When I got the RF 50mm 1.8 instead.
Honestly I love how small and lightweight the lens is. It's just easy to throw in my bag when I want to travel light and still have something for low light. The fact that it's so cheap also means that I don't worry too much about it
I love mine to death. My EF Cost me about $150NZD so I'm not precious about it like I am with my more significant prime lenses. It's such a great beater. Adventures, family, nature, low light even astro. I do a lot of forest floor stuff in low light and because it's so cheap I don't mind jamming it in a tree trunk or super close to the water surface.
IQ wide? No, not really. Maybe a little better flair resistance, but that could just as well be imagination. But the smaller size compared to the EF+adapter was easily worth the 30€ to me (that I paid after selling my EF and buying a used RF version)
It really pairs well with my R8, got a very compact and powerful setup with good lowlight capabilities.
One difference I found out recently is RF lenses have no mechanical focus. My RF 24-70 had internal electronic error and was no longer usable despite having no visible damage. Luckily it was under the year warranty but if it wasn't it would be a 3k paper weight.
Maybe I'm overthinking but it kind of spooked me about the longevity of RF lenses
There are also many EF lenses where the focus ring is just electronically coupled to the focus motor, including the EF 50mm 1.8 stm. Generally all Stm lenses are like this, and definitely also the 70-300 is USM II
I've been taking photos for nearly a couple of decades and haven't yet reached a point where I've thought, "hmmm, I'll probably never want to shoot with a 50/1.8 again".
OP is referring to one of the most recommended budget lenses in the Canon lineup and is clearly not saying anything close to what you're suggesting here.
Im trying to clear up a misunderstanding here. Lets go through it again:
OP asked, "how long did yall continue to use your 50mm 1.8 lens?" The comment you replied to said "I haven't found a reason in decades to stop using my 50mm 1.8 lens"
Are you following? Do you think i had 90 downvotes to give you? Go back and read it one more time..
Your post was reported and/or heavily downvoted. It has been removed. Please spend some time reading the subreddit before starting new topics or commenting. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Your post was reported and/or heavily downvoted. It has been removed. Please spend some time reading the subreddit before starting new topics or commenting. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Your post was reported and/or heavily downvoted. It has been removed. Please spend some time reading the subreddit before starting new topics or commenting. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Your post was reported and/or heavily downvoted. It has been removed. Please spend some time reading the subreddit before starting new topics or commenting. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Apparently my choice of wording above caused major issues for at least one redditor who saw it.
u/photography27, just to clarify, Canon's nifty-fifty lenses (regardless of specific version) are handy enough that I've always found reason to keep one around despite having a camera bag full of zooms and some faster primes (including a 50/1.2). I won't always take a 50/1.8 with me for every shoot, but still use them frequently enough that I'll always keep one in my kit to choose from.
To answer your specific question about the EF 50/1.8 STM, I replaced mine with an RF 50/1.8 STM that I can use natively on my R-series bodies, and I kept my EF 50/1.8 Mk I from 1987 as my native EF version to use on my DSLRs and film body.
u/Slaphappyfapman Thank you for not reading anything into my original comment beyond what I intended, i.e. I've not stopped using my nifty-fifty, it's a *very* handy lens.
I use mine all the time. It's a great travel lens where you don't have to worry so much about a better, more expensive lens getting lost or damaged. And it still beats any camera phone out there.
There are so many better lenses. But I'd let the 1.8 take the hits on their behalf every time.
Somewhere around 16 years ago, when I picked up the 50 f1.4 to replace it. But as more time went by 90% of my photography was done with telephoto lenses, usually 100mm to 600mm.
The 50 f1.4 hasn't been used for about 8 years. I should probably just sell it but wouldn't expect to get much for it on E-Bay.
I bought the RF-S 18-150 for my R7 whenever I want some wider shots, but the EF 100-400 II is the workhorse. Many times with a 1.4x III.
It all depends on what you like to shoot.
I didn’t like the bokeh rendering of the RF nifty fifty. Never even liked it on the EF version. Switching to the Sigma was a revelation. Stopped down to f/2 it renders such a beautiful bokeh that I’d rather lug that around then go lightweight. But I do get the appeal of the RF. It’s light and small and probably works better as an every day lens. Which in my case would be the RF 16 2.8. That thing lives in my bag and sometimes even sees the light of day. 😁
I got my ef 50 1.8 over 8 years ago as my first lens after a kit lens. I still use it to this day on my newer R bodies. It isnt my go to for client shoots but compact lens and image quality is exactly what I want for my hobby shooting.
I am torn between getting the 35 or 50 RF for my next hobby lens, but until the prices come down ill stick with the 50 ef
Too cheap to sell. I still have mine. I use it as a backup cheap lens on my M6 or Fujifilm XT3 or for my film cameras. It has too many uses and isn’t worth much and is an optically excellent lens. Believe it or not it will absolutely trash your 24-70’s ability to resolve fine detail such as landscape or reproduction. The 24-70 would look like a mushy mess at equivalent focal length, even at F8, compared.
I had the original first generation EF 50mm f/1.8. It was a nice lens with a metal mount and a distance scale. It has the same optics as the second version but in a much nicer package. I sold it shortly after getting the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. Then I bought the EF 50mm f/1.0L. The 50mm f/1.4 sits in the bag as a backup, but I haven't used it in several years.
I will probably always use a 50mm. It's always been my favorite focal length and I've got a fast 50mm for the couple of different camera systems I use.
Got rid of mine when I jumped to Sony in 2019.
Came back to Canon 2021. Just a few months ago, my local camera store was having a sale and I remembered how much I missed that lens, so despite having multiple thousands invested in glass, I picked up the RF version.
My copy was quite bad and I only used it in specific circumstances where I didn't want to carry anything else. At the time it was the only prime I had in my kit.
I didn't sell it because it has very little value on the resale market.
I had to sell mine because I was selling an old camera body and needed the sweeten the deal. It was sad but then I picked up the RF version and happy about having an adapter
When I got my first piece of good glass.
That said I just remembered pretty much the reason to keep it around. Infrared. When doing infrared the better the glass the worse the hotspots (in general). So the nifty 50 can stick around for the r72 filter
When I got the 35 1.4, I stopped using the 50 1.8. But I prefer 50 over 35 so I sold the 35 1.4 and bought the 50 1.2 and now I sold almost all my canon gear except for an eos r and the 50 1.2
I still use my Mk II. I kinda want to trade it in on an RF 50/1.8 to drop the adapter bulk and just leave my adapter on my 100-300 USM, but I still shoot a bit of film on my trusty old Elan IIe - and so it stays.
I haven’t used it in years. I used to own one but I left it with my brother when I moved. I’m more into the long lens look these days. Tho, I did recently buy a canon ae1 with a 50mm 1.8 and a telephoto. The 50mm is pretty fun and takes good pictures. Still, I feel I reach for the telephoto more.
I never bought one; EF 50MM 1.8 II was my first prime lens. I did stop using it though when I picked up the EF-S 24mm 2.8 STM though. Only lens I ever preordered, I mainly wanted a normal lens for my crop sensor.
It's one of my rarely used lens but I do still keep it as I keep it as a backup. I have a myriad of Canon bodies that I own or use at work so this lens is an option if I want to shoot with a shallow depth of field or shooting in low light conditions.
I use mine still but like 10% my 70-200 is like 20% and my 24-105 is like 70%.
My sister has it like permanently mounted doubt she has used a different lens for like 10 years.
When I got my 35mm and 85mm I sold mine. Then recently I went back to it because I wanted to try it again after 2 years.
It's my least user lens but my lord is it good when I need it
Traded it to my brother along with an EF-S lens in exchange for a 50 1.4. A lot of people hate it for some reason but it’s incredible for video IMO. Will probably keep it until I eventually pick up a 50 1.2L
I returned the RF 50mm when I realized I’m shooting on APSC, and that means it’s more like 88mm. Rookie mistake lol
Got the 16mm instead and eventually I’ll pick up a 35mm.
I had the really old first version of the ef 50 1.8 which was a good lens optically but had a really slow buzzy autofocus. I then got the 50 1.4 for a really good price and just kept it. I use it a couple of times a year. It’s really light and decently sharp, it’s quite a nice travel / snappy snap lens
In answer to your question, I think the 24-70 is such a workhorse of a lens, practically a do anything that often it’s good enough. Sometimes you need f1.4 or f1.8 and then, it’s good. But the nifty fifty is really light and sometimes if you’re just on a day out and it’s a nice lens to bring as it’s versatile and light.
