 |
|
|
GFerRo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 25, 2007
Location: Brunei
Posts: 0
|
|
 Oct 28, 2007
|
|
transoptic1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 930
|
|
Review Date: Oct 27, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $80.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
PRICE
|
|
Cons:
|
also price
|
|
|
Anyone who rates this lens a 9 or a 10 is a novice. Period.
This lens only does well at f/4 or above. But then what's the point? I'd rather use a zoom if I'm constrained to those apertures. The point of having a fixed lens is the wide apertures. Not to mention they usually have better glass for the price. This lens, being less than $100, is an exception. The sharpness and contrast fall considerably at larger apertures.
The AF is below average in low light. It searches a lot. At least it's quiet and somewhat fast.
That being said, you'd be foolish to not spend the few bucks getting this lens. If nothing else, you will run into a situation where you just HAVE to have the 1.8 aperture for low light.
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2007
|
|
lextalionis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 28, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1076
|
|
Review Date: Oct 20, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $80.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very low cost lens, fairly quick, good for indoor and low light.
|
|
Cons:
|
Poor build quality and lack of USM so AF is a bit "clunky/loud".
|
|
I had this lens for 6 months before letting it go. I enjoyed using it and produced some decent shots. I felt the low aperture blade count resulted in harsh OOF highlights and need a better build quality 50mm. I'm seriously considering the EF-S 60mm 2.8 Macro. Good Utility-to-Value ratio.
I have sample shots under the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II Gallery Folder here: http://www.motleypixel.com/reviews/
Lex
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2007
|
|
Kurt Alden
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 18, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 18, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, Sharp, Fast, Small
|
|
Cons:
|
Poor AF and build quality
|
|
|
** This review is written from a novice's point of view ***
I have an EOS 350D with the kit lens and, despite being relatively happy with it, fancied extending the cameras abilities a little with a sharper and faster lens and, at the price, the EF 50 1.8 was the obvious candidate.
When it arrived I was amazed at how small and light it was, it really does feel like a toy and makes my 350D look a little odd with such a small lens. It's small size means you can literally stick it in your pocket so it adds to your "carry around" armory.
Initial results were disappointing - used wide open pictures taken of my young son indoors were far from sharp. However, this is down to me being a complete novice and not realising that taking close-ups using a 50mm lens at f/1.8 gives you such a small DOF that barely any of the subject could be in focus anyway.
Once I got the hang of this DOF malarky, my images suddenly became MUCH sharper and and became very happy with my purchase. Soon I took it for its first real test - I was photographing fishing boats in a harbour in very low light - I found that I was getting really good shutter speeds despite it being so dark - it really is a revelation when you use a fast lens for the first time.
There though I also discovered it's achilles heel - the autofocus performance in low light. It was really pretty disappointing, the poor little thing was hunting like mad and absolutely failing to focus a lot of the time, despite sounding like it was about to fall apart with the very noisy AF mechanism. I had to spend an inordinate amount of time finding constrasty areas of my scene to point it at to give it a chance to focus. Even when it finally achieved focus, around half of the shots were far from sharp, something I didn't discover until getting home. I even resorted to trying manual focus, something I rarely get good results with. It was tooth-gnashingly frustrating to have a beautiful scene in front of you yet not be able to photograph it because your AF is not up to it.
However, despite these issues I was still able to get plenty of decent photos as I took a fair few which made up for everything - it was very satisfying taking photos that good from a lens that cheap in very low light conditions.
To sum up as a novice user, used correctly you'll get great results - by that I mean learn about depth of field, learn to focus manually or how to "help" the autofocus in poor conditions and use it in it's sweet spot (f/5.6 or so). You'll be able to take pictures you'd never achieve with the kit lens and f/1.8 gives you excellent low-light performance and a tiny DOF if you fancy getting creative.
|
|
|
Oct 18, 2007
|
|
juberisk2
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 16, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 500
|
|
Review Date: Sep 29, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $70.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
inexpensive, sharp, 1.8
|
|
Cons:
|
none at this price point
|
|
|
this really is the best bang for buck in all of photography. and it's so cheap that you need not put a UV filter on it to protect it...if you scratch or break it, just buy a new one.
I concur that it is very good at f/1.8 and sharp at f/2.8. if you're on a tight budget, this is the best lens you can buy for portraits, shallow depth of field, or lowlight photography. period.
|
|
|
Sep 29, 2007
|
|
Don Farra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 4, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $108.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp low light lens, with fast and accurate focusing. Low cost makes it a great value. Low distrotion and flare resistant. Does not draw attention, which allows for great candids. Doesn't say steal-me in seven diferent languages.
|
|
Cons:
|
Somewhat noisy focusing when the lens hits the rails, min-max distances, you will hear a clunk noise. Plastic contruction to the extreme, outside of the electrical contacts I don't think there is any metal in the lens.
|
|
|
This is a lightwieght, small, low cost lens that in the right hands can produce some outstanding images. Great for candid portraits, travel, interior images and camping. Put it on a good tripod, lock up the mirror and use a cable release and sit back and be surprised on just how well this lens can capture all the details. Do not underestimate the creative enabling power of a 50mm lens 1.8 lens. Hand holding will allow the phototgrapher to capture available light images with a shallow depth of field to isolate your subject, something other EF-IS lenses cannot reproduce.
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2007
|
|
Dawei Ye
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 14, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3763
|
|
Review Date: Sep 22, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp Images; (Relatively) Cheap in Price
|
|
Cons:
|
Breaks very easily, and even when not broken it feels like it will imminently break;
Not Cheap enough to be "Disposable"
Not wide enough on a 1.6X Crop
Autofocusing in the dark
|
|
I'm an absolute newbie but here are my views:
Paid $125 AUD (around $100 US) which is exceptionally cheap compared to my Tamron 17-50mm which was $560 AUD (though still cheap) and $970 for my EOS 400D (Rebel XTi)
Wow! When I first purchased it I thought this is a piece of crap, my Powershot A640 gave sharper images, but now that I have learnt how to take photos properly with my 400D, it is very sharp. the A640 also gave sharp images, but they had that 'grainy' noise stuff you get from sharpening in Photoshop, so I assume it is due to more aggressive in camera sharpening. The 50mm f/1.8 on a 400D gives both SHARP and CLEAN results with barely any of that oversharpened noise/squiggly thingys. In practice, it is also much easier to get sharp and "SLR like" results from this lens than my Tamron 17-50mm, especially at night, though this could be because of my (lack of) skills.
Not very good at focusing, I don't mind noise, but in dark locations it tends to "hunt" (?) a lot and feels like it will break apart with all those shudders. Also the AF Assist Flashes of the EOS 400D pisses off people as this happens, but that's another issue 
Not a fault of the lens per se, but often I use it instead of the Tamron at parties at night because it performs better, but unfortunately you have to back up quite a lot and people think you are a weird or something (e.g. "WTF is that guy doing??"), so it is a bit too ?"long"? on a APS-C 1.6X crop camera
At time of writing, I have just dropped mine from about 1m high whilst it was in it's box and bubble wrap and plastic and it still broke!!! with two of the hook things on the top part snapping off. I have superglued them and will see how it goes This has left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth because I feel I was just getting used to this lens and being able to use it properly. So a big gripe is that it isn't cheap enough to warrant such poor durability.
I admit when I first got my dSLR and this lens, I thought that comments about it feeling like a toy were a bit harsh, but after getting another lens (Tamron 17-50mm), and after it breaking on me, I understand and agree with the comments.
Whether my broken one will work in the morning, or whether I get a replacement, I am going to sticky tape padding all over it!!!
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2007
|
|
Morgan Lupton
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 22, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 22, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $90.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Incredibly short and easy to fit in carrying cases.
Well priced for a student budget.
Excellent bokeh for the price.
|
|
Cons:
|
The switch for manual focus takes a good push; makes me wonder if it will be the first problem if I have any with the lens.
The lens cap comes off to easy, but not a major problem since the glass is recessed well into the lens.
|
|
|
This is my first lens that I actually bought and didn't recieve as a gift. It's a quite good one. There are a few nuisances with this lens, but I don't consider them to big.
I ordered this through Wolf Camera because they didn't have it stocked, and so I couldn't try it out first on my camera. After a couple weeks of using it, I have started to get un-"used" to wide angles.
The camera is quite picky about focusing. 95% of the time it is spot on. But for the few other times, it needs a certain of amount of difference in colors. Hard pictures to focus include clouds and dark objects.
This is an incredible lens. I probably will use it in all cases were I have control over the picture and don't have to worry about zooming. It'll fit anywhere and the focusing can be perfected with some days of use. I'd suggest buying.
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2007
|
|
borderlight
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 6, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1753
|
|
Review Date: Sep 10, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $70.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, sharp, decent contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
Build, lack of scale, MF difficult
|
|
|
You will be surprised with this gem if you can put up with the lack of a DOF scale and difficult MF. The one I have is quite sharp at f1.8. On a FF it is best between f2.8-f5.6. According to The Digital Picture.com, a site where you can actually compare your lens against others, the 50 f1.8 is sharper than the 50 f1.2L, and it just about beats any zoom, L or not, at 50mm stopped down to @f2.8. The 50 f1.4 beats the f1.8 version in bokeh, flare control, and slightly better contrast, but then it's 1/4 the price.
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2007
|
|
fromthecoast
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 5, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $84.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great ability to take indoor shots in low light
|
|
Cons:
|
None, for the price what is there to complain about?
|
|
|
I received this lens in the mail one day after my xti and it has replaced my kit lens ever since. I should have purchased a body only. This thing is great for indoor photography. I have a newborn and I cannot believe the shots that I am getting. Great in low light, great background blur, very sharp. I have used at 1.8 all day long with no problems and 2.8 is rock solid as already stated. The only con to this lens is that it will make you wonder where you can find the next hidden canon gem for less than $100. If you know where, please let me know. As stated earlier, if you don't have this lens you are really hurting yourself.
|
|
|
Sep 5, 2007
|
|
Luisifer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 75
|
|
Review Date: Aug 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $110.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
superb lens per price, image quality, low CA, good and nice bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
nothing (because price exclude cons)
|
|
|
Perfect lens for everithing. :-D
(you can experiment so much with this lens ... no mather whats happend because the new one is "for a kiss") :-)
I have very good experiences with lens + 68 mm extension tubes. It's funny work. :-) (you can have one's fling with it to much)
|
|
|
Aug 31, 2007
|
|
Povilas
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 23, 2007
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Aug 23, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $115.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Good colours, f1.8, price, small&light
|
|
Cons:
|
CA at 1.8, focus sometimes, 50mm on crop - a bit too long
|
|
|
If you are considering this lens, you have to buy it!
It is basically the same price as the 18-55 kit lens but is a completely different league.
First, it has aperture of 1.8, which in practice means that you can easily shoot indoor without any flash at ISO100! And this is accomplished buy having and aperture of 2.2, 2.8. In darker rooms you can use ISO 200/2.2-1.8 settings and still not need a flash.
Second, it has NICE colours. The colours are deep and the contrast is good.
Third, it is so cheap that no one would expect it to be a good lens. But it is.
Fourth, it is so small and light that you will love it from the firt time you touch it.
I have noticed only a couple of negative aspects of this lens. It has a noticable CA at aperture of 1.8. However, one rarely requires 1.8 and when one does he/she usually shoots in low light conditions, where CA is much less noticable.
