Canon 50mm 1.4 vs Nikon 50mm 1.2 vs Nikon 50mm 1.4

J

jondoe

Active member
I have a Canon 60d and I'm looking for a good 50mm Prime lens for my camera. Ive narrowed it down to the following 3. What are your thoughts or would someone like to add more. I'm adding a Sankor 16F Anamorphic adapter to it (when I can find one for sale).

[h=2][/h]Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM $340
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1.4D $260
Nikon 50mm 1.2 (f/1.2) manual focus ais (ai-s) lens $440
 
Hmmm... tough call. The Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 has the autofocus, which is often easier, especially when you're shooting by yourself or shooting photos. (you can set the autofocus in still mode and then switch to film mode.) However, the total rotation for focussing is less than the two Nikon's, so manual focus would be harder.

The first Nikon would be a nice solid lens (the autofocus won't work, but it has a manual iris, so it will act just like a manual Nikon).

I like the last option, it's just a nice option artistically to have an f1.2 lens (I have a Canon L 50mm f1.2). It's tough to focus manually at f1.2, but who cares? You'll need good eyesight, or a loupe, or an external LCD, though. Also, those older Nikon's can be a little soft wide open. Still, that's probably the one I'd get if I didn't have the Canon. I'm addicted to having that one really fast lens.

Caveat: I also have a 35mm L f/1.4 as well. I use this lens more, because the 50mm is too long on my 7D when inside. When I use a 5D, it's fine though. But if you need to use a fast lens, then you're often indoors (or it's night). The 50mm is just too long, it's like an 85mm on the 7D, to be used indoors. So bear that in mind.
 
Either buy a best one (Nikon 50 f1.2 on your list), or go real cheap (Canon 50 f1.8, not listed).

If stills are your thing (how likely? As otherwise you'd have already known which to get), then Canon 50 f1.4.

No idea why one would *buy* (it's okay to borrow or even steal - i don't care) a Nikon f1.4 for 60D, unless you could get it for the price of 50 f1.8.
 
I don't know why anyone interested primarily in video would *buy* the canon 1.4

I bought my Nikon 1.4 for 90 bucks, and it's amazing.

I do agree that if you have the cash and can do it, the Nikon 1.2 would be a great buy, and it's not like it will really lose value, so if you don't like it down the line, you can get a lot of your investment back
 
Non AI vs AI vs AIS isn't going to make a difference on a 60D.

I've got a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 pre-AI that I love to death. I found it for $70 at a camera show and I see them for about $100 or less on ebay. It's pretty soft when you're open all the way to f1.4 (fine for video but soft on stills), but it's great once you're at f2 and up. If money is an issue, you might want to look at that over the Nikkor D lens that you're looking at.

As for the f1.2 AIS, I don't think it's worth the money. An extra half stop is nice but, considering AIS does nothing for a Canon and you're still doing manual focus, it's hard to justify paying $440 for such a lens.
 
You need to see your choice in a broader view

If you have other lenses the a nikon will focus the 'wrong' way

If you are building a nikon set, a nikon 50 will focus the 'right; way

If you intend to use a Follow Focus you should discount the baby canon as the focus barrel is too skinny

S
 
I got the canon 1.4 before I got a response. I like the Canon but keep in mind that Ive never had a 50mm Prime before.

Someone was telling me that if I use a Nikon lens, I would loose some quality because its not a Nikon camera. I dont believe thats true but I wanted to ask.

David W. Jones said:
Skip the anamorphic lens hassle.
Click to expand...
I love the look of the anamorphic lens and dont believe there is another way to achieve the 2:35:1 aspect ratio (but I could be wrong). I know it can be done in post however I dont wanna go through converting it later
 
2x anamorphic means it compresses twice the width. a 16:9 video becomes a 32:9 video, or 3.56:1 ratio. You'll have to crop off some of the left and right sides to get it back down to 2.4:1.

If you want easy cinemascope ratio get a 1.33x anamorphic...but those are much more expensive. 1.33x gives you 21.28:9 which is as close to 2.35:1 as you'll get without cropping.
 
jondoe said:
I got the canon 1.4 before I got a response. I like the Canon but keep in mind that Ive never had a 50mm Prime before.

Someone was telling me that if I use a Nikon lens, I would loose some quality because its not a Nikon camera. I dont believe thats true but I wanted to ask.
Click to expand...

That person has no idea what they're talking about. Glass is glass. A Nikon DSLR isn't going to interact any better with an older Nikon lens than a Canon body would.
 
Not to derail the thread, but may I ask why the price difference in the Canon 1.4 USM vs Canon 1.8? Does the speed increase of the 1.4 justify a $200 increase in price?
 
build quality is worlds appart- the 1.4 is a regular lens, the 1.8 feels like a toy, just as cheaply made as the rebel's kit lens, if you've held one - also, the 1.8 is extremely sharp, but bokeh is not nice (not that the 1.4 has amazing bokeh either, but it's better)
 
NormanBates said:
build quality is worlds appart- the 1.4 is a regular lens, the 1.8 feels like a toy, just as cheaply made as the rebel's kit lens, if you've held one - also, the 1.8 is extremely sharp, but bokeh is not nice (not that the 1.4 has amazing bokeh either, but it's better)
Click to expand...

50mm f/1.8 is one of the sharpest lenses I have used, and I've used all kind of L lenses and none are really as sharp as the 50mm. Do you know of any wide lenses that are as sharp as the 50mm?

Also how does the rokinon 85mm compare?

I know you know a lot about lenses, so I had to ask
thanks
 
re: 50mm f/1.8 and wide lenses
the nifty fifty is indeed really really sharp
on the wide end, it's not easy, specially on a budget... I went for the canon 24mm f/2.8, and it seems quite sharp to me, but I still haven't run it through my "one dollar resolution chart"
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
(Rockmore was unimpressed by this 24mm f/2.8 when compared to his beloved Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC)

re: samyang 85mm f/1.8
absolutely awesome lens, not so much because of its sharpness (although it's sharp enough), but because of the nice bokeh
in that respect, it's much closer to the way more expensive Canon 85mm f/1.2 or Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 than to the similarly priced Canon 85mm f/1.8; check the bokeh tests linked here:
http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html#samyang
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top