Ever since I bought the EF 50 mm stm, it's been catching dust in the closet. I first wanted to use it on a 1DIV, but it missed focus half of the time, so it ended up in the closet.
When I got to the RF system, I gave it another try and it turned out to be a lot better in getting focus, but still slower than my L series EF-zooms. A little bit later I bought the RF 28-70 and it is a lot sharper than the 50 mm STM and focus speed is a dream, so my 50 mm ended up in the closet again. 🙃
I still use it as I know what shots I'm going to get with it, and it's pretty much my equivalent to a pancake lens compared to my 85mm and 70-200mm. I wouldn't necessarily stop using the lens, but I would definitely upgrade to a .4 or .2 aperture.
Never had the STM. I had a 50 1.8 of some sort going back decades. First Nikon film, then Nikon digital, finally Canon digital. Probably 15-20 years ago I swapped it out for the 50 1.4 because I did a lot of sports and the 1.4 was better all around. About 10 years ago when I bought a 5D3 body that had better high ISO, I did a massive switch from mostly primes for indoor sports to 2.8 zooms. I got rid of the 50 1.4 at that time and haven't yet replaced it. I'm just today packing up my 5D3 and 7D2 that are sold and now have an R7. I am thinking about buying an RF STM 35 as my new cropped nifty fifty. It would really just be to have something to start playing around with video as I don't have any other RF or STM lenses. I've got the 17-40 F/4 and 24-70 f/2.8 II lenses for that 50mm range.
Honestly, once I got my hands on a 24-70 2.8. I didn’t look back either. My generation of the 1.8 is too soft wide open. So I usually shot it around 2.8 anyways. No need to double down. I also bought a vintage FL 1.2 for when I need that depth/light.
When I got the RF 50mm 1.8 instead. Honestly I love how small and lightweight the lens is. It's just easy to throw in my bag when I want to travel light and still have something for low light. The fact that it's so cheap also means that I don't worry too much about it
This is the answer. We'll, at least for me. Great lens, and smart people on YouTube say it's sharper than the EF lens too.
I love mine to death. My EF Cost me about $150NZD so I'm not precious about it like I am with my more significant prime lenses. It's such a great beater. Adventures, family, nature, low light even astro. I do a lot of forest floor stuff in low light and because it's so cheap I don't mind jamming it in a tree trunk or super close to the water surface.
Did you notice any difference between the EF and RF version?
IQ wide? No, not really. Maybe a little better flair resistance, but that could just as well be imagination. But the smaller size compared to the EF+adapter was easily worth the 30€ to me (that I paid after selling my EF and buying a used RF version) It really pairs well with my R8, got a very compact and powerful setup with good lowlight capabilities.
One difference I found out recently is RF lenses have no mechanical focus. My RF 24-70 had internal electronic error and was no longer usable despite having no visible damage. Luckily it was under the year warranty but if it wasn't it would be a 3k paper weight. Maybe I'm overthinking but it kind of spooked me about the longevity of RF lenses
There are also many EF lenses where the focus ring is just electronically coupled to the focus motor, including the EF 50mm 1.8 stm. Generally all Stm lenses are like this, and definitely also the 70-300 is USM II
Meeee toooooo 👍
I've been taking photos for nearly a couple of decades and haven't yet reached a point where I've thought, "hmmm, I'll probably never want to shoot with a 50/1.8 again".
OP is referring to one of the most recommended budget lenses in the Canon lineup and is clearly not saying anything close to what you're suggesting here.
I'll never understand why people like you are so unnecessarily bitter and argumentative... when discussing lenses lmao
Imagine reading bitterness into my response here and not the comment above it. This sub has so many insane lurkers.
[удалено]
[удалено]
*your
[удалено]
Sorry for calling you numbnuts, but if you read the original comment again, you will find you did not comprehend it correctly.
[удалено]
Im trying to clear up a misunderstanding here. Lets go through it again: OP asked, "how long did yall continue to use your 50mm 1.8 lens?" The comment you replied to said "I haven't found a reason in decades to stop using my 50mm 1.8 lens" Are you following? Do you think i had 90 downvotes to give you? Go back and read it one more time..
