 |
|
|
peterstrong
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Dec 21, 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 21, 2016
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, very sharp and very cheap!
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
Two of the weaknesses that I found: in very low light or when the object distance is very small, the AF does not work very well. In order to still use this great lens, I switch to MF mode which not bother me as long as the the scene is static. By day with plenty of light, the AF works very well. The AF noise is overrated in my opinion as long as you don't shoot wildlife animals (but this lense is not made for that anyways). Another weak point is the plastic construction that seems fragile. The lens must therefore be used with care but with this price, you can not ask for too much either. Then again, I have never met anyone with a broken 50mm 1.8 either.
|
|
 Dec 21, 2016
|
|
luke1705
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 28, 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 8
|
|
Review Date: May 29, 2016
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp
Large aperture
Minimal CA
Cheap
|
|
Cons:
|
Feels cheaply built
|
|
|
Hard to find a better deal in all of photography in terms of quality for the price. Useable as a short telephoto for portraits on a 1.6 crop factor camera, as well as a normal lens on a full frame. It's not built like a tank, but it's also not priced like a tank. Certainly would buy again as a vast improvement over any kit lens in terms of image quality. It also makes you think about what you're taking a picture of instead of just mindlessly zooming in and out with a kit lens.
|
|
|
May 29, 2016
|
|
bigoak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 23, 2015
Location: United States
Posts: 13
|
|
Review Date: Nov 26, 2015
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
cheap, decent bokeh, understandably slow focus
|
|
Cons:
|
this is your standard lens; what your eye sees. must have for budget consumers, but if you are willing to double down (i recommend for this focal length if non-redundant with other lenses you may own), consider a sigma or zeiss.
|
|
|
This will get the job done.
Will this leave you wanting more? If you never try a better 50, probably not. If you try a zeiss or sigma art 50, you will realize (as i have already) that this tool is only "decent". I'm not a pro, i'm not trying to talk pure sharpness. I just think that this lens (IMHO) is not anything special.
For the price (>$100 refurb), you will not find a better deal. If you are not so price concerned, look at the zeiss 1.4 or the sigma art.
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2015
|
|
ScottUmstattd
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 16, 2014
Location: Mexico
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 16, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight. Excellent pictures. Very affordable.
|
|
Cons:
|
Plastic.
|
|
Before I bought this lens some 6 or 7 years ago I read that this was the one lens that every photographer should have because it takes great pictures, has a wide aperture and it is affordable.
All of these years later, these aspects still hold true. This is a great lens for the money. Yes, the plastic build means I can't drop it and expect miracles. But I don't make a habitat of dropping lenses anyway.
If you are in the market for a low light, lightweight wonder-lens. The nifty-fifty is still a must have for every photographer.
It's not my everyday lens. But I am comforted knowing I have it at my disposal.
I also use this lens a lot when shooting video. The wide aperture opens creative doors and lets me shoot a little longer after the sun has gone down.
Here's my full review based on my experience with this lens.
http://www.picture-power.com/canon-lens-reviews-canon-ef-50mm-f-1-8-II-lens.html
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2014
|
|
ruicarv79
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 8, 2014
Location: Portugal
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 26, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, very sharp and very cheap!
|
|
Cons:
|
Focus hunts in low light, focus noise, build (cheap plastic), bokeh very nervous.
|
|
|
Boy this lens is a winner! For 100 bucks you get (almost) the image quality of a thousand bucks glass!
You can't go wrong with this lens. It's so cheap that you can sell it and get a more expensive one later without feeling too bad about it.
The image quality is impressive, especially from f/2.8 onwards. For this price it is an incredible value proposition.
Now the bad news: it's built very poorly (all cheap plastic); the bokeh is very nervous (not a cream machine here); the focus is loud and tends to hunt very much in low light.
I recommend this lens to every amateur photographer that uses kit lenses. This lens will be a major upgrade for very little money.
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2014
|
|
hans.dampf
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 12, 2014
Location: N/A
Posts: 11
|
|
Review Date: Feb 12, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, Weight, Quality, Does not look professional
|
|
Cons:
|
Focus hunting in low light, Feels very cheap, Does not look professional
|
|
Strengths that I find are: a very good quality / price ratio. The optical quality is very good, good sharpness even wide open, very low distortion, vignetting is very low at 1.8 (at least on APS-C) but, a very nice and especially very bright bokeh. I use it for portraits, for night landscapes and indoor photos without having to use the flash.
