 |
|
|
dcad10
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 26, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 301
|
|
Review Date: Dec 19, 2008
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
metal mount, better to have this than having no 50mm at all
|
|
Cons:
|
noisier than the 50mm 1.8 II, and costs almost twice as much.
|
|
|
I have used the 50mm 1.8II for almost 2 years, and thought I would try out the 50mm 1.8. I wasn't impressed.
the AF motor is MUCH noisier than the 50mm 1.8 II, and I cant see any increase in optical quality. It hunts in low light just as much as the 1.8 II.
people say they dont trust the plastic of the 50mm 1.8 II, however, I feel that if I dropped this lens, Id be just as likely to break it. (plus Ive never dropped it anyways).
Id rather save money, buy a NEW 50mm 1.8II, and move on with my life.
Being disappointed, I am definitely going to sell mine. Anyone want to buy a used 50mm 1.8?
|
|
 Dec 19, 2008
|
|
petefuchs
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 11, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Dec 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, Light
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft up to F2,5 - Autofocus not always spot-on
|
|
I bought it out of curiosity, paid around 95€ so no much risk here.
I love it. I thought I would stay mostly with my 17-40L on my 30D but as it turns out the lens I use now mostly is the 500mm 1,8. Alone the fact that you can get very decent pictures out of a 95€ Euro plastic lense is fascinating. And really the pictures are great. I use it mostly at F2,5. Everything above and I might as well use the 17-40L... So highly recommendable.
Check out my Hoempage were I posted a few sample shots (as well as many in the gallery)
http://www.fuchs-photography.com/02-Pages/Photography-50mm.htm
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2008
|
|
oajlu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 19, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 170
|
|
Review Date: Nov 20, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
cheap and F1.8
|
|
Cons:
|
none for a $100 lens
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008
|
|
marcus riley
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 27, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 192
|
|
Review Date: Aug 29, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $70.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price! Sharp. VALUE!
|
|
Cons:
|
Build
|
|
|
I picked up a plastic version II, and I have to say that it is wonderful. It's easy to make fun of the build (like a toy) but the value of this lens is TOP. Mine did get crushed in a hiking bag once and the front element popped off. I was sad for about 5 minutes until I figured out how to pop it back on.
Mine is only a little soft at f1.8 and I have no problem using it wide open aside from a lower contrast. From f2-2.2+ it is great. It focuses relatively quick, even if the AF is a little sloppy. I use it as a single walk-around lens often due to the flexibility and weight.
For the price and performance you can't beat it; I recommend it to all my friends (and many have bought it now and also love it). I can't bring myself to upgrade when this lens does so much for so little money.
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2008
|
|
ian1979
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 28, 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Awesome pics, awesome price, introducing a new photographer to f1.8 is like taking a newly-unblinded man to Pamela Andersons house
|
|
Cons:
|
I dropped it and it broke and now I dont have one. (Not really Canon's fault). Wish minimum focus distance was a bit closer
|
|
|
Wish I could post 11 for price rating
Opens up a whole world of photography with f1.8
Takes unbelievable portraits, in fairly low light
I hate using flash, so this lens suited me perfectly.
|
|
|
Jul 28, 2008
|
|
martinsmith
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 17, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: May 21, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, sharp images
|
|
Cons:
|
People ranting about how good this lens is
|
|
|
I'm basing this review on the price of the lens
Much sharper than the kit lens, bit of CA wide open which is minor and is gone around F2.8, easily fixable in photoshop. Colour & contrast take a bit of tweaking in photoshop for best results, but I shoot mainly B+W portraits with this lens.
Build quality is as to be expected for the price.
I hear comments about noisy AF. I want it for taking pics not for listening to.
If you're on a tight budget and want something better than the kit lens buy it. If you're expecting `L' quality for this price then you may be disappointed and possibly rather foolish.
|
|
|
May 21, 2008
|
|
Boonen
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 11, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, good for beginners to experiment
|
|
Cons:
|
Bokeh, focus speed and build quality
|
|
|
I just upgraded to the 50mm f/1.4 and I cannot believe I put up with the 1.8 lens for so long. The 1.4 is nearly as great as my 85mm f/1.8 but the 50mm f/1.8 is not in this class. Get the f/1.8 only if you are truly watching your pennies. In fact the filter and the hood cost nearly as much as the lens.
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2008
|
|
LM Hernandez
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 25, 2007
Location: Mexico
Posts: 40
|
|
Review Date: Mar 2, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $90.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp (and fun) for the price.
|
|
Cons:
|
It's Plastic. Not so nice bokeh in some textures (like grass)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 2, 2008
|
|
Spam Lover
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 10, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 8
|
|
Review Date: Dec 17, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $152.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Metal mount, inexpensive, beautiful bokeh and sharp wide open, very nice colour/contrast for a non-L, fast!
|
|
Cons:
|
Hunts in very, very low light sometimes but mostly finds it's target just fine. Loud AF motor (not USM), no FTM
|
|
|
My first prime after I initially bought my camera, this is one of the best deals you could possibly get as far as price and performance go. Low light images are astounding. I decided on the MK I version as the 'Plastic-Fantastic' or 'Nifty-Fifty' just seemed too cheap in built quality for me. I forgot what it was like to have a proper prime that used available light effectively. My old X-700 had a 50mm 1.7 and performed wonderfully in low light, so this just brought back my desire to photograph again. Mine was built in 1987 but still performed like new!
I just sold mine to upgrade to the 1.4 so we'll see how she performs.