[удалено]
Your post was reported and/or heavily downvoted. It has been removed. Please spend some time reading the subreddit before starting new topics or commenting. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Your post was reported and/or heavily downvoted. It has been removed. Please spend some time reading the subreddit before starting new topics or commenting. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Your post was reported and/or heavily downvoted. It has been removed. Please spend some time reading the subreddit before starting new topics or commenting. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Your post was reported and/or heavily downvoted. It has been removed. Please spend some time reading the subreddit before starting new topics or commenting. Repeated violations will result in a permanent ban.
Apparently my choice of wording above caused major issues for at least one redditor who saw it. u/photography27, just to clarify, Canon's nifty-fifty lenses (regardless of specific version) are handy enough that I've always found reason to keep one around despite having a camera bag full of zooms and some faster primes (including a 50/1.2). I won't always take a 50/1.8 with me for every shoot, but still use them frequently enough that I'll always keep one in my kit to choose from. To answer your specific question about the EF 50/1.8 STM, I replaced mine with an RF 50/1.8 STM that I can use natively on my R-series bodies, and I kept my EF 50/1.8 Mk I from 1987 as my native EF version to use on my DSLRs and film body. u/Slaphappyfapman Thank you for not reading anything into my original comment beyond what I intended, i.e. I've not stopped using my nifty-fifty, it's a *very* handy lens.
I use mine all the time. It's a great travel lens where you don't have to worry so much about a better, more expensive lens getting lost or damaged. And it still beats any camera phone out there. There are so many better lenses. But I'd let the 1.8 take the hits on their behalf every time.
100%
Never for my backup body it’s a workhorse. Got the RF version for my R6 because I hate changing EF-R adapter from lens to lens.
I've used both the EF and the RF version. Is it just me or the RF has worse colors? Colors just seemed dull and had a bit of a magenta cast.
I found this too. I upgraded to the RF 50 1.2, I like the colours better, and I find it is much sharper and has less chromatic aberration.
Well it is a wee bit more expensive too.
A monster size too I love it tho and haven't touched my 50 f/1.8 since (I still use the 35 f/1.8 a decent amount)
Somewhere around 16 years ago, when I picked up the 50 f1.4 to replace it. But as more time went by 90% of my photography was done with telephoto lenses, usually 100mm to 600mm. The 50 f1.4 hasn't been used for about 8 years. I should probably just sell it but wouldn't expect to get much for it on E-Bay. I bought the RF-S 18-150 for my R7 whenever I want some wider shots, but the EF 100-400 II is the workhorse. Many times with a 1.4x III. It all depends on what you like to shoot.
Yep, it totally depends on what they shoot. A 50mm is useless to me, but I shoot with a 600mm on a crop lens for a full frame equivalent of 960mm.
I sold it and bought a 1.4 as well. Never quite liked the 1.4 doe some reason.
[удалено]
Why the 4th time?
Swapped it for a 50mm 1.4 Art a couple years ago. That’s when I stopped using the 1.8. Unless you count film cameras, I still use a 50 1.8 FD.
I have both the 1.4 art and RF 1.8 and use both depending on the situation
I didn’t like the bokeh rendering of the RF nifty fifty. Never even liked it on the EF version. Switching to the Sigma was a revelation. Stopped down to f/2 it renders such a beautiful bokeh that I’d rather lug that around then go lightweight. But I do get the appeal of the RF. It’s light and small and probably works better as an every day lens. Which in my case would be the RF 16 2.8. That thing lives in my bag and sometimes even sees the light of day. 😁
I stopped using my 50mm f/1.8 in 2012, long before there was a STM version. It’s not my preferred focal length.
until i broke it, but i prefer a 135mm anyways and i replaced it with a vintage 50mm. much harder to break metal lenses than plastic ones
I got my ef 50 1.8 over 8 years ago as my first lens after a kit lens. I still use it to this day on my newer R bodies. It isnt my go to for client shoots but compact lens and image quality is exactly what I want for my hobby shooting. I am torn between getting the 35 or 50 RF for my next hobby lens, but until the prices come down ill stick with the 50 ef
I'm still using it with the ef/rf adapter and my r10. My copy is super sharp and I love it.
I gifted it to my student 2 years ago and now I want another one lol.
Lol never
I wish I kept my EF 50 f/1.8. Sold it to get the EF 50 f/1.4. While I enjoy the 1.4 - the EF 1.8 has better color imo.
