Damn I have Canon 6D and Irix 15mm f2.4 that I got for landscape and astro and had limited hardware for anything other than that. Now a friend wants me do do some photo shoot so I finally ordered 50mm f1.8 STM. I wanted 1.4 but after watching some videos yours included I reckon f1.8 is probably a better lens to learn portrait photography and better bang for a buck since for now at least I'm an armature so money is important. Thanks for your advice.
To be honest the 1.4 "USM" version is one of the oldest lenses i ever used, you cant expect sharp images or good IQ at all, but in fact its awesome when it comes to bokeh and when stopped down it also looks better than the 1.8. I really loved the 1.4 lens and used it for over 4 years, but i enjoyed even more the RF 50 1.8 STM on the EOS RP (charming small and light)
@@DanYosua I would have preffered the RF 35 with stabilizer, but the price of the RF 50 was already a thing to think about (considering you can get EF 1.8s for 40-50$!), the 35mm was just too expensive.
I like the color rendering of the 1.4. And stopped down to 2.8 it is definitely sharper than the 1.8 stm. But wide open the autofocus is hit and miss even combined with a mirrorless body. A lot of color fringing happens there and it is not really sharp even in the center. I had the 1.8 II and stoped down it was sharpest of the all and had nice contrasts and color. The stm had a kind of a more modern digital look.I would only use the 1.4 on full frame.
Interesting, I think I would be more curious about the edge to edge performance stopped down now (more than I was at the time) as I’ve progressively shot more landscape over the years. Still disappointed there’s no middle of the road option for the RF mount, but it looks like that could take a long time.
At f2.8 the sharpness is identical between the 1.8 and the 1.4 At the corners the 1.4 is sharper. If You dont get sharp results in the center it is not the lense fault unless the lense is faulty.
The perception and demands regarding sharness may be subjecttif and may also vary from lens copy to another. I like using the 1.4, on my older bodies like the 5d Mk1 or Mk2. I personally would not use this lens wide open on aps-c or high resolution full frame bodies fior the reasons I mentioned. But sure this is only my expirience.
Very helpful video! I appreciate your direct style and the absence of the extraneous “filler” remarks that are elsewhere ubiquitous with photography-related reviews. (And I was in no way offended by your “dogs” greeting. lol)
Idk if I'd say better, but I liked it for as long as I used it on the RP as a true 50mm on full frame. If you own it already, have liked it so far, and especially if you have other EF glass then I would say it's worth grabbing an adapter. If you don't already own the lens or the adapter, the RF 50mm is only $200 and you may appreciate the tiny form factor more (even though it's 1.8). I do at least.
I’ve heard from professionals that have delivered client work shot with the 1.4 and that no one has ever complained about the softness. If it’s good enough for pro work, why is it that TH-camrs are obsessed with image sharpeners?
You might have meant this rhetorically, but I'm gonna answer just in case 😅Agreed, no client is going to flag this and I think your general sentiment is fair, though a few things: Lots of "pros" ARE the TH-camrs, they're the same people. Not always, but these aren't two mutually exclusive groups. Non TH-cam photographers also like to get the image quality they pay for 😂 It's not just the sharpness but also the contrast and color fringing wide open. Not a "bad" lens, all things here are workable in post but the idea is that, when compared to the nifty, for most people, this f/1.4 is a poor use of the extra money. And as noted, speaking in new prices here.. I bought mine new and then sold later for ~$200. If it was weather sealed and a bit quieter to focus, then there's more differentiation from the nifty to justify perhaps.
a lot of people say the 1.4 has better color. And it also does better in low light, so it can be more versatile. youtubers are usually pointing out which is a better value, and the 1.8 is definitely a better value.
I’m not a youtuber. I didn’t enjoy mine. Sold it and got the 1.8. No more softness problem. You have to appreciate that modern technology has raised the bar on what people expect from their digital gear.
