f1.8 and I found that at f1.8, 50mm f1.8 beats 50mm f1.4 in sharpness.
M
misha
Guest
This is odd. I don't have the 1.4, but I compared the 50/1.8 and the EFS 18-55 3.5-5.6 at the same apertures, and got the same shutter speeds.
--
Misha
ioannis
Veteran Member
Are you trying to say that for the 50mm f/1.8 II to give as sharp results as the 50mm f/1.4 it needs to be stopped down ? The way you are phrasing it is the equivalent of saying 1+1 = 3 because my results show it. Same aperture and focal length using the same ISO will give you the same exposure if you use the same shutter speed.
Did you use a filter or is your glass not clear enough or something?
--
Yiannis
' Now the trumpet summons us again--not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we are-- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, 'rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation'--a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.'
http://www.pbase.com/ystasino
photonutbug
Well-known member
What I am saying is valid and the and I stand by my statement as correct.
Due to larger glass on 50 1.4 it has more light gathering capability and my meter shows one stop advantage. I have done controlled tests where I
shot same subject with 50 1.8 II at different f stops. And the same subject under same lighting with 50 1.4 with similar f stops from 1.8 onwards. My meter always showed me one stop faster aperture for the 50 1.4 for each f stop as against for the same f stop on 50 1.8 II.
This is my observation and I was happy to realize that the extra money of 50 1.4 gives me that extra one stop advantage in addition to better bokeh and build and AF overide.
Due to larger glass on 50 1.4 it has more light gathering capability and my meter shows one stop advantage. I have done controlled tests where I
shot same subject with 50 1.8 II at different f stops. And the same subject under same lighting with 50 1.4 with similar f stops from 1.8 onwards. My meter always showed me one stop faster aperture for the 50 1.4 for each f stop as against for the same f stop on 50 1.8 II.
This is my observation and I was happy to realize that the extra money of 50 1.4 gives me that extra one stop advantage in addition to better bokeh and build and AF overide.
Are you trying to say that for the 50mm f/1.8 II to give as sharp
results as the 50mm f/1.4 it needs to be stopped down ? The way you
are phrasing it is the equivalent of saying 1+1 = 3 because my
results show it. Same aperture and focal length using the same ISO
will give you the same exposure if you use the same shutter speed.
Did you use a filter or is your glass not clear enough or something?
--
Yiannis
' Now the trumpet summons us again--not as a call to bear arms,
though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we
are-- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle,
year in and year out, 'rejoicing in hope, patient in
tribulation'--a struggle against the common enemies of man:
tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.'
http://www.pbase.com/ystasino
Proof your statement.
Not true. The front element of the 50mm/1.4 has a larger diameter because of the F1.4 (50mm/1.4=3.5cm front element needed, 50mm/1.8=2.7cm front element needed, it's as simple as that). This has - no influence on how much light "passes" through the lens at smaller apertures.
Again, proof it. There have been numerous comparisons between the two lenses and they all showed that - just as everybody who knows the basics about optics would assume - both lenses set to the same apertures will give you the same shutter speeds.
Gosh - just think about it: If the 50mm/1.4 somehow was a full stop brighter at the same aperture than other lenses, then Canon would DEFINITELY sell it as such a lens. But they don't, because the lens is just as bright as every other lens at the same aperture. At F1.4 it will be 2/3 of a stop brighter than the 50mm/1.8, but at F1.8 both lenses will give you the same shutter speeds.
I have a hypothesis that might explain the difference.
One possibility is that you measured light that was right at the tipping point for your meter. The difference between 125 and 180 is half a stop, and I'm betting that your camera is set to meter in half-stop increments. Although both lenses should report identical values, it's possible that a slight difference tipped the reading over to the next increment. That difference could have been a variation in the copy of one or both of your lenses, or it could have been a slight change to the framing, a shift in light, or another honest experimental error.
The difference would be less significant the more you stop down, but your camera calculates the stops based on a reading at the maximum aperture rather than actually stopping-down the lens, so you would still get a consistent progression through the exposure values.
If you see this behavior again it would be interesting to compare the readings of each lens while stopped-down:
1. Dial in a small aperture, like f/22.
2. Hold the DOF preview button while dismounting the lens.
3. Hand-hold the stopped-down lens in place while metering.
-jack
P.S. - It's a bummer that people become hostile and/or defensive so quickly about this stuff. Please, try not to take the discussion so personally. With that in mind, I welcome criticism of the hypothesis I've proposed.
photonutbug
Well-known member
I am on my way to Egypt in few days.
But when I get back I will dig up some of my tests to see if you agree.
You do not have to agree with me, but I was surprised to see the results although did not expect it.
The bigger front glass of-course helps capture (gather!!) more light and thats for sure even if you have stopped down to 1.8. This is where that one (or half) stop is playing in.
But when I get back I will dig up some of my tests to see if you agree.
You do not have to agree with me, but I was surprised to see the results although did not expect it.
The bigger front glass of-course helps capture (gather!!) more light and thats for sure even if you have stopped down to 1.8. This is where that one (or half) stop is playing in.
Due to larger glass on 50 1.4 it has more light gathering
capability and my meter shows one stop advantage. I have done
controlled tests where I
shot same subject with 50 1.8 II at different f stops. And the same
subject under same lighting with 50 1.4 with similar f stops from
1.8 onwards. My meter always showed me one stop faster aperture for
the 50 1.4 for each f stop as against for the same f stop on 50 1.8
II.
This is my observation and I was happy to realize that the extra
money of 50 1.4 gives me that extra one stop advantage in addition
to better bokeh and build and AF overide.
Are you trying to say that for the 50mm f/1.8 II to give as sharp
results as the 50mm f/1.4 it needs to be stopped down ? The way you
are phrasing it is the equivalent of saying 1+1 = 3 because my
results show it. Same aperture and focal length using the same ISO
will give you the same exposure if you use the same shutter speed.
Did you use a filter or is your glass not clear enough or something?
--
Yiannis
' Now the trumpet summons us again--not as a call to bear arms,
though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we
are-- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle,
year in and year out, 'rejoicing in hope, patient in
tribulation'--a struggle against the common enemies of man:
tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.'
http://www.pbase.com/ystasino
Choppy
Member
Here's a previous review that was previously posted in Dpreview.
http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Reviews/g_Fifty_versus_fifty/a_Fifties_duel_--_f1.4_vs_f1.8.html
It does aknowledge that it goes a little soft at 1.4 but I'm pretty happy with my sample. Would'nt change the 1.4 lense.
The below picture was shot at f1.4 without post processing
http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Reviews/g_Fifty_versus_fifty/a_Fifties_duel_--_f1.4_vs_f1.8.html
It does aknowledge that it goes a little soft at 1.4 but I'm pretty happy with my sample. Would'nt change the 1.4 lense.
The below picture was shot at f1.4 without post processing
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum