# Nifty 50 or Shorty 40?



## bendobb (Jun 24, 2013)

Well, after years of procrastination I'm ready to spend some cash on some new gear. 
I'm an amateur who mostly shoots family, holiday and landscapes and want to try macro photography too. 

I've pretty much decided on a canon 6d; kit 24-105; 100L macro; 600 ex-rt. 

But I've a few hundred left over and want something small, light weight and relatively fast. 

So 50 f1.4 or 40 f2.8. I think I would like the wider angle and tiny pancake, but is the 50 a sharper lens? Will I miss the extra stops?

Thanks for any help. 

Ben


----------



## Pi (Jun 24, 2013)

The 40 is 1 stop faster than the 24-105, no IS. It is very light and small but this matters only if you go out with that lens only, not just add it in your bag.

The 50/1.4 (which is not the "nifty") is another story. Old and a bit fragile but it would offer something the zoom cannot even get close to.

EDIT: The 50/1.8 - I would not touch it. Its AF is so inconsistent and wide open is so soft, that using it wide open is a RPITA.


----------



## flymoon (Jun 24, 2013)

assuming that by nifty 50 you're referring to the 50 f/1.8, i would definitely go with that one, as 1.8 is a huge step up from 2.8 and it would make a bigger difference from the kit lens (f/4)


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jun 24, 2013)

flymoon said:


> assuming that by nifty 50 you're referring to the 50 f/1.8, i would definitely go with that one, as 1.8 is a huge step up from 2.8 and it would make a bigger difference from the kit lens (f/4)



Well, with the 6D having ultra-fast primes is not quite as important as it may once have been. That said, both are good, but I believe the 40mm is the sharper, and definitely smaller of the 2. Maybe take a couple of rubber bands and put the 24-105 at 40mm and 50mm for a few days, and check to see which focal length you seem to like better.

One other thing of note, even just going to f/2.8 you can take advantage of the extra-sensitive center AF point on the 6D, while on f/4 you don't get that. So even just going to f/2.8 can be worth it.


----------



## Harley (Jun 24, 2013)

Find a good condition Canon FL or FD 55mm f/1.2 and get the EdMika conversion kit (eBay). You'll have an incredible, inexpensive, fast lens that you won't want to take off your camera body.


----------



## Hesbehindyou (Jun 24, 2013)

50 1.8 all the way. Gives access to razor thin depth of field, good fun to play with, whereas the 40 2.8 isn't anything special in that regard.


----------



## mrzero (Jun 24, 2013)

I have the actual nifty fifty, the 50mm 1.8, and the 40mm. I don't have the 6d but that is my upgrade kit, so here is what you might want to consider. The nifty fifty and shorty forty are very similar. Both are small, lightweight, inexpensive. The 40 is a little slower at 2.8, but stellar wide open, and good for almost-macro type shots with a close focusing distance. The 50 is wider aperture with less depth of field, but older, cheaper, and little iffier on autofocus abilities or macro.

If you are really looking at the 50mm 1.4, you might want to wait and see what happens with the upgraded 50mm IS that will be coming out soon (following in the footsteps of the 24, 28, and 35s). I think that lens could coexist nicely with the 40mm.

If it was me, I'd pick the 40mm now and wait on the upgraded 50mm. When I bought my nifty fifty, there was no 40mm and no IS primes on the horizon, either. Shoot with the zoom and the 40 for a while, and decide if you would rather have a wide angle prime, a normal prime, both, neither, etc. But the pancake will always have a spot in the bag due to its size and quality.


----------



## brianboru (Jun 24, 2013)

I have both. 

The 50mm 1.8 is faster but feels and sounds horrid in use. (Although on my vintage Canon-10s I kinda like it as the plastic body with a plastic lens just seems to match.) 

The 40mm feels nice and is fun for a walk-around prime. I also include it my sports kit for occasions where I'm expecting my 70-200 to be in use constantly but want a small, wider, faster lens lurking in the kit.

For shallow DOF I have a Sigma 30mm f1.4 DC (crop) that I like as well as a couple of old Mamiya/Sekor 55mm f1.4's on adapters.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 24, 2013)

1. 50 f1.4 seems to be a better choice for low light, even stepping to f2 for sharper image.

2. 40shorty is sharp @ wide open, but still might not enough for low light shooting.

Build quality on both lenses are crappy, but hey! it's way cheaper than my 50L and it delivers high quality images for everyday photos.


----------



## distant.star (Jun 25, 2013)

.
Drop $150 on the 40mm today. The 50mm f/1.4 you mentioned is $350, and as has been said already, it's old and can be cranky -- and the 50mm focal length Canon line is probably to be updated sooner rather than later.