Thanks! I have been absolutely loving it so far. I probably shoot most often with the RF 24-105 f/4. Just that lens alone gets you so far. But I have really liked using my 50 and 100 on the full frame as well. Do you shoot with the RP?
@@NatureDigitalPhotography Gotcha. If it helps at all this is how I looked at the choice - I could basically afford the R with no lens (or maybe with the RF 35mm) or the RP with upgraded 24-105. I went with the latter to get me into the RF ecosystem as cheap as possible. The 24-105 can be my staple, and I have the freedom to get one of the expensive lenses in the series or the R6 after a price drop if I get more into video (as my next big investment).
I bought The Original EF 50 mm MK 1 with the metal bayonet in as new condition for £30 plus including a EOS 650 film camera and a Sigma 70-210 film lens also both mint. The EF 50 mm MK 1 is better built like the F1.4 ultrasonic what is spoils it is the fact that sellers on eBay have a ego inflated opinion of The 50mm f1.8 mk 1 when selling them
Damn I have Canon 6D and Irix 15mm f2.4 that I got for landscape and astro and had limited hardware for anything other than that. Now a friend wants me do do some photo shoot so I finally ordered 50mm f1.8 STM. I wanted 1.4 but after watching some videos yours included I reckon f1.8 is probably a better lens to learn portrait photography and better bang for a buck since for now at least I'm an armature so money is important. Thanks for your advice.
It'll still be there for you later if you reconsider, but getting started with the f1.8 sounds like the play for sure. Good luck with the shoot!
To be honest the 1.4 "USM" version is one of the oldest lenses i ever used, you cant expect sharp images or good IQ at all, but in fact its awesome when it comes to bokeh and when stopped down it also looks better than the 1.8.
I really loved the 1.4 lens and used it for over 4 years, but i enjoyed even more the RF 50 1.8 STM on the EOS RP (charming small and light)
The RF 50 on the RP is delightful. It’s a nice break from a bigger lens and remains small and mighty
@@DanYosua I would have preffered the RF 35 with stabilizer, but the price of the RF 50 was already a thing to think about (considering you can get EF 1.8s for 40-50$!), the 35mm was just too expensive.
Haha it’s crazy how affordable those EF niftys are.
This was an amazing video, so helpful and informative. Thank you very much, Dan, all the best for you and your channel!
Thanks for watching and for the feedback!
This was most useful video I've seen on 50mm. Thank you!
Thanks for watching, hope it helped 😄
Thank you.
Thanks for getting to the punchline in the first 20 seconds, still enjoyed to watch the rest of the video
Welcome! This is definitely one where the verdict then the context make sense in that order 😀
I like the color rendering of the 1.4. And stopped down to 2.8 it is definitely sharper than the 1.8 stm. But wide open the autofocus is hit and miss even combined with a mirrorless body. A lot of color fringing happens there and it is not really sharp even in the center. I had the 1.8 II and stoped down it was sharpest of the all and had nice contrasts and color. The stm had a kind of a more modern digital look.I would only use the 1.4 on full frame.
Interesting, I think I would be more curious about the edge to edge performance stopped down now (more than I was at the time) as I’ve progressively shot more landscape over the years. Still disappointed there’s no middle of the road option for the RF mount, but it looks like that could take a long time.
At f2.8 the sharpness is identical between the 1.8 and the 1.4
At the corners the 1.4 is sharper.
If You dont get sharp results in the center it is not the lense fault unless the lense is faulty.
The perception and demands regarding sharness may be subjecttif and may also vary from lens copy to another. I like using the 1.4, on my older bodies like the 5d Mk1 or Mk2. I personally would not use this lens wide open on aps-c or high resolution full frame bodies fior the reasons I mentioned. But sure this is only my expirience.
24 mm pancake is not a 45 mm equivalent. It's a 38.4 mm equivalent.
F1.8 was crap compared to the F1.4, so much so I gave my 1.8 away for free as I felt too bad taking money for it
Very helpful video! I appreciate your direct style and the absence of the extraneous “filler” remarks that are elsewhere ubiquitous with photography-related reviews. (And I was in no way offended by your “dogs” greeting. lol)
Trying to keep em dense and friendly! Greeting had to go, experimenting with better hooks at the start 😃
Thanks for sharing!