Second is that if you shoot against the sun, it sometimes finds hard time to find a focus on a subject with AF. Sometimes you even can not focus with AF, need to use manual. But I have founs this problem only when I was experimenting on purpose. In regular shooting - never.
The last one is rather my choice then a problem, but it is obvious that on crop DSLR it it a little bit too long for indoor shooting. It is perfect for portraits though, but sometimes you need to include more than just faces and shoulders. In outdoor conditions it is again - perfect.
I can not do anything else that to put a clear 10 for this lens, because it is unbelievable what Canon has achieved for 115$.
|
|
|
Aug 23, 2007
|
|
Peter Chung
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 31, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Aug 18, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $70.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Image quality, price, compact.
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit too long for indoors.
|
|
Was my first lens. Sharp and easy to carry. Image quality is excellent. Also useful in low light
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2007
|
|
Nick Muellerle
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 13, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 13, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
price, bokeh, speed. (if you want to shoot sports indoors, f/ 1.8 is perfect.)
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality, feel, AF speed, minimum focus distance is a bit far.
|
|
|
I am in a love-hate relationship with this lens. I love the ability to shoot fast-moving things indoors without having to resort to using the flash. I love the bokeh my lens produces. as far as taking photos is concerned, it's amazing.
but living with it is a struggle sometimes. I am not excessively hard with my lenses, I will admit that I live with them. they are going to get jostled, knocked around a little bit, and they are going to get used.
People will say this lens feels cheap. well, its 100 dollars, it IS cheap. and it shows. The plastic feels very low quality, and is prone to rattling. I've only had the lens 6 months, and the manual focus feels grainy and constrained, as though there were sand inside it. I honestly think the lens may in fact be falling apart. I know somehow, something has affixed itself to one of the inside elements, and it bothers me to look at it.
I know this lens is better than the kit lens. I know I'll get more use out of it, and I know I'll be able to use it in more places. but when I hold it, I think. this thing is a toy. it's a bit of a joke. it feels about as solid as a sushi roll.
by all means, buy the lens. it will never disappoint. but if you're like me, and want it for longer than a few years, buy an upgrade. I know I plan to.
|
|
|
Aug 13, 2007
|
|
bergie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 12, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Aug 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $80.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Not expensive
Good image results
|
|
Cons:
|
Cheap build (but expected)
|
|
Since I've spent a lot of money between acquiring my 30D and the excellent 10-22, I couldn't afford the 70-200 I want (would prefer to wait until I can afford an IS version), so I decided to buy this for $80 and for the money, I can't see how I could be happier.
Yes, it's cheaply built, but at least I have something I can shoot in low light and stop action with. Plus with my 1.6 crop body, it's essentially an 80mm prime!
Here's a pic of my son in action taken with this lens:
http://www.pbase.com/bbergquist/image/83112092
Although I've not shot with the 1.4 version, the only difference I can tell between the two besides build quality and price is that it has better bokeh. Some may find the blur on this one to be more harsh, and it is, but I don't think it's so bad it stands out or ruins the picture. I'd rather save the $200 to go towards my 70-200 tele...
|
|
|
Aug 12, 2007
|
|
slang20034
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 30, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Aug 7, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, picture quality, size, weight
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality
|
|
|
I only have one thing to say regarding my thoughts on this lens. Two weeks ago I was in Banff, AB on a vacation. A quick slip and a trip, and my lens was in 10 pieces on the ground. Oops.
Within an 2 hours I had a brand new one in my hands, because this lens is a no brainer for the price and for the quality of shots that I get at my amature level.
Anyone starting out in photography needs to buy this lens. It is a great learning tool and can show you what you are capable of. My first priority after smashing it to bits was to get another one in my hands ASAP. It is almost disposable for the price. I also learned a great and cheap lesson on how not to treat lenses.
|
|
|
Aug 7, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
351
|
588803
|
Dec 21, 2016
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
94% of reviewers
|
$128.42
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
5.88
|
9.56
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
