 |
Page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7
|
|
|
|
Unregistered
|
|
Review Date: May 3, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $90.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, sharp, fast AF
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
 May 3, 2004
|
|
Derek_S
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 22, 2003
Location: N/A
Posts: 448
|
|
Review Date: Sep 22, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $90.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
It's really cheap!
|
|
Cons:
|
It's really cheap(ly built)!
|
|
|
Surgeon General's Warning : Use of this lens "filterless" on female portraiture is extremely hazardous to your health. In some instances, you will receive a kick to the groin upon showing women pictures of them taken with this lens.
Outside of that, this is the Grado SR-60 (if you get that reference, you are really, really, really cool. Really.) of the photography world. It's sharp, has a nice contrast, focuses relatively well in low light, and cheap to boot!
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2003
|
|
Gochugogi
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Jun 25, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 8349
|
|
Review Date: Jul 12, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $95.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, cheap, small, light, dependable & kick ass lens
|
|
Cons:
|
Gritty MF & people keep asking if I want to sell it...
|
|
|
For years this was one of my favorite lenses due to its sharpness, perspective, portability and low cost. It shares many characteristics with the EF 35 2.0: small (42 mm L), light (188 g), 5-blade diaphragm, 52 mm filter threads and focuses close (45 cm). The front element does not rotate, but the lens changes in length when focusing. This front element extension is why AF is a little slower than other AFD lenses such as the EF 24 2.8.
Surprisingly, AF is about the same speed as the EF 50 1.4 USM. Unfortunately, the AF motor is noisier than most AFD lenses. The manual focusing ring has a loose gritty feel, the worst I have used. This lens has DOF markings for F11 and 16. In contrast, the EF 50 1.8 MK II lacks a DOF scale and the EF 1.4 USM only sports F22.
The six-element design is highly flare resistant compared to a zoom lens. Moreover, it is extremely well corrected, sharp and contrasty (Photodo 4.2 MTF).
The EF 50 1.8 has been out of production since the early 90s, so it's difficult to find the original ES-65 lens hood. Unfortunately, there are three good substitutes that clip-on just like the original: the EW-65 II, ET-65 III and ES 65-III. The EW-65 II is the hood for the EF 35 2.0, so it's on the small side. The ES-65 III is the hood for the TS-E 90 2.8 but fits perfectly and affords excellent protection. The ET-65 III is the hood used for the EF 70-210 USM, EF 100-300 USM, EF 85 1.8 USM and EF 100 2.0 USM. Although it looks too big, I have used the ET-65 III with this lens for years and it gives the maximum amount of protection possible without vignetting, plus it looks cool.
Unfortunately, this wonderful lens was discontinued in 1990 and replaced by the cheaply made EF 50 1.8 MK II. Optically they are identical, but the newer version has a plastic mount rather than metal, lacks a distance window and uses a bogus screw in manual focus adapter on the end of the barrel. What a step down! [hurl] Canon probably did this to make a clear distinction between it and the EF 50 1.4 USM, a wonderful lens if you don't mind spending $350. The result is that the old EF 50 1.8 holds its value on the used market, selling for more than a new EF 50 1.8 MK II.
If you wish to buy a MK I used, expect to pay about $100 for one in excellent condition. Mint ones may be a bit more.
|
|
|
Jul 12, 2003
|
|
Unregistered
Offline
Location: United States
|
|
Review Date: Jun 30, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact, optically almost as good as the 50/1.4, inexpensive, well built.
|
|
Cons:
|
Zizzy AF motor, no RT-M.
|
|
|
This is optically within a hair of as good as the bigger and much more expensive 50/1.4, at all apertures including wide-open. After discovering this knocking around a drawer at my parents' house, I decided to sell the 1.4: for most practical purposes, it does the same thing with less, 2/3 stop brightness difference and USM notwithstanding. The DOF scale is better on this lens than the 1.4, too.
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2003
|
|
mwinog2777
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 2, 2003
Location: N/A
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jun 11, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $69.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Low price; light weight; sharp focus; fast lens
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I continue to be amazed by this small/light-weight lens. It is very sharp at 1.8; no need to stop down. I've put my flash away; with fast ISO's, no need for flash. Acts like an 80mm lens, with 1.6 adjustment factor. Leave it on camera, and rarely use any other lens. Can't beat the price.
|
|
|
Jun 11, 2003
|
|
ChuckyB
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 29
|
|
Review Date: Jun 10, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $125.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp prime. Very good aperture. Very low price.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
The second revision of this lens doesn't have the distance scale.
|
|
|
Jun 10, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
102
|
203675
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