The 40mm gets you the f/2.8 for the AF. If you shoot any video, it also has the STM AF to hold the noise down when focusing during shooting.

I have a hard time believing the light and DOF from f/2.8 to f/1.4 is worth an extra $200 in an old technology package. But, it's your call. That seems to be the crux of the decision to me.

Good luck, and enjoy the new equipment.


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 25, 2013)

My initial response was... 40mm if you are on crop, 50mm if you are on full frame. Since you have a 6D, I think the 50mm f/1.4 is a good option. Put a hard plastic hood on their and you should be safe from any AF issues.


----------



## captainkanji (Jun 25, 2013)

I own them both. I often use the 50 1.4 if I'm in lower light and want sharper than the 24-105 or want that DOF. I don't really use the 40mm. I bought it for a backup lens. At the price, I couldn't resist. The 40mm will be my lens of choice if I go to an event that eyes "professional" cameras with suspicion. If I remove the battery grip, the 40 makes my 6D look like a rebel  If I had to choose, I would take the shorty 40 over the plastic fantastic 1.8. It fits better in my pocket and is better built. I've read lots of stories in the forum of the 50 1.8 falling apart for no apparent reason.


----------



## FTb-n (Jun 25, 2013)

Here's another vote for the 40 2.8. I own this lens and the 50 1.8. The 40 is quieter, focuses faster and is sharper corner to corner with both lenses at 2.8. As for the 50 1.4, TheDigitalPicture image tests shows it to be quite soft wide open. Niether 50 is really sharp until you stop them down close to 2.8.

The 50 1.4 and 1.8 will give you an edge at lower light if you're ok with softer images. But, the 6D is great at higher ISO's. You may not need that edge. You also may find the DOF too be tighter than you want on the FF body.


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 25, 2013)

FTb-n said:


> Here's another vote for the 40 2.8. I own this lens and the 50 1.8. The 40 is quieter, focuses faster and is sharper corner to corner with both lenses at 2.8. As for the 50 1.4, TheDigitalPicture image tests shows it to be quite soft wide open. Niether 50 is really sharp until you stop them down close to 2.8.
> 
> The 50 1.4 and 1.8 will give you an edge at lower light if you're ok with softer images. But, the 6D is great at higher ISO's. You may not need that edge. You also may find the DOF too be tighter than you want on the FF body.



In regards to the 50 f/1.4, you are right, it does sharpen up substantially around f/2.8... but it is more than just tolerable at f/2... so if you are in a low light situation, that extra stop of light might be just the key.


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 25, 2013)

I would go for the 40 if i were you...


----------



## symmar22 (Jun 25, 2013)

I would say it depends on what you want it for, if it's just to have a super light compact lens, I would go with the 40mm for the USM focus and unbeatable size, on the other hand the 50mm 1.8 would allow a shallower depth of field and is 2 stops faster than your 24-105. I don't think built quality is an issue, especially considering the price asked for these lenses.

I would not go for the 50mm 1.4 now, since it's likely to be replaced soon. Nothing about the sharpness, (it's the sharpest of Canon's 50's, and better than the Carl Zeiss 50 1.4), but it's a very old lens and its simplified USM is not the most reliable. I would wait to see with what Canon will replace it.

For the price of the 50mm 1.4 you can have both the 40mm and the 50mm 1.8, try and decide what works best for you. You will have lenses to wait until a new 1.4 version is released.

IMO all these lenses are sharp enough, the real point is what you can or cannot do with them, and what they bring to your style of photography. 

For different pictures, you could also consider the 50mm f2.5 compact macro, it's old but optically better than all the previous ones, allows 1:2 close-ups and is quite cheap as well.


----------



## bholliman (Jun 25, 2013)

I recommend the 50 1.4. Its superior in build quality and IQ over the all plastic 50 1.8 and very close in IQ to the much more expensive 50 1.2 L. Even if Canon does come out with a new 50mm lens at some point (still just rumors), it will not affect the resale price of this lens much and you will have the opportunity to use it now. All lenses will be replaced at some point...

The 40mm pancake is a very nice little lens also. Its tiny, inexpensive and excellent optically. The 40 is slightly sharper at the edges at f/2.8 compared with the 50 1.4, but the 50 has the advantage of being able to open up to 1.4 if you want really shallow depth of field shots. Also, since I typically use the 50 for portraits and shots of the kids playing indoors, I don't worry that much about sharpness on the corners. 

Both are excellent lenses for the money, you really can't make a wrong choice here.


