Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II (Prime Lens)

[IHateMyJob2004]

I'm about to pull the trigger on this $100 prime lens.
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Last I looked, the step up is really in the $400+ range which I do not want to do. There was a Sigma lens that was something like $500 that sounded awesome.

Anyways, this is primarily for portrait type stuff. I was wondering if there are any other primes I should consider.

I currently have the Canon EOA Rebel XS w/ 18-55mm and 55-250mm lenses.

The discussion on the Rebel XS buy just for the sake of having it linked:
AT thread

 

[Maximus96]

a good lens for what you pay. gets you hooked on primes which will inevitably lead to more expensive primes. the gateway drug, as they say...

there's nothing else to consider if you're in the $100 price range. if you can swing a few hundred more, look into the 85mm 1.8. the focus speed and quietness is night-and-day compared to the 50mm. but unless you have the room, you'll probably have to do head-and-shoulder shots with the 85mm on a XS

 

[Paladin3]

There is nothing sharper or faster for the money. It will make you not want to use those other lenses you have when you see the difference in image quality.

 

[Lotheron]

Its honestly the only lens on my camera. Great for portrait shots indoors with a little one.

 

[Kanalua]

Thread for the Canon digital photography, lens archive forum: Nifty-fifty

I find I keep this lens on my crop a lot. great for indoor, low light stuff, and portraits.


IMG_4684 by kiapolo, on Flickr

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Everything that is being said about primes is what it seems like I have been told.

I hope it is not a gateway drug though. I fear spending to much cash on these lenses.

Hoping to get the lens for next week. It will be 10 years since the first date with my wife and I'm hoping to get some nice family shots in.

Thanks!

 

[yhelothar]

If you don't mind using manual focus, the SMC Takumar 50mm F/1.4 is also a popular choice among Canon users...
And here's why...

 

[Sp12]

Was about to say, there are definitely sharper/faster options out there if you're willing to MF.

 

[Lemon law]

IMO, the 50mm f1.8. aka, the plastic fantastic, has some dubious merits for me. As I wonder what its adds to the standard 18-55 kit lens.

One one hand a prime will always optically tend to out preform a zoom, but, in my mind, being a 50 mm lens, the 35MM film camera equivalent to a 80mm lens, puts it mainly in the portrait lens category. And two comments there, in some cases a very high resolution lens can flatter the human face, in other cases, especially with faces with big pores, its too honest. The other comment is that for portrait shots, only 80mm film equivalent lens force the Camera into the subject faces. And when the 1.8 f50mm has a grack wrrr auto focus motor, it tends to kill the spontaneous photo portait moment. And at less than a F stop better than the 18-55 mm kit lens, its not much better for low light shots.

In short, I am unlikely to buy such a lens, especially when I have a F1.4 pentax lens I can adapt to my Canon XSI, but still, many will find such a canon F1.8 lens to fill a very useful niche in their digital photo lens arsenal.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I like the Sigma 50/1.4 a LOT. The creamy bokeh is just amazing. The 50/1.8, while a great value and sharp, has a meh bokeh.

 

[Maximus96]

And at less than a F stop better than the 18-55 mm kit lens, its not much better for low light shots.

The 18-55 kit at 50mm is at f/5.6, the 50mm at f/1.8 is more than 3 stops faster, not less-than-one as you said. at low light that is a HUGE difference. Even at the 18mm end, it is still about 1.5 stops faster. But then the whole perspective is different between 18 and 50mm so there is really no comparison.

the sigma 50mm is a nice piece of glass. i had one before and hated the EX coating. I see the new sigmas have a different better coating, except on the focus ring. Sigma must have a boatload of left over focus rings with the old coating. The quality control in auto-focus accuracy also contributed to me dumping the sigma.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Is there a good used option for $200?

 

[DaWhim]

had a 50mm f/1.8 with nikon, but dump it for the 35mm f/1.8. i like 35mm a lot better, 50mm zoom too much. factoring in the chop factor, 50mm = 75mm. my 35mm is closer to the true 50mm.

 

[Maximus96]

Is there a good used option for $200?

sometimes if you're lucky you can find a 50mm f/1.8 mark I, its got a metal mount and also a focus distance window. i believe the optics are mostly the same but constructed a little more sturdy. those are around $200 i think, maybe less. the mark II really does feel like a cheap plastic toy. i had one for a bit and sold it for a 30mm sigma. my friend also had a mark II, the front just fell off one day for no apparent reason. he put it back in but it could no longer auto focus.

 

[AkumaX]

the kit 18-55mm, 55-250mm and the 50mm f/1.8 - a.k.a. the unholy trinity, lol

 

[BigSmooth]

Is there a good used option for $200?

I can't think of another prime (even used) that I would choose over the 50mm f/1.8 that you could get for $200.
At $350-400 your options start to open up, but until you get to that level the nifty fifty is the obvious choice IMO.

 

[alfa147x]

I love my 50mm but it makes me want to sell my 24 - 105mm F/4L for a set of prime lenses

 

[Maximus96]

I love my 50mm but it makes me want to sell my 24 - 105mm F/4L for a set of prime lenses

do it...i sold my 24-70 and 70-200 to end up with my set of primes, the 17-40 is the odd step child in my setup

 

[alfa147x]

do it...i sold my 24-70 and 70-200 to end up with my set of primes, the 17-40 is the odd step child in my setup

I don't have a lot of money to pour into camera equipment. What set of lenses would you buy with the money from a 24 -105?

 

[oogabooga]

I can't think of another prime (even used) that I would choose over the 50mm f/1.8 that you could get for $200.
At $350-400 your options start to open up, but until you get to that level the nifty fifty is the obvious choice IMO.

Agreed. At 300-400 you have more options like the 1.4, or a 35mm prime (f2 I think?)

Personally I wish I had the 1.4 or 1.2, but that's just a wish. For the money, the 1.8 has been fantastic value. It was my primary lens until I got my 17-55 2.8.

 

[Maximus96]

I don't have a lot of money to pour into camera equipment. What set of lenses would you buy with the money from a 24 -105?

i would buy the 28mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 with that money. a 35mm will be nice on full frame, but the 35mm f/2 is the old design, with 50mm-like buzzy AF motor.

 

[alfa147x]

Sorry OP for stealing your thread.

i would buy the 28mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 with that money. a 35mm will be nice on full frame, but the 35mm f/2 is the old design, with 50mm-like buzzy AF motor.

thanks! here is my thread:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=31371386#post31371386

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Looking more at this inexpensive 50mm lens, I am more concerned. I want the 1.8 stop to be good but reviews show horrible blurriness.

Not sure if I want to get this lens now. Or am I worried about the wrong thing?

For portraits done indoors, what kind of f-stop would normally be used? This lens is really good focus wise at an f-stop of over 5.0.

Review:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_50_1p8_ii_c16/

 

[alfa147x]

Read this:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-50mm-f-1.8-ii-lens-review.aspx

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

OK, I guess I can better word my concern.

How much faster is the 50 mm at f/5.0 compared to the 18-55mm set at 50mm and f/5.0?