Member of the Month

hi_vis360
November, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Canon 50mm f/1.8 ii vs 50mm f/1.4 vintage?

profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
I've been wanting to get a cheap fast 50mm lens and I'm torn between a ef 1.8 ii and an m42(as I have an adaptor, and most of the other adaptors seem to need glass to focus to infinity, if there's any others that aren't super expensive let me know thanks) 1.4 vintage lens, was hoping somebody could give some advice, I'll be using it all around, and the only real thing I'd need the 1.4 for is when I'm filming urban at night, but I'm not sure if I can justify it:

50mm 1.8 ef ii:


Pros:
Autofocus(seems to be pretty fast, can somebody shed some light on whether it's faster than a tamron 17-50(and by how much)
light as hell
New(not really too bothered by this though but at least I'll know for sure the condition is good)

Cons:
weak build quality apparently(although that won't be much of a problem for me)
More expensive than the vintage lenses


50mm 1.4 vintage:


Pros:
f/1.4
solid metal build
cheaper

cons:
no AF
heavy


Also people rave about how sharp the super takumar 50mm 1.4 is even at 1.4, but so does everyone about the 50mm 1.8 ef ii so I was wondering if anyone knew which was better in that respect.




Oct 6 2012 1:46PM
1 0
profile picture
123+ski
Posts: 2832 - Karma: 581
Having an f1.4 lens is nice, but I usually stop mine down to at least f2. I would go for some like a pentax super or smc takumar 50mm f1.4. should be around the same price as the canon. It has the metal build, and as far as weight I wouldn't worry about it. I have a helios 44-2, and while it is solid and "heavy," it is nothing compared to even a mid tele lens. it is seriously not something to worry about. Also, for filming I would always go with vintage glass. You should be using mf anyways, the 50mm af is spotty at best from what I have heard, and the legacy 50's always have nice smooth focus rings with long throws and accurate marks
Oct 6 2012 3:15PM
0 0
profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
oh sorry I forgot to say I'd be using the 50mm 1.8 for a lot of photos, the main time I'll be using it for video is when I'm doing urban, which won't be often. I managed to get a 50mm 1.8 for 65$ so I went for it, if it's not good enough I can always resell it, probably make a bit of money too, but I'm sure it'll be great. Thanks for trying to help though
Oct 6 2012 3:19PM
0 0
profile picture
[skier.]
Posts: 33 - Karma: 354
i use a canon 50 1.8 quite often for photography and filming. i do like it a lot! whichever you choose, it will be a great buy - they're so cheap...
not sure about this one, but i think the canon has image stabilisation... that will probably be a plus, too.

ask yourself, do you take stills too? otherwise, you won't need that autofocus (ok, autofocus while filming on dslrs is coming, but until now...)
what i hate about that lense is the shitty focus ring. not cool for manual focusing and you can't use a follow focus on it.

and: do you use the adaptor for several lenses? buy one for each or buy the canon lense. changing adaptors all the time = shitty

personally, i'd take the 1.4...
Oct 6 2012 3:26PM
0 0
profile picture
123+ski
Posts: 2832 - Karma: 581
Yeah, 50mm f1.8 is a solid lens, especially at that price. For photo or video though, modern perks are nice, but I still love vintage glass
Oct 6 2012 3:48PM
0 0
profile picture
TijmenDal
Posts: 4849 - Karma: 1,295
Most adapters DONT have glass. Read my guide and you'll find out you can adapt almost any mount to Canon, especially on an APS-C sized sensor, without glass.

How much photo/video are you going to do? If you're going to do 75+% video, get a vintage lens. Once again: check my thread for good 50mm's.
Oct 6 2012 4:04PM
0 0
profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
I thought there was a lot of lenses that needed glass so that you could focus to infinity for a bunch of them? must have missed that in your guide, and yeah with the 50mm 1.8 I'd be taking a lot of photos, probably more photos than video.
Oct 6 2012 4:16PM
0 0
profile picture
TijmenDal
Posts: 4849 - Karma: 1,295
If you feel like you need the AF for taking photo's, then the 50mm f/1.8 is a good lens for the money. If you don't, get a vintage 50mm 1.4
Oct 6 2012 6:18PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)