From what I’ve read, the general image quality of the ‘cheap’ EF/RF 50mm 1.8 is very similar to that of the much more expensive 1.4 or 1.2 versions. At least from F1.8 and up, that is.
I’d prefer the better lenses, of course, simply for the faster and less noisy focus but I’d have to pay 12x what I’ve paid for the RF 50mm 1.8! It’s just insane.
Same as with audio equipment, I’m still at a level where I can see, as a fact, that money is still a limiting factor and not just my skill level.
The 1.4 is only about 2-2.5x the price of the 1.8, and while it might not seem like the specs justify that price increase, I recommend renting it for a week (or “retail renting” buy/return) to better understand what it has to offer. It’s hard to understand the difference until you play with it a bit, and if you are digging the DOF of the 1.8, you might love that extra stop of the 1.4 double that amount. It all depends on your tastes as a photographer and the style that you’re going for, but you should really give it a spin to find out for yourself.
As for the 1.2, I have a friend that swears by the 1.2, but it’s because the speed and extra shallow depth of field is worth 12x the price of the 1.8 for him. It isn’t for me, though. There are very few situations where the 1.4 leaves me wanting the 1.2 (which is why I don’t own it), but there are soooo many times that I grab my 1.8 for its size and weight and wish I had brought my 1.4 instead. If you find yourself loving the 1.4 more than the 1.8, then you should at least try the 1.2 as well, because you won’t understand why it costs so much more until you have it on your camera.
grab my […] for its size and weight and wish I had brought my […] instead.
Story of my (photo-) life haha. It’s so hard not to feel sad when you find a situation where a certain piece of equipment you left at home would’ve been sooo much better suited for the task. But you just can’t carry all lenses, a tri-pod and a flash with you everytime you leave the house. Even taking the camera is hard enough sometimes…
Thanks for the suggestion of renting it. Might give that a shot. There might even be a service for it I’ve used before. I wouldn’t like to pretend-buy something just to test it, though I’d probably keep it after what you’ve told me.
Sadly, there’s not 1.4 RF lens so I would have to use the EF-adapter as well. But considering the weight and size that should still be quite acceptable. Not sure if there’s a trade-off regarding image quality when using the adapter but probably not enough for me to notice anyway.
Oh damn, all this time I thought we were talking EF. My bad. The 1.4 is still really light but just sticks out quite a bit more than the 1.8 RF. With the adapter, it will obviously stick out even more so it will feel a bit heavier in hand because the center of gravity will be more forward on the camera. Still tolerable and worth a try though.
I totally get what you mean about the pretend-buy, but just do it on Amazon rather than B&H or Adorama so you don’t have to feel bad borrowing from the big corp. I did that with quite a few gimbals when I was trying to find one, and it was the only affordable way to find the right one.
Nah it’s alright, the RF series is rather niche still and when it’s much more reasonable (price per quality) I might as well use an EF with the adapter. As my always-on lens is the RF 24-240mm (very useful for travel when you don’t know what you’ll do that day), the size&weight of EF 1.4 + adapter would still be quite a bit less.
Apparently, I can rent it via a service for 20 or so bucks a month. That’s fair.
![[OC] Basket](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/739fa8ef-9dc2-4b02-92f5-df7a7277be8c.jpeg){kind=link}
From what I’ve read, the general image quality of the ‘cheap’ EF/RF 50mm 1.8 is very similar to that of the much more expensive 1.4 or 1.2 versions. At least from F1.8 and up, that is.
I’d prefer the better lenses, of course, simply for the faster and less noisy focus but I’d have to pay 12x what I’ve paid for the RF 50mm 1.8! It’s just insane.
Same as with audio equipment, I’m still at a level where I can see, as a fact, that money is still a limiting factor and not just my skill level.
The 1.4 is only about 2-2.5x the price of the 1.8, and while it might not seem like the specs justify that price increase, I recommend renting it for a week (or “retail renting” buy/return) to better understand what it has to offer. It’s hard to understand the difference until you play with it a bit, and if you are digging the DOF of the 1.8, you might love that extra stop of the 1.4 double that amount. It all depends on your tastes as a photographer and the style that you’re going for, but you should really give it a spin to find out for yourself.
As for the 1.2, I have a friend that swears by the 1.2, but it’s because the speed and extra shallow depth of field is worth 12x the price of the 1.8 for him. It isn’t for me, though. There are very few situations where the 1.4 leaves me wanting the 1.2 (which is why I don’t own it), but there are soooo many times that I grab my 1.8 for its size and weight and wish I had brought my 1.4 instead. If you find yourself loving the 1.4 more than the 1.8, then you should at least try the 1.2 as well, because you won’t understand why it costs so much more until you have it on your camera.
Story of my (photo-) life haha. It’s so hard not to feel sad when you find a situation where a certain piece of equipment you left at home would’ve been sooo much better suited for the task. But you just can’t carry all lenses, a tri-pod and a flash with you everytime you leave the house. Even taking the camera is hard enough sometimes…
Thanks for the suggestion of renting it. Might give that a shot. There might even be a service for it I’ve used before. I wouldn’t like to pretend-buy something just to test it, though I’d probably keep it after what you’ve told me.
Sadly, there’s not 1.4 RF lens so I would have to use the EF-adapter as well. But considering the weight and size that should still be quite acceptable. Not sure if there’s a trade-off regarding image quality when using the adapter but probably not enough for me to notice anyway.
Oh damn, all this time I thought we were talking EF. My bad. The 1.4 is still really light but just sticks out quite a bit more than the 1.8 RF. With the adapter, it will obviously stick out even more so it will feel a bit heavier in hand because the center of gravity will be more forward on the camera. Still tolerable and worth a try though.
I totally get what you mean about the pretend-buy, but just do it on Amazon rather than B&H or Adorama so you don’t have to feel bad borrowing from the big corp. I did that with quite a few gimbals when I was trying to find one, and it was the only affordable way to find the right one.
Nah it’s alright, the RF series is rather niche still and when it’s much more reasonable (price per quality) I might as well use an EF with the adapter. As my always-on lens is the RF 24-240mm (very useful for travel when you don’t know what you’ll do that day), the size&weight of EF 1.4 + adapter would still be quite a bit less.
Apparently, I can rent it via a service for 20 or so bucks a month. That’s fair.