Two of the weaknesses that I found: in very low light or when the object distance is very small, the AF does not work very well. In order to still use this great lens, I switch to MF mode which not bother me as long as the the scene is static. By day with plenty of light, the AF works very well. The AF noise is overrated in my opinion as long as you don't shoot wildlife animals (but this lense is not made for that anyways). Another weak point is the plastic construction that seems fragile. The lens must therefore be used with care but with this price, you can not ask for too much either. Then again, I have never met anyone with a broken 50mm 1.8 either.
One last point, generally speaking about primes: they make you learn so much! After all, good photography is more about framing and composition and a prime forces you to think more about that. Zoom with your feet!
In short, for the price it's very worth it, I would say it is almost a "must". It does not take much space in your bag so you can take it anywhere to accompany a bigger (and slower) zoom lens. Of course there is the f/1.4 (3 x the price) and 1.2 (prohibitive price for most people) that are even higher quality but for a photographers with a modest budget, the 1.8 responds to most needs.
I do use the 50mm 1.2 for professional use. You can see some use of it here: Photographe de Mariage en Suisse Romande. On that page you can see a portrait taken with the 1.2 so you can see forself that the is nice but for most people, the 1.8 is enough.
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2014
|
|
lunacat
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 13, 2014
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Jan 13, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $90.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
When starting out in photography, it is the first lens I recommend to beginners. Usually, we would suggest to have a 50mm on a full frame, which not actually the case for most beginners that mostly use APS-C instead of full frame when they start.
Therefore, we should theoretically begin by buying a 35mm lens instead of a 50 mm.
Anyway, I have loved using this lens when I first went into photography. This helps understanding depth of field with the 1.8 aperture, which would be more difficult to see with a kit lens opening at 4 or 5.6 maximum.
Last thing, this lens is so cheap it would be a shame not owning it! I used it a lot for food photography and even portraits at weddings (I own the 1.4 equivalent now): http://www.lunacatstudio.fr/photographe-prestataire-mariage-garnier-coiffure-lausanne/
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2014
|
|
dkyeah
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 10, 2013
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 10, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $110.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, f/1.8, decent image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Construction, AF noise, AF speed
|
|
This is probably the best value for money lens you cant get for your Canon DSLR.
It might not be the best lens but for about $100 you get a lens that is decently sharp with AF that works. Add in the fact that it is f/1.8 and you have a winner!
Granted it's not well built (very plasticky) and the noise of the AF will discourage any serious wedding photographer of buying it.
Photography is a hobby and you want to get that shallow depth of field look? This is the lens you should get. At $100 neither your wife nor your bank will complain you bought it .
You are serious about photography but love zooms? Get this cheap lens to add some variety in your shots!
You are serious about photography and have lots of money to spend? Go buy the 50mm f/1.2 L 
I own a 50mm 1.4 (Canon) but still use the 1.8 for some of my shoots, especially for events/concerts. You can find some examples of shots I captured with it mounted on my 5DIII:
http://quentindecaillet.com/blog/1569-slide-and-sound-2012-concerts-du-samedi.html (most of them are shot with the 50, some with a 70-200)
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2013
|
|
m10chk
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 26, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 26, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent images, acceptable focus performance, price
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality
|
|
|
The real issue surely has to be -- you have a Canon, want a 50mm prime so which one do you get. 1.8, 1.4 USM, Sigma or the 1.2L.
I have owned the first 3 (never the L - could not justify the cost) and I have to say there is a very clear overall winner .... its the 1.8. I rate on Build Quality, Image Quality and Value
Everyone complains about the build quality of the 1.8 and rightly so. It is very ... err 'plastic'. BUT I do not think the build quality of the 1.4 usm is anything to boast about (the barrel wore loose on mine very quickly and the USM is not that durable). The Sigma wins on build quality but it seems you have to be very lucky to get one that focuses consistently (mine didn't). So overall in build quality, as it matters for taking photos, I have to put the Canons ahead of the Sigma but cannot really rank them.
