 |
|
|
miles0823
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 11, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1261
|
|
Review Date: Oct 30, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $130.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp Great Value
|
|
Cons:
|
Loud focus motor
|
|
|
These seem to be getting harder to find. I have a love-hate relationship. I have had 3 and for some reason seem to think I don't use it enough to keep it. As soon as I sell it I want one again. Go figure? To bad some of the reviewers below rated the mark II instead of the mark I. This lens was rated very high until that happened. There is a completely different 50mm on the list if you look a little harder.....
|
|
 Oct 30, 2004
|
|
optician
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 17, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Oct 17, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $65.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, sharp, effectively a portrait lens when shooting digital
|
|
Cons:
|
none for the price
|
|
|
Have to agree with what others say about the positive qualities of this lens, it's a little treasure. I've also used mine with extension tubes for macro shots which have been absolutely tack sharp.
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2004
|
|
mdude85
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 11, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4346
|
|
Review Date: Sep 12, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $65.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, uncluttered and easy to use, very sharp at all apertures, nice bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
plastic build and mount, no distance meter on the Mark II, not very wide on a 1.6 crop
|
|
|
I can vouch that the 50 mm 1.8 is very very sharp... nice maximum aperture gives smooth, low depth of field wide open. Lens is easy to use, crisp, sharp, light, and produces little or no halo effects or chromatic abberation. The 52 mm thread size is very common so it's easy to put standard polarizers and filters on it.
The only problem with this lens is that on a DSLR with a 1.6 crop factor, it's not wide at all ... it is a good portrait lens only if you stand pretty far away from your subjects. For a "standard lens" it is quite zoomed on my D30. But other than that I really like it a lot, and the price can't be beat.
NOTE: Some pictures seem a little soft, but I think that is the nature of the D30, and not the lens.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2004
|
|
photojunkie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 1, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Sep 1, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $130.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, 1.8 aperature, durable, compact
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow to focus. Especially in really low light.
|
|
|
Someone mentioned the poor plastic design.
I have actually dropped this lens out of my bag and on to the concrete or asphalt grouns twice now. And it bounced and rolls without and damage to the lens.
Extremely durable and extremely handy in low light situations, especially for the price.
|
|
|
Sep 1, 2004
|
|
Unregistered
Offline
Location: Canada
|
|
Review Date: Aug 18, 2004
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $75.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, wide aperature
|
|
Cons:
|
Plastic, front focusing at 1.8, slow auto focusing
|
|
|
While everyone give good review about this lens, I didn't have very good experience with it. After I noticed some of the portraits I took with this lens was not very sharp, I did a test and it does front focusing when aperature is greater than 2.0. Perhaps it was my bad luck. I tried the USM 50mm f/1.4, and I like the results lot better. Years ago, I used Pentax K1000 with SCM 50mm f/2.0 lens ($90 new), and that lens was lot better built than this plastic thing.
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2004
|
|
Unregistered
Offline
Location: Canada
|
|
Review Date: Aug 17, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $70.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, and cheap.
|
|
Cons:
|
plastic
|
|
|
Best $70 I ever spent on camera equipment. At f/1.8 you must be meticulous with the focus and lens positioning to keep the image sharp, but when done right, it can provide dramatic results in terms of DOF. This lens is tack sharp.
As for the plastic body, I am a careful person, and if an accident does happen, at $70, I won't have any heartburn over replacing it. Love this lens!
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2004
|
|
Tim Speciale
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5787
|
|
Review Date: Jul 21, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $80.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, light weight, snappy focus, sharp as a tac, shallow DOP with creamy bokeh, great in low light, nice focal length
|
|
Cons:
|
None...
|
|
I spent weeks searching for this lens, no one could keep it in stock, i eventually got it on ebay. One of my best buys to date.
Many people complain about the build quality of this (the MKII) lens but i personally dont mind it. I wish it had a metal mount, and the scale like the MKI. But this "cheap" build quality allows it to be darn light. Out of my 5 lenses (including a 70-200 f/2.8 L) this is by far on my camera the most.
It snaps into focus, not as quick as a USM motor...but at $70-$90 this lens is a must have and is great for those just starting out...and those who have been doing it a while (although i suspect these people already own one)
The zoom length is perfect: 35mm=50 which is great for most work, 1.6 crop turns it into an 80mm lens which is great for portraits
Example shots:
http://www.antiwall.com/June2004/images/7velle.jpg
http://www.antiwall.com/June2004/images/5Dakota.jpg
http://www.antiwall.com/May2004/images/2What%20about%20me.jpg
http://www.antiwall.com/May2004/images/coke.jpg
http://www.antiwall.com/march2004/images/2aidan%20and%20meghan.jpg
http://www.antiwall.com/march2004/images/5john.jpg
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2004
|
|
Rob Ernsting
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Jul 12, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $75.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, very cheap and I fall in love from the first shot on with 1.8 effect fully open.
|
|
Cons:
|
None, I have the old version from before the MarkII
|
|
|
I used to have a 1.8 on my Konica FP in the 60's. I had a 1.8 on the Olympus C4040, fixed lens. Now I have it on my Canon EOS 10D and I can honestly say the 1.6 cropfactor makes it a perfect portrait lens. I was lucky to find an excellent item of the original make for a bargain second hand price.