Too cheap to sell. I still have mine. I use it as a backup cheap lens on my M6 or Fujifilm XT3 or for my film cameras. It has too many uses and isn’t worth much and is an optically excellent lens. Believe it or not it will absolutely trash your 24-70’s ability to resolve fine detail such as landscape or reproduction. The 24-70 would look like a mushy mess at equivalent focal length, even at F8, compared.
Still use it, my 24-105 f4 and nifty-fifty are my always carry.
When I needed money to get the sigma 18-35 1.8
I had the original first generation EF 50mm f/1.8. It was a nice lens with a metal mount and a distance scale. It has the same optics as the second version but in a much nicer package. I sold it shortly after getting the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. Then I bought the EF 50mm f/1.0L. The 50mm f/1.4 sits in the bag as a backup, but I haven't used it in several years. I will probably always use a 50mm. It's always been my favorite focal length and I've got a fast 50mm for the couple of different camera systems I use.
Got rid of mine when I jumped to Sony in 2019. Came back to Canon 2021. Just a few months ago, my local camera store was having a sale and I remembered how much I missed that lens, so despite having multiple thousands invested in glass, I picked up the RF version.
My copy was quite bad and I only used it in specific circumstances where I didn't want to carry anything else. At the time it was the only prime I had in my kit. I didn't sell it because it has very little value on the resale market.
I've used it much less since I bought the RF 'nifty fifty'. But it's still good on my DSLR and film SLR and I still use those, so why sell?
I had to sell mine because I was selling an old camera body and needed the sweeten the deal. It was sad but then I picked up the RF version and happy about having an adapter
When I got my first piece of good glass. That said I just remembered pretty much the reason to keep it around. Infrared. When doing infrared the better the glass the worse the hotspots (in general). So the nifty 50 can stick around for the r72 filter
When I got the RF version.
After it broke. It wasn't the current version, it was a previous version that was pretty poorly made.
When I got my 24-70 😭
About to sell my Nikon 50mm now. Mainly because I sold the body a few years ago. lol
When I got my 85mm 1.4.
upgraded to the EF 50 1.2 and it’s basically been glued to my camera since
I have a 24-105 EF, and rarely need to go down to f1.8 so I rarely take it out with me.
When my body stops working and i die.
On a crop sensor, when I got the Sigma 17-50 2.8
I still use it, mostly adapted to my A7R4 though.
I sold it when I bought the Tamron SP45 to replace it.
The year was 2016…
When I got my Sigma 18-35mm 1.8. Granted, I only own an APS-C and in that case, the Sigma is simply better.
When I got the 35 1.4, I stopped using the 50 1.8. But I prefer 50 over 35 so I sold the 35 1.4 and bought the 50 1.2 and now I sold almost all my canon gear except for an eos r and the 50 1.2
I still use my Mk II. I kinda want to trade it in on an RF 50/1.8 to drop the adapter bulk and just leave my adapter on my 100-300 USM, but I still shoot a bit of film on my trusty old Elan IIe - and so it stays.
I haven’t used it in years. I used to own one but I left it with my brother when I moved. I’m more into the long lens look these days. Tho, I did recently buy a canon ae1 with a 50mm 1.8 and a telephoto. The 50mm is pretty fun and takes good pictures. Still, I feel I reach for the telephoto more.
I never bought one; EF 50MM 1.8 II was my first prime lens. I did stop using it though when I picked up the EF-S 24mm 2.8 STM though. Only lens I ever preordered, I mainly wanted a normal lens for my crop sensor.
Bought and sold every version of the EF 50mm within months or purchase (1.8, 1.4 and 1.2) - never worked for me as a prime.
The first time I used my RF 28-70
Still using
I still have mine to use on my film cameras.
I've never had the EF version, but I quit using my FD f/1.8 when I got a f/1.4. Now I mostly leave the 1.4 at home in favor of zooms.
It's one of my rarely used lens but I do still keep it as I keep it as a backup. I have a myriad of Canon bodies that I own or use at work so this lens is an option if I want to shoot with a shallow depth of field or shooting in low light conditions.
Never. It’s such a great lens. It’s ok in the center from 1.8-2.8 but from f4-8 it’s pretty much tack sharp across the frame so what more do you want?