The Sigma was undoubtedly the sharpness king ... when it was in focus (not very often), but the 1.4. and 1.8 were not far behind for me. As between them I find it hard to call. I think the 1.8 has it ... just but that is splitting hairs. Call it a draw. Other aspects of IQ (Fringing, Bokeh etc) I could not reliably tell them apart.
Value for money ... It has to be the 1.8. For me the extra cost of the 1.4 buys a heavier, better looking lens that is fundamentally not very well built and does not deliver any better IQ. The Sigma was just too unreliable to consider long term.
|
|
|
Aug 26, 2013
|
|
chets954
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 9, 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 21
|
|
Review Date: Jul 5, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, f1.8, fast, compact
|
|
Cons:
|
IQ, inconsistent AF
|
|
|
Very affordable, decent build, compact lens. I loved the compactness and the range but later realized you get what you pay for.
The major advantage is the f/1.8 but is seems inconsistent at f1.8
|
|
|
Jul 5, 2013
|
|
rater
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 26, 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 33
|
|
Review Date: Apr 17, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Prize, sharp and f/1.8.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow/noisy autofocus, cheap build quality
|
|
|
This lens is a bargain. You get f/1.8 for less 100$ if you buy it used. Image quality is OK but build quality is not great, although for the price you pay is great value.
I sold mine to buy a f/1.4 version as I was always complaining on the autofocus and the fact that it has not full time manual focus.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2013
|
|
oldshutterhand
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2012
Location: Hungary
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 29, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good light gathering capacity, no distorsion, no cromatic abberation, usable wide open, sharp stopped down, even colours, can make pictures with special athmosphere
|
|
Cons:
|
bad light focus hunting, low quality feeling, on APS-C, flare can be a problem
|
|
The lens most positive aspect is the light gathering capacity, I like the pictures in 'near dark' situations. The field of view on APs-C is not the best though (I agree with the people of same opinion in this forum.) The lens is sharp, but not expect miracles for this price. Better check before buy. Even colours, but not as good as canon 200 /2.8L for example. Not suggest for a one lens solution.
For portraits works good with a Kenko 1.4 dgx converter.
I have a review of this lens at
http://oldshutterhand.com/?page_id=146
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2012
|
|
FreelyBlueBird
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 22, 2012
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 22, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheapest lenses in the whole market,good quality,very sharp indeed.
|
|
Cons:
|
plastic body and mount
|
|
|
I was buy this one because it very cheap.
The lense is working so fast and sharp focus.
It's very valuable for use in field work.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2012
|
|
bonjerdo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 14, 2011
Location: South Africa
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 18, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, lightweight, easy to use and gives great pictures
|
|
Cons:
|
none, especially that you can buy one of these for under R1000
|
|
I have had many lenses including L series and found that if you get to know your lens and camera well you can produce great photos at a fraction of the cost.
I think the very expensive lenses are for pros who need a 100% reliable and sturdy build if it gets dropped etc. Most people are clicking away for a hobby and this little lens will give you some very surprising results.
Take a look at some of the photos i took casually with this lens.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bonjerdo/7217722410/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bonjerdo/7084360653/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bonjerdo/6273405675/in/photostream
I would almost be bold enough to say that you could use this lens on any pro photoshoot especially if you are shooting on a controlled environment.
I use this lens most of the time.
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2012
|
|
aestiva
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 17, 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 15, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp and cheap
|
|
Cons:
|
Wide open poor quality, ugly bokeh
|
|
|
One of my first lenses.
Very sharp for the price, but poor build quality.
|
|
|
May 15, 2012
|
|
nswelton
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 16, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 282
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2012
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
none
|
|
Cons:
|
filmsy. don't breathe on it!
|
|
|
canon doesn't make a good 50mm prime. they make a cheap junky one, a medium priced junky one, and a super expensive one that is okay but that still falls apart. this 50mm is the cheap junky one. it rolled off a coffee table and landed on a pillow 12 inches lower. broke. got a new one to put in a travel bag and the focusing gears make the most unholy noise ever now. beware. it'll blow your mind if you're moving up from a kit lens, but it will annoy you to no end if you are used to anything of any quality.
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
351
|
588808
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