----------



## Ryan708 (Jun 29, 2013)

I would go with the 50 f1/4 or even 1.8 over the 40mm in my opinion. alot of my favorite shots have been on my [email protected], and a very high percentage of my favorite shots out of my 17-70 are at 31mm and 34mm (very colse to 50mm on a full frame). the 50 1/8 @f2.8-5.6 is VERY sharp. and I have never had any issues with it focusing badly on my 60D. The 50 1.8 actually focuses well in low light too. I use an extension tube with it for a very sharp macro lens


----------



## pedro (Jun 29, 2013)

symmar22 said:


> I would say it depends on what you want it for, if it's just to have a super light compact lens, I would go with the 40mm for the USM focus and unbeatable size, on the other hand the 50mm 1.8 would allow a shallower depth of field and is 2 stops faster than your 24-105. I don't think built quality is an issue, especially considering the price asked for these lenses.
> 
> I would not go for the 50mm 1.4 now, since it's likely to be replaced soon. Nothing about the sharpness, (it's the sharpest of Canon's 50's, and better than the Carl Zeiss 50 1.4), but it's a very old lens and its simplified USM is not the most reliable. I would wait to see with what Canon will replace it.
> 
> ...



I'd go with the 50 f/1.4 it is a fine lens. I am shooting it wide open even at ISO 51k and 102k on my 5D3.



5D3 extreme ISOs sample 1 by Peter Hauri, on Flickr




5D3 extreme ISOs sample 2 by Peter Hauri, on Flickr


----------



## bholliman (Jun 29, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> My initial response was... 40mm if you are on crop, 50mm if you are on full frame. Since you have a 6D, I think the 50mm f/1.4 is a good option.


+1 The 50 1.4 is considerably better than the 50 1.8 in sharpness and build quality. I find the 50mm focal lengh very useful on a full frame body, I use it more than my 35mm, even though the 35 1.4L is better glass. I've never owned a 40mm pancake, but they are nice lenses. I've tried them out at camera stores. 

Both are very good lenses. The choice really depends on which focal length you prefer and if a wider aperture is more important to you than smaller size. You can't really go wrong either way.


----------



## pedro (Jun 29, 2013)

bholliman said:


> The choice really depends on which focal length you prefer and *if a wider aperture is more important to you than smaller size. * You can't really go wrong either way.



+1 I am all for widest financially affordable apertures of my primes.


----------



## dgatwood (Jun 30, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> My initial response was... 40mm if you are on crop, 50mm if you are on full frame. Since you have a 6D, I think the 50mm f/1.4 is a good option. Put a hard plastic hood on their and you should be safe from any AF issues.



I'd actually say 40mm on a full frame, "none of the above" on a crop body. I own the 40mm. On my XTi, I'd describe it as a good portrait lens. I really don't find it to be wide enough to use as a walk-around lens. As always, personal tastes vary.

Just for fun, I used sqlite to dump the focal length of every shot in my Lightroom database, then ran a histogram on the data.



10mm240611-30mm1051831-45mm258246-60mm237661-120mm4262121-600mm2130

There are two obvious hot spots around 10mm (2,406 pictures at full wide on my 10–22) and 17mm (4,195 picture at full wide on my 17-85). I took 6,526 pictures in the 16-20mm range. The median is 28mm. The mode is 17mm. Standard deviation is 69.02.

Obviously YMMV. Widely.


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 30, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > My initial response was... 40mm if you are on crop, 50mm if you are on full frame. Since you have a 6D, I think the 50mm f/1.4 is a good option. Put a hard plastic hood on their and you should be safe from any AF issues.
> ...



I would very much like to do that myself. Was it free? Was it hard?


----------



## dgatwood (Jun 30, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > Just for fun, I used sqlite to dump the focal length of every shot in my Lightroom database, then ran a histogram on the data.
> ...



Pretty easy, actually, at least on OS X. I have no idea on Windows. Lightroom just uses a SQLite database, so you can run any SQL queries on the thing and get back results. For example:


```
# Make a copy of the library just to be extra careful:
cp ~/Pictures/Lightroom/"Lightroom 4 Catalog.lrcat" lr4.sqlite3

# Run a query that dumps the focal length of every shot:
sqlite3 lr4.sqlite3 "select focalLength from AgHarvestedExifMetadata;" > focallengths
```

I then opened that in TextEdit, copied the resulting file (which contains one length per line), and pasted it into a Numbers spreadsheet. I then sorted the list and deleted everything below 10mm (iPhone pictures), though I really should have limited the query by camera type to begin with, e.g.


```
sqlite3 lr4.sqlite3 "select * from AgInternedExifCameraModel;

# Look at the list and create a comma-delimited list of the index number on the left
# end of each interesting row, e.g.:

sqlite3 lr4.sqlite3 "select focalLength from AgHarvestedExifMetadata where cameraModelRef in ('510367', '509132');"
```

Either way, once you have the numbers in a spreadsheet, you can do various sorts of statistics on the list.


