Why I'm upgrading from 50mm f/1.8

The 50mm f/1.8 is one of the most heavily debated lenses. It seems you either love it or hate it. I loved mine until yesterday. I was out taking some shots practicing my portraiture skills with my girlfriend. Usually I like to use my 85mm f/1.8 when doing portraits, but there wasn't much room to back up where we were, so I mounted my nifty fifty and we headed down the road. I was shooting with a heavily backlit background earlier with my 85 and was having hardly any trouble focusing at all, but when I tried shooting with my 50 it was a whole other story.

All I can say is thank god I didn't try this with an actually client because I would've been horribly embarrassed. These three pictures below are an example of what I was shooting.







I could not get it to focus to save my life. I was shooting with a very wide aperture so I couldn't risk trying to focus on any point but the eyes. I ended up having to manually focus, and I still couldn't get it to confirm that I was in focus. It was without a doubt the most frustrated I've been since I started. Luckily I was with my girlfriend so it wasn't a huge deal, but I cannot afford to have something like that happen with a paying client. I was never that bothered by how long it took to focus in low light (the main reason I got it), but couple with having trouble focusing in intense light, I'm going to upgrade.

Looks like I'm gonna have to put aside some money before I get my L series zoom so I can get the 50mm f/1.4.

Has anyone else jumped the from the 1.8 to the 1.4? I'm really hoping it's worth the money.

Your pictures are heavily overexposed. Shooting wide open with a bright background is only going to yield overexposed pictures. Either stopping down and using fill flash or changing angle would've done the job. Did you have your hood on? Did you have a filter on? I gave my girlfriend a 50mm f/1.8 and it was fantastic (one of the reason that made me go digital). I skipped to the f/1.4 and it sure is a fantastic lens!

I did. Please have a look at the following thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1029&message=28976985

Regards,
Asif

my 50 1.8 is excellent in both low and bright light.
are you sure it is not your technique or the problem with the lens?

here is a couple of examples of a heavily back-lit portraits taken with my 40d+50/1.8

neither of those are as flare ridden as the examples. It's the flare that was causing the problems, and of course that can be a problem with any lens.

yesterday I was shooting directly into the sun with the 50 1.2, and even without a filter I had to resort to manual focus. Turned out great though.

I disagree with the comment on their exposure. They look fantastic, and the focus issue isn't even obvious at these sizes. The second one's extra great!

You can always manually focus bracket with shots like these, as long as the model can hold a pose naturally just take a few in succession with tiny moves of the dial.

Let me say this again, they're not overexposed, exposure is relative, make the photo look how you want. there are no rules.

keep it up!

But I doubt replacing the lens because of this one shoot is the answer. You now know the weakness, and now have the knowledge needed to work with it.

The photos of the original poster look like he used a soft filter to me. I have the newer Sigma 50 1.4 I enjoy, but my 17-55IS is very, very close to it in IQ.

Kent

The scene is washed out due to flare. The sun's rays are getting to the front element even though the sun is not in the frame. The resulting loss of contrast cripples the autofocus. I'm pretty sure a lens hood would have solved this problem. Do not use a UV filter, but a polarizer (properly shielded with a hood) would have removed the reflections on her sunglasses which I found distracting (YMMV).

The f/1.4 is nearly as prone to flare as the f/1.8.

I wonder if focusing in Live View mode (constrast detection) would have worked.

Also, manual focusing via the LCD (with LCD zoomed 10x) is much easier in my opinion than using the optical viewfinder.

Wow! That's aweful!

But my experience is otherwise.







So I do not see a problem with mine. Looks like a flare and overexposure issue on your images.

--
Francis
http://www.pbase.com/fcg

Daniel Kim said:

Your pictures are heavily overexposed. Shooting wide open with a
bright background is only going to yield overexposed pictures.

Click to expand...

FCG said:

Looks like a flare and overexposure issue on your images.

Click to expand...

