EF 50 f/1.4 USM: Optics to be expected or back to Canon?

f/1.4

f/2.0

f/2.8

f/8 {I'll skip 3.2 to 7.1}

Mine does the exact same thing.

Auto-focus?

I find manual focus works best with this type of photography.

Look at the lates Vogue issue. Wonder photography by Anne L.

Yes, initial Auto Focus on one of the buildings. Then I turned the AF switch to M.

Now I know that @ f/1.4 you'll get a lot of light fall off at the edges. As you stop down the light fall off at the edges will become minimal, example f/5. But should the resolution be this poor at f/1.4 or even f/2?

If those are 100% crops...

... sort of normal, in that you see a softer image at f/1.4 that begins to sharpen up around f/2 and then becomes very, very sharp at smaller apertures. (You might even see slightly better resolution at f/11 on your FF body.)

If those are NOT displayed at 100%, you have a problem with AF or something else.

Dan

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the "problem" given the limitations of communicating via forum, but first, are you shooting raw? Pixel peeping jpegs is not a rewarding experience.

My 5D + 50mm f1.4 lens performs beautifully wide open, when focused accordingly. However, the first new copy I received had a faulty focusing mechanism- it felt like it was uncoupled. B&H replaced it immediately, free of shipping charges and I've had no problems with it since.

The Images were taken from Large JPG. Opened in PS CS2, Imaged Sized 12 x 8. First image was only cropped from the top & bottom. Then saved for the web at 700 pixels on the longest side.

Cropped JPGs were sized the same way 12 x 8. Cropped same amount from the top & bottom, then cropped off 2 inches from both sides. Saved for the web a 700 pixels longest side.

Looks about right to me. My EF 50 1.4 USM was very soft wide open but sharpened up nicely by F2.8 and was killer at F8. If you need sharp wide open you want the EF 50 1.2L USM. Amazingly the EF 50 2.5 CM is also tack sharp wide open.

Seems like a bit of a pattern forming, some EF 50s perform like this at f/1.4 and others appear to be sharper at f/1.4

Two years ago I had Canon repair the lens because when packing the lens for a trip home, I teaked the barrel out of alignment. So now that I have a 5D, I wanted to see how well my EF 50 f/1.4 performed. I love it @ infinity say between f/6.3 to f/11. But I had no idea that it would perform this bad at f/1.4 to f/2.8 when focused at infinity.

So I'm asking myself, "I should drop it off at Canon to look at?"

There are two issues that could explain f/1.4 softness on this lens:

1. The lens IS soft at f/1.4 - pretty much a know "personality" trait of the EF 50mm f/.4. It also suffers from reduced contrast at f/1.4. Not that this keeps me from using mine at that aperture when the advantages of f/1.4 outweigh the disadvantages.

2. At f/1.4 any inaccuracy in focus becomes a bigger problem due to the very narrow DOF wide open. You could eliminate or confirm this issue with your lens by doing a careful test: Shoot from tripod with MLU and a remote release. Let the lens AF on a clear subject at f/1.4. Turn AF off but don't move the focus ring. Make an exposure. Make two more exposures; one focused a tiny bit closer and the other a tiny bit further away. If either of them are better than the first shot that used the AF setting, it is possible that your lens or body could have an AF issue requiring adjustment.

Dan

I'd send it back. That looks too soft for me.

I don't know, my 50 1.8 and 35 F2 are much sharper wide open than your 50 is even at F2. I think it might need calibration/allignment/repair. Yeah they are all a bit softer wide open but this loooks significant.

Your hyperfocal distance in this situation is about 200 feet and that landscape looks like it's about 1 mile away. So infinity focus should be sharp.

Maybe test it at closer focus first, but send it in to Canon.

Yeah, my distance is at least 1.5 to 2 miles. At least looking (measuring) at at my Rand McNally Map: Point A to B.

I'll try again tomorrow, my focus just might of been slightly off. If I get the same results again with my EF 50, I'll send it back to Canon. I'll also shoot it against my EF 85 f/1.8

Thanks for your responses.

something is wrong with that lens. this lens is usable at 1.4. here's a shot that's typical

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=7450337

it shows extremely shallow dof, but those areas that are in focus are sharp (not f8 sharp, granted, but usable). the thing to remember is this shot would be impossible to get with any other lens, so the softness at 1.4 has to be excused

your only other option is the 50 1.2, which is not as sharp or contrasty as the 1.4

anyway, there's something out of adjustment with your copy

i should add i used an extension tube for the bee shot

Yesterday. 5D EI 50 w/ MLU. Tripod & Cable Release. 17-40 f/4L USM w/ B+W Cir-PL @ 29mm

F/4

Take it back! Its got to be better than my 50mm 1.8II but it isnt in that pic you gave. Good luck Josh

Yes, the 50 is softer at 1.4. No, it shouldn't be that soft. If it were mine and performed that way in a second test, I'd send it to Canon.

My 50 mm 1.4 is superb. with razor sharp in focus and rapid fall off in DOF. Very much like the bumble bee shot

Try this quick test. Pick a sunny day, ISO around 400, Set to 1.4 and some decent speed focus on auto and press the shutter - yep just take a picture - then have a look. Maybe while you are busy turning everything off you are upsetting the actual focus. The other pictures look reasonable, but the 1.4 is horrible.

