|
|
Pennington
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 9, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Jan 5, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $150.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
very small & light, metal mount, sharp, fast
|
|
Cons:
|
cheap build, focus hunts
|
|
Having owned both this and the later Mk II version, the Mk I is definitely the better lens. I was able to hunt one down that was still in it's box, virtually unused since it was manufactured in 1987. It's an amazing little lens and really a lot of fun to work with.
The image quality is good wide open at f/1.8, but improves noticeably at f/2.8, and even more so by f/5.6, at which point it can be almost uncomfortably sharp. I grab mine for portraits and party/event shots, especially when I know the light is going to be low, and I am unable or just don't want to setup strobes. I try to keep it at f/2.2, but if I have to drop down to 1.8, at least I know it's there. Matched with the 7D's good high ISOs, there's almost nowhere I can't shoot with it.
50mm is a little long on an APS-C sensor; at parties, for instance, you need either a big room, or have to accept isolating several people instead of an entire group. I sometimes find myself wanting a wider angle, but that's not the fault of the lens – just of the photographer.
Unfortunately, it doesn't feel very solid or integral. I'm often afraid that a good jolt or two could do it in, at which point I'd be stuck trying to find another one. They do appear in the used market, but the price can go much higher than the Mk II version – a testament to just how good the original is.
I'm really more of a zoom guy, but this is a lens that makes shooting with primes fun, and I'm not about to part with it.
|
|
 Jan 5, 2010
|
|
Olivier6
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2010
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 1, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, weight, size
|
|
Cons:
|
No USM
|
|
If you can find one, buy it no matter the price.
This lens is so sharp, so good... I am using mine now for 17 years. First on my EOS 620, then on my 300D and now on my 5Dmk2. The cameras are retired together with many lenses but this little fellow is still in business!
I am using it together with a 17-40, a 24-70, a 70-200 and a 100 macro and it is still one of my favorites!
|
|
|
Jan 1, 2010
|
|
DoogieH
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 27, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 64
|
|
Review Date: Oct 5, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $140.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, Price, metal mount of this version, fast in some low light conditions
|
|
Cons:
|
noisy, searches in incadencence lighting
|
|
I love this lens, it took me several months to track one down with the metal mount. To me this makes a huge difference and I should have this lens for a long time. The plastic mount version does not hold up and Canon might make a change to that lens due to cost and lower even its quality. I use this for portraits and the lens is outstanding. By 2 if you can find them!!!
|
|
|
Oct 5, 2009
|
|
squareeyez
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 22, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 500
|
|
Review Date: Aug 15, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build, distance window, convenient focal length for many uses
|
|
Cons:
|
noisy (this ain't no bird lens so who really cares??) but it lets me know it's working. Hard to replace an actual mk I, no more parts...
|
|
I see a lot of people offering critique here have confused the plastic mkII with this vintage lens. I bought this lens with my first EOS camera in 1986. I fell down a flight of stairs in Tokyo with it and had to have it repaired. It's worked well since then and having held on to it for so long I now know what a gem this lens is. Apparently Canon stopped supporting this version but it is a cult classic and you can easily find others who love this lens. You'd be hard pressed to pick up a mkI near a hundred dollars anymore so if you do find that offering take it! I started to use this for close quarter shooting on my 5D mkII and it works well when it wants to. Too old and too new seem to have an issue but I am not the only one with that issue so I don't take it personally. f1.8 allows you to shoot in a wide variety of lighting and 50mm is a decent focal length for parties, work, or whenever things are fairly nearby. Knowing that I have a vintage lens on a cutting edge body is kind of fun. I don't think the IQ is much different for this and the mkII adn I woudl certainly hope the mkII has some image advantage because it sure is a cheapy-choppy build! This lens is an era gone by but it reminds me that things used to be built to last longer than me. And plastic doesn't give me that feeling. Well, there IS Fisher Price toys...
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2009
|
|
asanduloiu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Location: Romania
Posts: 104
|
|
Review Date: Apr 27, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great price, great in low light, lightweight
|
|
Cons:
|
Cheap build, but what should you expect for this money?!
|
|
I've bought this lens some months ago and I'm happy with it. I don't use 50 mm too often, but the results are good. Very sharp from 2-2,2 onwards and I've taken some amasing mountain sunrises in low light what really made me feel that the money weren't spent in vain.
Go for it, buy it and keep it in your bag because it won't take much space or add weight!
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2009
|
|
Gary Lee 44
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 1685
|
|
Review Date: Jan 24, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $74.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price-sharp-great in low light
|
|
Cons:
|
build
|
|
I purchased this lens to take me back to the old days when all I used on my Canan AE-1 was a 50mm and a 28mm. I didn't expect much for the price, but was I surprised. The lens is light weight-sharp and fast. I know it is plastic but so what. I didn't expect to get a Canon L for $74. The build is not a issue here. The issue is it takes great photos and did I say SHARP?
Those who worry about dropping it should worry. I worry about dropping all my lenses. But if I drop this one and it breaks, I will buy the Classic Plastic lens again for $74.
The point is, you will have a hard time finding a lens this sharp-this cheap. I have Canon L lenses, but they are just a little sharper than the Plastic II. Why waste your money on the USM. Buy this one and if you break it, you have and excuse to buy a new lens! Great lens. NOW GO GET ONE!
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2009
|
|
dcad10
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 26, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 178
|
|
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: 153
|
|
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: 94
|
|
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
|
|
|
