help!! 40mm f/2.8 or 50mm f/1.4?

[allybuggi]

I'm a teen with a canon t3i. For Christmas I'll be getting one of these for sure (if I'm lucky, both) but I don't know which one I want more! I'm interested in portraits.

Which is better? Lately I've been leaning more towards the 50mm f/1.4.

I currently own the 18-55, 55-250, and 50mm f/1.8. I don't use the kit lens anymore. I like the 55-250 for nature shots, but I can't take easily self portraits with it (I don't have models at the moment) and its pretty grainy. Plus, I don't like the bokeh. The 50mm f/1.8 is nice but it seems to get soft sometimes, and I know it's not made well.

[CharlieB]

50mm would be on the short end of a portrait lens, on your crop sensor camera.

I you want a portrait lens... either the 50/1.8 or 50/1.4 would be good.  So would the 50/2.5macro - which would give you some extra flexibility.  You really shoot very few portraits at wider than f/4 anyway due to depth of field considerations.

If you want a normal lens... the 35/2 or new 35/2IS fit that bill.

If you want an alternative, sort of all round snapshot lens with some higher speed, the 28/1.8 is excellent.

You're not likely to break the 50/1.8 unless you abuse it.

[allybuggi]

Thank you so much!! haha I really don't know much about this stuff..

[bainsybike]

Get the 50 1.4.  Then you can save up for the 40 and buy it yourself - it's cheaper than the 50 so you'll get there more quickly. 

[allybuggi]

Thank you!! I was considering doing that, too. I need to babysit cx

[jp121]

For more information, read this review on the 40mm. There are pictures comparing it directly to the 50mm f/1.8. There is also a link, on the page, for reviews of both 50mm 1.8 & 1.4

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-40mm-f-2.8-STM-Pancake-Lens-Review.aspx

[pwp]

For more information, read this review on the 40mm. There are pictures comparing it directly to the 50mm f/1.8. There is also a link, on the page, for reviews of both 50mm 1.8 & 1.4
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-40mm-f-2.8-STM-Pancake-Lens-Review.aspx

You have already got the Nifty Fifty so why not choose the Shorty McForty. Read the review. I've got one. It's a really cool little lens, better at f/2.8 than your current 50 f/1.8 is a f/2.8.

-PW

[atlcroc]

I just recently wanted to add a faster lens to my collection and tested in the store a 50 1.8, 50 1.4 and the 40 2.8. I ended up selecting the 50 1.4 for two reasons: thought the sample shots were sharper and mainly I wanted to use this lens for video. The larger focusing ring made manual focusing a lot easier. If you will be using manual focus for video or other reasons, I'd go with that one. If you have a local camera store, they will let you test them and that may help you decide.

[Hydrosmerc]

I think neither.

50 f1.4 - From using both the 1.8 and 1.4, I found that they are both tack sharp for portraits. And if MTF charts is your thing:


As you can see, they are about the same at f1.8.
Unless you have a bad copy, keep using your 50, buying a newer one is redundant.

40 f2.8 - This is a great lens, super sharp on APS-C. I used it as a standard lens for a 60D. But the focal range is too similar to the 50 you already own, I can't imagine you switching from your 50 to 40 just to get a wider shot.

Canon 35 f2 and the newer f2IS - Canon doesn't seem to do very well in the standard-lens-for-cropped-sensor range. The 35 is ancient and the newer IS version gets owned by sigma. If you really really wanted an excellent prime, the sigma 35mm f1.4 is the way to go for $900.


I would actually recommend upgrading your zooms. If you take a lot of full body shots, then the tamron 24-70 f2.8, eventually upgrade to full frame of course.
Or if you do a lot of headshots and nature stuff, tamron 70-200 f2.8.

[Hector1970]

Having owned the 50mm 1.8 (but someone else accidently dropped it) I replaced it with a 50mm 1.4 which I love. (Alot of people say the 50mm 1.8 is not well made and don't like it's plastic mount - but I can never understand this - it's a very good lens for the price and reasonably well made - I don't think anything would have survived the drop that damaged it  -strangely it kept working - just visually it was falling apart).
I own the 40mm F2.8 - I've never really used it - it's lovely and compact but it's too close to 50mm in length.
If you want something different you could try a Samyang (Rokinon) 8mm Fisheye. It's a great lens on a APS-C sensor. It's manual everything so you learn alot about Aperture and manual settings on your camera.
If you didn't have the 50mm 1.8 I'd say definately the 50mm 1.4 but since you have it probably 40mm would be better but you should consider other primes like 28mm or 35mm.

[gilmorephoto]

Get the 40mm.  It's wide enough to use generally on the crop body whereas the 50mm becomes more of a portrait only lens.  The 40mm is sharp wide open which makes it very useable even in low light situations.  That would be my recommendation (and I have the 50 1.4).

[RS2021]

50mm f1.4 gets my vote.

[matukas]

I have both and prefer 40 f/2.8.
5Dc and this is killer (read: cheap  ) combo for street/everyday pics.

[FTb-n]

I have the 50 1.8, 35 2.0, and the 40 2.8 that I use on crop bodies (60D and 7D).  Of these I prefer the 40 2.8.  It's sharp wide open, relatively quiet, and so small.

The 35 2.0 is a nice lens on crop bodies and sometimes the extra stop helps.  But, you have to stop it down to 2.8 to match the 40 2.8 wide open.  The same is true for the 50 1.4.  It's quite soft at 1.4 and doesn't match 40 until you stop the 50 down to 2.8.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=810&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=115&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

If you already have the 50 1.8, there's little benefit in going to the 50 1.4 unless you really need the extra stop and are ok with softer images at 1.4.

The 40 offers you something different than what you have and it's a great little walk around lens.  I'm betting this a lens that you'll keep as you upgrade bodies in the future.

If you're hoping for both, consider the 40 2.8 and the 85 1.8.  The 85 1.8 would give you a nice portait lens (when you find models) and a very good low light telephoto lens for crop bodies -- good for indoor sports and events.  (It's one that I seriously considered before taking the plunge with the 70-200 2.8L Mark II).

[RustyTheGeek]

I know it's not on your list of options  ( 50/1.4 or 40/2.8 )  but I agree with CharlieB.  Give the 28/1.8 USM a thought.  That was my first prime and likely a lot more versatile on the crop camera.