----------



## fegari (Jun 30, 2013)

Harley said:


> Find a good condition Canon FL or FD 55mm f/1.2 and get the EdMika conversion kit (eBay). You'll have an incredible, inexpensive, fast lens that you won't want to take off your camera body.



A Canon FD 55 1.2 SSC in good shape plus the mika conversion will amount to close to 500 USD and you have the probability of hitting the mirror in infinity. I have that combo, it does produce a particular look but wide open it is only good for portraiture (lots of aberrations that give a certain surreal look). 

In your place and with hindsight experience of buying a bunch of lenses I would advice *strongly* to save a bit and get the very best first rate lens that you can afford later on. It is not worth spending some cash just because you have a couple hundred dollars to spare and coincidentally the 40 2.8 or the 50 1.8 are in that price range. 

My advice to you would definitively be to save a bit and get yourself the Sigma 35 1.4 which used can be a very attractive proposition. The 6D deserves first rate lenses and the 35 1.4 (a top tier 35mm, sharpest of all) will serve you handsomely in moderately wide landscape, general and even portraiture. Not to mention super fast 1.4 aperture that will do wonders in low light with the sigma....

Now, if you _really_ need to chose now between the 40 and the 50 I´d give the 40 a try.

Good luck with the choice!


----------



## Mantanuska (Jun 30, 2013)

A lot of good answers but most of them aren't choosing one of the two options provided. I have both lenses with a 6D and it really depends on what you want to shoot. 
These lenses are very similar, in my opinion the only important differences are AF speed and max aperture. 

If you are shooting moving subjects in low light, the 50 1.8 will end up being too slow to focus for you. The 40mm will be much faster.

If you are trying to get a shallower DOF, go with the 50 1.8

In all other situations they are pretty well matched.


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 30, 2013)

fegari said:


> In your place and with hindsight experience of buying a bunch of lenses I would advice *strongly* to save a bit and get the very best first rate lens that you can afford later on. It is not worth spending some cash just because you have a couple hundred dollars to spare and coincidentally the 40 2.8 or the 50 1.8 are in that price range.
> 
> My advice to you would definitively be to save a bit and get yourself the Sigma 35 1.4 which used can be a very attractive proposition. The 6D deserves first rate lenses and the 35 1.4 (a top tier 35mm, sharpest of all) will serve you handsomely in moderately wide landscape, general and even portraiture. Not to mention super fast 1.4 aperture that will do wonders in low light with the sigma....



I went the other way. I would suggest not losing money when you buy and subsequently sell lenses. The best way to do that is to buy a lens when it is on sale (obviously), but even more so, buy used good condition lenses and canon direct refurbs. 

So let's say the normal price for a 50mm f/1.4 is a $349. There was a sale price for $285 the other day. Or a canon refurb is $320 but with a 20% discount, it would only be $256 (before tax). It's subsequent resale value is around $300 in really good condition. 

So buy the lens, use it for a year or two, and then sell it for what you paid, or maybe for a little bit of a profit.

The key is keeping it in like new condition. 

So buy a lens at a good price, and use it for a while and then when you are ready to upgrade, it is almost like you had that money in escrow and you are able to tap into any time you want.

As an FYI, bodies lose their value quickly because they are replaced frequently with better models. Lenses aren't quite that way because even if a better/newer model comes out, it is still cheaper than the newer model which helps keeps its value higher, and more often than not, the older lens is still really good.

3rd party lenses lose value much faster than Canon lenses. They may be good, but the market for Canon lenses is significantly larger than Tokina/Sigma/Tamron/etc.


----------



## kennephoto (Jun 30, 2013)

Pancake on FF is a lot of fun! You can take fun photos of you and your significant other by holding the camera out in front of you and get good fun shots! I've had the 50 1.8 and I still prefer my pancake, it makes good bokeh too!


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 30, 2013)

kennephoto said:


> Pancake on FF is a lot of fun! You can take fun photos of you and your significant other by holding the camera out in front of you and get good fun shots! I've had the 50 1.8 and I still prefer my pancake, it makes good bokeh too!



I HATE seeing the "hold your camera at arms length to take a self portrait photo". Buy a IR wireless shutter release.

http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-RC-4-Wireless-Control-Digital/dp/B0019RGQVU/ref=sr_1_19?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1372620757&sr=1-19&keywords=wireless+shutter+release+canon


----------



## robertbanksoz (Jul 1, 2013)

adhocphotographer said:


> I would go for the 40 if i were you...



+1


----------



## tron (Jul 1, 2013)

a few hundred left, a small lightweight and relatively fast lens = 85mm 1.8 for me...

Otherwise, if it has to be between the two I'd get the 50 1.8 (I do have the version 1 of that lens)


----------

