Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens
by Canon
|
List Price: Our Price: $112.30 You Save: $87.70 (44%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $107.00 (click here) Category: Digital Camera See more product details |
|---|
Customers in the UK,
Buy this product at amazon.co.uk
for British Pounds
Digital Cameras Photo Reviews of Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens
Customer Review: Great inexpensive portrait lens, but must realize focal length limitation on 1.6 crop cameras
Summary: 5 Stars
This review is lengthy, detailed, and honest, but it reflects my personal experience which will likely differ greatly from your own, so keep that in mind. This review is geared towards budget minded people (I am a university student after all) with 1.6x crop-sensor cameras, e.g. Rebel, XT, 20D, 30D, etc. who probably started out with the kit lens and now have outgrown it.
This is an optically excellent lens at a truly bargain price. Particularly if you are going to this straight from the kit lens, you will be amazed and even shocked at the quality of the images this lens can produce compared to the kit lens.
Low-light performance is excellent, with the large aperture (still incredibly sharp wide open) allowing wonderful low light flash-free photography which will greatly impress you, your friends, and your family after you photograph people candidly at your next gathering.
This brings me to the focal length limitation. For what I just described, candid low-light photography at a party or other gathering, as well as candid shots of children and pets, this lens excels because on a 1.6 crop camera (such as the Digital Rebel series, which I imagine most people who buy this lens have) this equals approximately an 85mm lens in 35mm film camera terms. This is a classic portrait focal length, and so naturally it is perfect for candid portraits (as well as posed ones, of course) because it lets you get pretty close to people without sticking the camera in their face, as well as providing pleasing out of focus backgrounds with very sharp subjects. Canon also makes an 85mm f/1.8 lens which people who own the more expensive full-frame cameras love for the same reasons those of us with the 1.6 cameras love this one, because the focal length and large aperture are perfect for the sort of photography I've just described.
It's not that it has no use besides that, though; I've taken many landscape and cityscape photos with this lens that are wonderful. But usually, I feel very closed in by the long focal length. If you're a long distance away from your subject, this lens can often be great for landscape and nature photography, but eventually you'll be longing for a wider field of view and will at least be tempted to go back to the kit lens for many shots, and for some you will absolutely need it.
And this is its biggest problem, which is the flip side of this being a great lens for low-light social gatherings - even if you only use this lens for low light situations, you will feel like you need a wider field of view at least half of the time. To get a group shot of four or five people with this lens in a small house, I literally had to shoot from across the next room through the door, and that still wasn't quite wide enough. My only other option was to use the kit lens, which with its f/3.5 maximum at the widest focal length is just not usable for most low-light situations without a tripod or flash, so I had no choice.
To reiterate, it is very likely that if you aren't already spending a lot of money on your camera and lens collection, you will really feel the limitation of not having a wide enough field of view for a lot of your photography. Depending on your style and what you mainly shoot, you could easily get very frustrated with this lens despite its strengths.
The other thing that is likely if you're upgrading to this from the kit lens is that you will get addicted to the insane increase in picture quality and low-light usability and will not ever want to use the kit lens again, which means you'll need another higher quality lens that gives you a wider field of view. I used this lens more or less exclusively for about three months, became frustrated at not having a wider field of view, and ended up buying the $350 Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for its "normal" ~50mm equivalent on my 1.6 crop camera, and for its large aperture. That lens is great, by the way, and I wholly recommend it instead of this 50mm lens if you've got the money. You do lose the advantages of the 50mm's long reach for portrait situations, but in general you can make up for this by getting closer to the subject, which admittedly is not always possible. Solution? Get both ;)
Ultimate advice? If you've only got the kit lens and maybe a cheap telephoto zoom and you really don't want to or simply can't spend money on more expensive lenses in the near future, don't get this lens yet. Save your money up for a more versatile (and still optically excellent) lens in the $300-400 range, namely the "standard digital zooms" offered by Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina in that price range. I am currently saving up for one of these (probably the Sigma 17-70, the least expensive of them, since the advantages of the others are covered by the 30mm and 50mm lenses).
If you crave the low-light performance (which was what attracted me), and you really don't feel like you can spend $300 or more for something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, then go for it, but don't say I didn't warn you. You'll be craving more expensive lenses in no time.
Another disadvantage that you won't notice too much unless/until you have more expensive lenses is the build quality. In terms of durability I'd say this lens is great and it will hold up to normal abuse, but it definitely feels like a plastic toy, the manual focus ring is only marginally better than the one on the kit lens (which is a joke), and if you care about this sort of thing, it looks a little awkward on the camera (I have the Rebel XT). It is the same size as the 50mm lens for my 1978 Canon A1, but since the body styling on these new cameras is so different from the classic camera body style this size and shape looks a little silly. It's purely a cosmetic concern, but don't be surprised if you feel a little self-conscious about using it in public (this won't stop you from using it, of course, because you'll know that the silly look of the lens has no bearing on the outstanding results you get).