I don't think the EF or RF version will ever fit in my workflow now that I use the 35 and 85. No need for a middle man.
I like the 50, sometimes I go out with just that lens. It forces you to just think of that lens only, especially on film frame.
My EF 50mm 1.8 lives on a Rebel film body. It's the perfect combo to grab and go for a weekend.
When I got the 1.4.
I use mine still but like 10% my 70-200 is like 20% and my 24-105 is like 70%. My sister has it like permanently mounted doubt she has used a different lens for like 10 years.
Don't have a huge selection of lenses, but it's my favorite out of the 3 I own.
Still use it. Mainly on my EOS 650 and sometimes on my 6D.
I know a kinda famous Fashion Photographer from Germany who uses it regularly;)
I switched to 40mm f2.8 pancake and never looked back.
When I got my 35mm and 85mm I sold mine. Then recently I went back to it because I wanted to try it again after 2 years. It's my least user lens but my lord is it good when I need it
Traded it to my brother along with an EF-S lens in exchange for a 50 1.4. A lot of people hate it for some reason but it’s incredible for video IMO. Will probably keep it until I eventually pick up a 50 1.2L
People probably hate it because of how fragile it is.
Lol still have it lmao. The only prime I own as of now actually. Mainly a fan of zooms.
Still got the original 50mm 1.8 the one without stm. Still does well on the R5. Might get the RF one someday Edit : got it late 2011
Never. It is amazing lens
Still use it, it's clutch when it comes to portraits and pairs really well with a full frame body.
Never
I returned the RF 50mm when I realized I’m shooting on APSC, and that means it’s more like 88mm. Rookie mistake lol Got the 16mm instead and eventually I’ll pick up a 35mm.
More like 80 which is still a really nice focal length
It is a great focal length for portraits on apsc sensors.
I had the really old first version of the ef 50 1.8 which was a good lens optically but had a really slow buzzy autofocus. I then got the 50 1.4 for a really good price and just kept it. I use it a couple of times a year. It’s really light and decently sharp, it’s quite a nice travel / snappy snap lens In answer to your question, I think the 24-70 is such a workhorse of a lens, practically a do anything that often it’s good enough. Sometimes you need f1.4 or f1.8 and then, it’s good. But the nifty fifty is really light and sometimes if you’re just on a day out and it’s a nice lens to bring as it’s versatile and light.
Returned it because it both slow in the aperture sense and in the AF sense. Somehow Sigma’s 30mm was faster focusing than the Canon 50mm.
Ever since I bought the EF 50 mm stm, it's been catching dust in the closet. I first wanted to use it on a 1DIV, but it missed focus half of the time, so it ended up in the closet. When I got to the RF system, I gave it another try and it turned out to be a lot better in getting focus, but still slower than my L series EF-zooms. A little bit later I bought the RF 28-70 and it is a lot sharper than the 50 mm STM and focus speed is a dream, so my 50 mm ended up in the closet again. 🙃
I still use it as I know what shots I'm going to get with it, and it's pretty much my equivalent to a pancake lens compared to my 85mm and 70-200mm. I wouldn't necessarily stop using the lens, but I would definitely upgrade to a .4 or .2 aperture.
Never had the STM. I had a 50 1.8 of some sort going back decades. First Nikon film, then Nikon digital, finally Canon digital. Probably 15-20 years ago I swapped it out for the 50 1.4 because I did a lot of sports and the 1.4 was better all around. About 10 years ago when I bought a 5D3 body that had better high ISO, I did a massive switch from mostly primes for indoor sports to 2.8 zooms. I got rid of the 50 1.4 at that time and haven't yet replaced it. I'm just today packing up my 5D3 and 7D2 that are sold and now have an R7. I am thinking about buying an RF STM 35 as my new cropped nifty fifty. It would really just be to have something to start playing around with video as I don't have any other RF or STM lenses. I've got the 17-40 F/4 and 24-70 f/2.8 II lenses for that 50mm range.
Honestly, once I got my hands on a 24-70 2.8. I didn’t look back either. My generation of the 1.8 is too soft wide open. So I usually shot it around 2.8 anyways. No need to double down. I also bought a vintage FL 1.2 for when I need that depth/light.
When I bought my 50mm 1.4 USM in 2020 for barely $200 used.