Right away I went into dark corners of a pub and checked it out, superb in color and the focused items are great leaving a nice blur in the for- and background. With f 8 you can make fabulous sharp images. I have never felt so happy with a lens as this one.
I own the excellent 17-40mmL USM and the low quality 28-135 mm IS USM as well.
I can make shots with the 50mm 1.8 and crop those and still be sharper and have more contrast and definition than with the 28-135 at full f.l. of 135 mm
If you own a 300D or 10D try to get one.
|
|
|
Jul 12, 2004
|
|
evilenglishman
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 22, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Jun 22, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
price, weight, F1.8
|
|
Cons:
|
slow focus, plastic
|
|
|
a must have for anyone with a canon camera. I've use the 1.4 and the 1.8 versions of Canon's 50mm and have to say i dont see much (if any) difference in final image quality.
The non USM focusing is not as fast as it could be but for the price who cares!
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2004
|
|
jclark58
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 6, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 135
|
|
Review Date: Jun 17, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $65.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, sharp, well built, distance scale, focus ring.
|
|
Cons:
|
Non-USM focus.
|
|
|
Yes it's a standard lenght, rather bland when compared to a nice wide angle or a medium telephoto let alone a zoom. Bargains can still be found, I picked one up a second on e*ay earlier this year (with a EOS 750 body) for less than a new 50mm Mk II sells for. The distance scale, focus ring, metal mount, and better build quality certainly distinguish this lens from it's newer (optically identical) svelter younger brother.
Certainly one of the best buys in the Canon lens lineup.
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2004
|
|
phidong
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 19, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2489
|
|
Review Date: Jun 4, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $75.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
This is my sharpest lens. Its a cheapie, but I always finding myself using it when I'm low on light. What can I say? Its a great value!
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 4, 2004
|
|
Unregistered
Offline
Location: United States
|
|
Review Date: Jun 4, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $70.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, very sharp,light,F range, color.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build in plastic (dust enter sometime)
|
|
|
My bigest problem is dust. I see dust in my lense......i think it is the construction of the lens because all my orther lens doesn't have this problem. But for the price i don't have to complain so much!!! the next time i will probably buy the 50mm f1.4.....
|
|
|
Jun 4, 2004
|
|
samirkharusi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 16, 2002
Location: Oman
Posts: 16
|
|
Review Date: Jun 2, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap and very sharp when closed down a "little" bit
|
|
Cons:
|
Not sharp enough to shoot digital starscapes, even at f2.8, but then, neither is the 50/1.4
|
|
For tongue-in-cheek examples of what can be done with this lens (actually the Mark I), including macros, panos, and extra-galactic photography (honest!), see:
http://www.geocities.com/samirkharusi/mighty_50.html
|
|
|
Jun 2, 2004
|
|
MarkSaperstein
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 23, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1337
|
|
Review Date: Jun 2, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $125.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Metal mount and distance scale. Great image quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Noisy autofocus.
|
|
|
This review is for the older version of the 50mm f/1.8 with the metal mount. Several other reviewers seem to have mistaken this thread for the newer Mk II plastic version of this lens. I have used two copies of this lens. I have also used a Mk II version, and I now have the 50mm f/1.4. My experience is that the metal mount version is slightly better than the Mk II, and the f/1.4 is better than both of the f/1.8s. In this price range, there is not much to complain about. This lens is sharper than any consumer zoom at 50mm.
|
|
|
Jun 2, 2004
|
|
marksct
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 245
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $65.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light. Sharp, Excellent clarity, color.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build. Made of plastic. So you buy three for the price of the f1.4 and save them for when one wears out.
|
|
|
Money!
My portrait lens on my 10D.
The best value for a photo lens in the world, bar none.
Everyone should have this in their bag.
|
|
|
May 25, 2004
|
|
adrian-e
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 13, 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: May 13, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $85.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent image quality, sharp, contrast, cheap, light and fast AF
|
|
Cons:
|
Poor build quality, lack of distance scales, extending zoom (front element)
|
|
This is a fine lense: sharper than my 70-200 f/4L, lighter than my 17-40 and cheaper than both  . I'm glad this one is not that expensive as my lenses take a real beating sometimes.
I love this thing for portraits and low-light situations.
|
|
|
May 13, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
102
|
203691
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