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2007
|
|
Peter Kirk
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 25, 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 303
|
|
Review Date: Oct 10, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $225.00
| Rating: 2
|
|
Pros:
|
cheap,light,compact
|
|
Cons:
|
bokeh a bit average, softish wide open
|
|
|
nice for its price, but really a toy
|
|
|
Oct 10, 2007
|
|
Willa
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 462
|
|
Review Date: Sep 19, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $135.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight, nice than the mkII (which I also own). It has a distance meter on it, which the mkII does not, and the build quality is noticeably better than the newer version, and focuses much faster. The IQ is slightly better than the newer version, but the mkI is noiser fer sure ... I am not bothered one bit by the noise.
|
|
Cons:
|
None. For the money and the selection, this is my favorite choice of the Canon 50mm lenses!
|
|
|
It seems quite a few people confuse this lens with it's successor, the 50mm f/1.8 mkII.
I am quite happy with this little gem. I have read a few reviews from users of the mkII that say there's not much difference, but it's not true. THERE IS QUITE A NOTICEABLE DIFFERENCE between the two versions. I think if it wasn't true there wouldn't be so many people out there still trying to find one!
It's much quicker to focus than the mkII, and hunted less than the mkII (which I also own). It IS noiser than the mkII, but again, much quicker to focus, without a doubt. It's sharp as sharp could be. The mkII has it's moments, but was often producing softer shots than I'm used to. Some might say, well, what do you want for $90 bucks, but what I want is faster focusing and sharper photos! The color seems a bit richer and slightly better on this older version, too.
It's light, compact and is the perfect lens on your DSLR for a quick outing. It's great for indoor low-light portraits, too. Grab one of these little beauties if you can still find one. I don't know why the header to this review thread says the lens is under $100. Good for you if you find one cheaper than the newer version.
I paid $135 for mine and it came with a rubber hood which I like, also. In my honest opinion, t's a fair price for this 'better' version, and I'm delighted that I got my hands on one. I think I prefer it over the 50mm f/1.4mm, too!
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2007
|
|
Don Farra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 4, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 5, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $50.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight and super sharp lens, don't underestimate this lens, it can create wonderful images.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Great for up close portraits of children and a general all purpose normal lens. I used to think 50mm lenses were useless and to be avoided, but changed my mind and started using this 50mm around the house for window portraiture and was surprised at the great results. Fairly sharp images even at wide open, stop down one stop and you can create some nice children portraits by themselves or with their mom. Here again considering the price it represents a great value.
|
|
|
Sep 5, 2007
|
|
Perry Ge
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 30, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Jul 30, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $80.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price! Sharp, light, fast, good portrait lens on a cropped sensor.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality, AF hunts in low light.
|
|
|
There is no excuse not to own this lens (unless you have the 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.2L). I love it to death!
Fantastic image quality for this price, fast, light and sharp. On a 1.6x cropped sensor, focal length is 80mm (35mm equiv), making it an excellent portrait lens, particularly at f/1.8. Stop it down a bit and it's incredibly sharp.
Build quality is crap, and the AF is quite loud and hunts a little bit in low light, but what did you expect for this price?
Even at twice the price, this lens is still worth it. Unless you have money to blow on a 50mm with better build quality, this lens is a must-have.
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2007
|
|
Michael Hamilt
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 7, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 46
|
|
Review Date: Jun 20, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, great clarity, very fast and light weight
|
|
Cons:
|
None that I've found yet
|
|
|
I'm very new to DSLR or any type of SLR for that matter. I recently purchased a Rebel XT and kit lens (used). The Cannon 50mm 1.8 prime was my first lens purchase. I was AMAZED at the clarity, low light operation and quickness of this lens. Granted, as I said, I'm very new so my opinion may not mean squat...lol. But because I'm new, I'm not really able to justify paying $500.00 or more for a lens at this time. This lens is very inexpensive and I get amazing results out of it. I'm sure my results will only get better as I learn!!
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2007
|
|
Joshua June
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 14, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: May 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $149.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, Clear, Grabs ambient Light, fairly well constructed, MK I
|
|
Cons:
|
AF a little slow... but faster then cheap lenses... thus not much a neg (in low light manual focus is better anyway)
|
|
|
This Lens is hard to find, and not to be confused with the MK II. Also to set something straight as I adventure into the photography world of professionals... why complain about AF motor being loud, who cares? really? thats like saying you don't like the black color of the lens, good grief. Its not even that loud.
Anyway Compared to the L glass I have seen I'm not sure I would even call you spoiled, buying the 1.2 L 50 mm would make you unfortunate, a waste of clarity and money. Buy an L zoom, but buy this as your prime.
Looking at the context of the price and purpose of the lens some other photographers comlained about it lacking the depth or reach of their other lens etc. etc. ... Then why did you buy a 50mm? It was clearly marked when you bought it, also like buying a 100 - 300 mm Canon and complaining about not having enough wide angle... good God.
So, for the context of the purpose of this lens, find it, buy it. The Tamron lens (s) I own are shadowed by the capabilities of this fine piece it will not fall apart, its built right, it will be clearer then most L lenses and will cost less then third party makers at the same mm length.
|
|
|
May 31, 2007
|
|
Re-volver
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 15, 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 13, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $150.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast enough, sharp, very precise autofocus performance in also a bit lower light, manual focus ring, first EOS lenses constructed with care and ambition.
Better and more precise AF than in 50/1.4 or 50/2.5 Macro (used both).
|
|
Cons:
|
Plasticy, same feel as 50/1.4, but better than 50/1.8 II.
|
|
|
I also had 50/1.4. The reason I sold it was because my 50/1.8 I performed much better when it comes to autofocus precision and the difference became greater in low light. To me, autofocus reliability is one of the most important things when shooting quick outdoor portraits for instance. Maybe I just got a bad copy of 50/1.4 but I turned to keeping just my 1.8 I because I love it.
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
102
|
203814
|
Feb 22, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
94% of reviewers
|
$101.18
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
7.71
|
9.42
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
