Canon 50mm 1.4 worth it over 1.8? Or get other lens?

[ajedproduction]

Is the 50mm 1.4 worth it over the 1.8? I don't care about build quality I only care about the quality of the images and to a lesser extent the auto focus speed. Is it worth the upgrade or would I be better off just getting a different lens altogether to add to my arsenal?

My equipment is as follows:
Canon 550d
18 - 55 kit lens
50mm 1.8
28mm 2.8
Peleng 8mm 3.5 fisheye
Sigma 70 - 300mm f4 - 5.6

Is there a certain FOV I'm missing out on and should invest in instead of upgrading my nifty fifty? Next year I'm looking to upgrade to a 5d mkii, so I can't invest in any EF-S lenses. I do both films and photography with my camera, but mainly film.

 

[8salacious9]

well digitalrev prefers the 1.4 over the 1.8 and 1.2, the question is do you need to replace your 1.8? if you dont then obviously no...

the only reason you need to upgrade is if you need it, not for the sake of it.

id say you need a lens beginning at 70mm onwards looking at your current range

 

[Jack Lynt]

Yeah, it's really tough to recommend that you get the 1.4 when you already have the 1.8. You really don't need it, like Salacious said.

Before you bought either, it would have been easy to recommend that you spend a little more for the 1.4., unless it was cost prohibitive for you. But, hindsight.

If you really desire that little bit of better low light performance, it might actuallty be worth it to you. Maybe if you really want to shoot without lighting aids. But even then you get into questions about what else you could spend that money on that you don't have.

And consider what Ken Rockwell has to say in praise of the 1.8 lens you already have:

Excellent for use in low light; I prefer it to the faster 50mm f/1.4 because this f/1.8 lens gives me more accurate autofocus.

And:

This little lens is Canon's biggest secret.

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 II has fantastically good optics, better than Canon's "L" series wide lenses like the 16-35mm f/2.8 L II.

In fact, this $99 plastic lens gives sharper results than the 50mm f/1.4 USM I've used, especially in no light. The f/1.4 is soft at f/1.4, and worse, I rarely get in-focus results with it, while this $99 f/1.8 lens is sharp at f/1.8, and always delivers perfect in-focus results!

The 50mm f/1.8 II weighs less, costs less, and autofocuses more accurately than the 50mm f/1.4 USM.

And you get into questions about what else you could spend that money on that you don't have.

For example, it could go towards that new camera you're planning to buy.

I don't know about it for video shooting, but for stills at least, personally I'm fond of the 85mm focal length (very nice for portraits and a small telephoto). And the Canon 85mm 1.8 is in the near price range, for example. Also, the 100mm and 100mm macro lenses are supposed to be very nice. I have the 50mm 1.4 and I like it very much. But it doesn't sound like you're missing much, maybe even better off. In fact, I'm tempted to pick one of those 1.8ers up. Whatever you decide, you're going to be very pleased with your EF lenses when you go full frame. =)

Best of luck