The RF 50mm 1.8 or the EF 50mm 1.4 ??
Love your contact broo❤️
10/10 times I'm taking the RF 1.8 there, especially if you have an RP. It's such a compact combo.
Do you think that 50 1.4 performs better after adapting it on RP? Is it worth adapting it at all?
Idk if I'd say better, but I liked it for as long as I used it on the RP as a true 50mm on full frame. If you own it already, have liked it so far, and especially if you have other EF glass then I would say it's worth grabbing an adapter. If you don't already own the lens or the adapter, the RF 50mm is only $200 and you may appreciate the tiny form factor more (even though it's 1.8). I do at least.
I’ve heard from professionals that have delivered client work shot with the 1.4 and that no one has ever complained about the softness. If it’s good enough for pro work, why is it that TH-camrs are obsessed with image sharpeners?
You might have meant this rhetorically, but I'm gonna answer just in case 😅Agreed, no client is going to flag this and I think your general sentiment is fair, though a few things: Lots of "pros" ARE the TH-camrs, they're the same people. Not always, but these aren't two mutually exclusive groups. Non TH-cam photographers also like to get the image quality they pay for 😂 It's not just the sharpness but also the contrast and color fringing wide open. Not a "bad" lens, all things here are workable in post but the idea is that, when compared to the nifty, for most people, this f/1.4 is a poor use of the extra money. And as noted, speaking in new prices here.. I bought mine new and then sold later for ~$200. If it was weather sealed and a bit quieter to focus, then there's more differentiation from the nifty to justify perhaps.
a lot of people say the 1.4 has better color. And it also does better in low light, so it can be more versatile. youtubers are usually pointing out which is a better value, and the 1.8 is definitely a better value.
also most youtubers are shooting video and vlogging, so they want the faster, quieter autofocus.
I’m not a youtuber. I didn’t enjoy mine. Sold it and got the 1.8. No more softness problem. You have to appreciate that modern technology has raised the bar on what people expect from their digital gear.
Nice vid man! How do you like using the RP?
Thanks! I have been absolutely loving it so far. I probably shoot most often with the RF 24-105 f/4. Just that lens alone gets you so far. But I have really liked using my 50 and 100 on the full frame as well. Do you shoot with the RP?
Dan Yosua no. I have a rebel t6 just like you had the t7. I am wondering if the rp is a good upgrade or if I should just go for the r
@@NatureDigitalPhotography Gotcha. If it helps at all this is how I looked at the choice - I could basically afford the R with no lens (or maybe with the RF 35mm) or the RP with upgraded 24-105. I went with the latter to get me into the RF ecosystem as cheap as possible. The 24-105 can be my staple, and I have the freedom to get one of the expensive lenses in the series or the R6 after a price drop if I get more into video (as my next big investment).
Dan Yosua same for me. I think it is wise to invest in the glass and then get an r6 or r5 in a couple of years
Dan Yosua also how is the rp 4K. Is it just the crop or are there other downsides?
I bought The Original EF 50 mm MK 1 with the metal bayonet in as new condition for £30 plus including a EOS 650 film camera and a Sigma 70-210 film lens also both mint.
The EF 50 mm MK 1 is better built like the F1.4 ultrasonic what is spoils it is the fact that sellers on eBay have a ego inflated opinion of The 50mm f1.8 mk 1 when selling them
lol, well that sounds like a cool setup!
@@DanYosua I use it with My EOs 1D MK 4
Ok you said "BoKAH" dislike video. I'm done watching right there. 🤦🏻
Oops 👋
BOKEHHHHHH!!!!
We need the bokeh
What’s up dogs? What the hell is that! Thumbs down!
Lol
I....generally like your content but when you say "what's up dogs?" it comes across like Michael Scott from The Office saying it. It's....cringy.
😔