OuterSpacer said:

my 50 1.8 is excellent in both low and bright light.
are you sure it is not your technique or the problem with the lens?

here is a couple of examples of a heavily back-lit portraits taken
with my 40d+50/1.8

Click to expand...

I did not want to use a flash or have a heavy shadow on her face.

k_strecker said:

I disagree with the comment on their exposure. They look fantastic,
and the focus issue isn't even obvious at these sizes. The second
one's extra great!
Let me say this again, they're not overexposed, exposure is relative,
make the photo look how you want. there are no rules.

Click to expand...

Thank you.... somebody gets it. Apparently around here not having a "correct" exposure is a problem. That was exactly the look I was going for. They are are not overexposed at all.

turkeyjerky214 said:

You can always manually focus bracket with shots like these, as long
as the model can hold a pose naturally just take a few in succession
with tiny moves of the dial.

Click to expand...

I didn't think to do that. I'll have to try that next time I'm out.

turkeyjerky214 said:

But I doubt replacing the lens because of this one shoot is the
answer. You now know the weakness, and now have the knowledge needed
to work with it.

Click to expand...

So what exactly would you suggest to work around this problem? I still have an xti and won't be upgrading to a 40D until early next year so I can't use live view to focus. I don't want to have to use filters, but I have been thinking about getting a hood for it. Do you think a hood alone would help with the problem?

turkeyjerky214 said:

turkeyjerky214 said:

But I doubt replacing the lens because of this one shoot is the
answer. You now know the weakness, and now have the knowledge needed
to work with it.

Click to expand...

So what exactly would you suggest to work around this problem? I
still have an xti and won't be upgrading to a 40D until early next
year so I can't use live view to focus. I don't want to have to use
filters, but I have been thinking about getting a hood for it. Do
you think a hood alone would help with the problem?

Click to expand...

A hood would have helped, yes. Try it. You can easily make your own temporary hood with black paper and scotch tape

As others have said, it's the flare that's the problem here, not the focusing of the lens (in fact, if you look at the wall, the focus appears to be right where you want it). Flare isn't a result of how the subject is lit - it's how the LENS is lit. You can have a backlit subject such as yours, and if the same light is hitting the lens, you're going to have flare. But if the lens is shaded somehow - by a hood, the shadow from a tree, your hand, anything - the flare is reduced, if not removed completely, depending on any reflections within the image frame.

--
----------
Andrew Melvin Helmboldt

'A wise man talks because he has something to say; a fool talks because he has to say something.' -Plato

AMelvin said:

A hood would have helped, yes. Try it. You can easily make your own
temporary hood with black paper and scotch tape

Click to expand...

. But if the lens is shaded somehow - by a

AMelvin said:

hood, the shadow from a tree, your hand, anything - the flare is
reduced, if not removed completely, depending on any reflections
within the image frame.

--

Click to expand...

I often just use my hand as "hood". just hold it up to shade your lens from the sun. Also, you don't have any filters (Like UV/protective) on your lens, do you? That makes my lens flare like crazy in certain situations.

tkbslc wrote:
Also, you don't have any filters (Like

tkbslc said:

UV/protective) on your lens, do you? That makes my lens flare like
crazy in certain situations.

Click to expand...

nah, the only time I use a filter is on my 55-250 when I'm shooting skiers and wakeboarders out on a lake where I have to deal with a reflection on the water. I'm thinking I might need one this winter when I go to colorado and will be shooting out on the slopes

does anyone know if the hood for the 1.8 will fit the 1.4 just in case I do decide to upgrade?

turkeyjerky214 said:

does anyone know if the hood for the 1.8 will fit the 1.4 just in
case I do decide to upgrade?

Click to expand...

--

No ... the 1.8 and 1.4 hoods are totally different.
If you want to save money, get a cheap non-Canon ebay hood.
Also, the 1.8 hood has a screw mount, so any 52mm hood will be ok.