You do not own a 1.4 lens just so you can stop it down to 2.8 etc. good luck

Have just re read your post - did you actually focus or just set the lens to infinity? At wide apertures you still have to focus on whatever you are taking a picture of. The infinity thing is just a tease to make you feel good.

Someone clever can explain better than me!

Just off hand I don't recall if I have any images online I could share here as examples, but my 50/1.4 is sharper than that at both f1.4 and f2. At f1.4 it's a lot sharper than what you are seeing at f1.4, maybe even better than your f2 example. I does improve stopped down, but those shots of yours look way too soft to me.

Haven't read all of the posts but 1.4 seems much too soft, in fact too soft to be a glass issue. I would suspect AF was off. Even though the DOF at 1.4 is slim, if you are focused properly on the landscape, you should be able to get good resolution on this, and my guess is that you were out of focus. My lens is softer at the lower apertures (this is widely known with the 50 1.4 EF) but nothing like yours. Since you are shooting the 5D, I would try again, this time allow the AF to focus the shot, shoot at 1.4. This is shot #1. Then AF the shot again, then turn off the AF switch and manually focus it (I know, you are supposed to have real time manual focus override, but let's just eliminate the variables). Take the picture. This is shot #2. Compare the 2 shots. If the problem is the focusing, this test should show it. If they both look like mush, equally so, then I would return it for another. Even though my copy is soft at 1.4, your copy at 1.4 is...wow.

John Marsden wrote that his 50mm f/1.4 has "rapid fall off in DOF." What the heck do "rapid fall off in DOF" mean?

Regarding Doug Harhai's suggestion for testing the lens, please see the better (though related) method I posted earlier in this thread.

Dan

Clearly this lens is not focussed at infinity. While the 50 1.4 is not a stellar lens at full aperture it would be total junk if this was the sort of image it produced wide open. This is just simply not focussed. Try focussing it manually to infinity.

Almost ALL lenses are soft wide open- I'm surprised how naive many posters are, reporting the "softness" of Canon's 50 1.4

The wide open shot looks to be OOF, not soft. There is a difference.

If you want to ck the lens don't do it with such distant objects. Try the lens with a focus chart and then, you'll know what the issue is.

Brian, have you read the posts? I have the lens, as do most of the respondents of the post. Do you? We know about the softness of lenses wide open, especially this model. What he is showing us does not look like the softness that the rest of us have. That is not 'naive'.

Doug, obviously I have read the posts, and yes I have OWNED the lens previously. Again, ANY lens is soft wide open, and there is almost no reason to shoot wide open except in an exceptional situation. The OP was not showing "us" how he does not like the softness the "rest of us" have, as his original post was questioning the softness of the lens in general. Unlike film, digital bodies have more controls a user needs to learn to get the most from their digital body. I've shot with this lens and the 1.8 and images taken are as sharp as a razor's edge, and I would seriously look at the camera body and its functions, before assuming the lens is what's causing the above city landscape softness.

FWIW. Canon 40D + EF 50/1.4, @ f/1.4 and 1/25s, ISOE 3200, handheld. Full frame resized for the web - EXIF intact. Sharp enough..?

Oops. Must have screwed up the img src tag.
See this
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=7452272

Michael, what's the lens on the camera- in the photo? 24-70 2.8L?

Yes, it does look like a 24-70. But...I was hoping to attract attention to the lens on the camera taking that picture, rather than to what's in the picture.

I went back to the same location today and tried again. I think I got a bit better results, but I think it can do better.

5D at EI 50 with MLU and Cable Release. Auto Focus, then engaged CF-4 {AF won't work with shutter release button}

EF 50 f/1.4 USM with B+W Cir-PL at f/1.4

This next photo was shot at a distance of about 2 feet. Again, AF at f/1.4

This bird was at about 5 to 5.5 feet from me. I tried to AF on it's beak, but with not the best of luck. Again, EF 50 at f/1.4

IMO my EF 50 f/1.4 at f/1.4 when not focused at infinity has the potential of being very sharp. But f/1.4 at infinity, seems to be in need of some calibration.

Come-on Canon, it's time to update the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. The telescoping barrel is to prone to damage and getting knocked out of alignment.

The first time of getting knocked of out alignment was my fault. This time, A. was not sufficiently calibrated when in for first repair, or B. The lens to easily gets knocked out of alignment.

The shot of the post is very sharp. It looks like something is off with the focus, which could be either lens or body (or both in concert).

You got my attention so I took 3 quick shots with my 1.4 on my 10d. Softer at 1.4 as expected but not as dramatic as your test. 100% crop from about center frame. 1st 1.4, 2nd 2.0, 3rd 8.0

Hi Dennis,

Do you know what your distance was for the photos you posted? I was about 1.5 to 2 miles away.

Did you see my "Next Day Post?" I think I got a bit better results on day two. This time it was without my B+W Cir-PL. I think the Cir-Pl somewhat contributed to the softness.

Please see images posted June 25, 2008 @ 7:56PM

Thanks