Canon 50mm f1.4 lens

[Gunna]

I have a 40D & a very old 50mm 1.8 lens that doesn't owe me anything.
Is it worth spending the money on a 50mm 1.4 lens to get quality portraits & also to stitch landscapes.
I see 2nd hand ones sell every now & then.

[NGP]

if you're gong to use this lens often then definitely yes.. but if you're only using the 50mm occasionally then you might better save your $$

[djvkool]

keep this, and get yourself Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 to give you extra reach on either end

[harmo]

I own the 50mm 1.4, it's a fantastic lens which I use frequently, and I do not regret spending the extra cash. However, there are two problems that you should be aware of.
1. The 1.4 is a particularly fragile lens. Mild drops, even if they do not affect the glass, have a high probability of bending the tracks used in the focus mechanism. This renders autofocus (and even manual focus) inoperable. It is a long way from L series construction, so treat it with kit gloves. This is something I've learned the hard way.
2. The 1.4 suffers from a greater level of barrel distortion than the 1.8, so be aware of this when taking architectural shots.

For portraits, the 1.4 is very hard to beat. But if you're anticipating rough treatment, I'd say get the more expendable 1.8 lens.

[DaveNQ]

If you didn't have the 1.8 would you miss it? Maybe look at a zoom instead. If you don't use it then spend the money elsewhere but if the nifty is on your camera a lot I say shell out for the 1.4. I have it and it is very sharp and a great lens.

[ScottT]

There are some rumours of a mkII Canon 50mm f/1.4 - Yes, I know rumors are always there :) - so it may be relevant to see where this rumour goes and there might be some cheap current 50mm f/1.4's coming up for sale.

S.

[oldfart]

My 50mm f/1.4 still see's plenty of work even thought I own a 24-70mm f/2.8. They are cheap enough, and a worthwhile addition to any lens set that doesn't include a 50mm f/1.2.