Finally, the autofocus motor is a little noisy, but if you're used to the kit lens you won't mind it because it's only slightly louder than that (just wait until you're spoiled by the silent and super fast ultrasonic motors on the more expensive lenses, though...) The focus accuracy is excellent, even in low light, but there's no avoiding that it will occasionally have to hunt for focus in very low light and while this is extremely annoying, there's really not much you can do about it even with the more expensive lenses and cameras.
Overall - it is hard not to recommend this lens, but only if you get it knowing its limitations ahead of time and you are ok with it, and accept that it will probably make you want more expensive lenses to go along with it.
Again - for the things it is best for (portraits and candids, kids, etc., though of course you can do a lot of creative things with it), you can't do better than this lens, especially on a budget (but, this lens compares extremely well with the much more expensive similar lenses!) What it absolutely is not, though, is a "walk-around", general all-purpose lens that you can leave on your camera most of the time like in the film days when most people just had the 50mm f/1.8 lens that came with their camera and never took it off. The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 I mentioned fits that bill perfectly, if that's what you're looking for.
Customer Review: Best Value in Photography!
Summary: 5 Stars
Wow! My theory now is that Canon doesn't put this baby as their kit lens because many people would decide that they DONT NEED ANOTHER ONE! And many of them would be right!
Like others, I bought the Rebel XT and the 28-135 IS lens. The 28-135 is heavy and priced like a gold brick. I guess it does OK, and I do keep it mounted most of the time.
And like others, I stumbled on this lens somehow, read the raving reviews, and for the price figured, "What the heck?"
This lens in tack sharp. It shows the fire in the colors you photograph. The wide aperture means candles can be excellent lights for portraits. Its narrow field is great.
There are pitfalls though. I snapped a pic of my face at arm's length using autofocus a while back and (1) the focus locked on the tip of my nose and my face was already blurring (2) the lens was so sharp that I saw blackheads clearly on my nose tip I can't really see in the mirror (doh!). I've read that dSLR images are slightly soft to aid in later editing. I can only imagine what it would do on a film camera.
Yesterday while camping I slapped this lens on. Unlike the 28-135, this one is light enough that I didnt notice I was carrying a camera everywhere. At night I put the lens on the top of the car pointed at the sky, set the shutter for 15 secs, and hit the button. Much to my amazement, the lens not only showed hundreds of stars that were invisible to my eyes, but it also found a galaxy. That pic is on the customer image section of this page. You can see what I saw, but the smaller size doesnt do the lens justice.
One quirk of Amazon is that this page keeps alternating pictures of lenses. This lens does not have the distance focus scales on the outside of it.
Zoom is nice for many things. But where zoom isnt necessary, performance is very, very nice. Performance at $70 is almost too good to be true.
Let me close by repeating what has been said elsewhere and will continue to be said here....IF YOU OWN A SLR, STOP NOW AND GET THIS LENS!
UPDATE 12/06 I have owned this lens for about a year now. Over that time I have immersed myself in photography, workshops, books, tests, etc. I have since upgraded to the 30D and a couple of L lenses, and now have a portfolio strong enough that I am now getting dollar signs thrown at me that I didnt even see coming. I say all this to give you some perspective on what I will write afterward.
Now that Ive really learned the difference, I can agree with others that it is a tad soft wide open, but that is to be expected. I read a lens test recently that put the 1.8 against Canons heavweight L glass, and, not surprisingly, the L beat out the $70 plastic wonder in most categories. What might surprise you, however, is that when the lens was tested at F 8 it BEAT THE L GLASS in sharpness! As one that has felt the pain of trading large sums of money for L glass, I appreciate affordable quality...not something anyone can plan on seeing much of in photography.
My 28-135 has since joined my kit lens in the garage. The 1.8 is still in my case with my newer 30D.
With some experience under my belt I now would make the following recommendation. Right now, as you read this, you may have an idea if you've been bitten by the photog bug. You may know that this beast is going to morph into something more than a simple pasttime. If you look inside the depths of your aspirations and you know that you are going to be a serious amateur, bite the bullet and get the 50mm 1.4. Trust me on this one. Eventually you'll end up getting it anyway, so just apply the $70 to the 1.4 now.
If you're just exploring different areas of SLR photography, you cant go wrong with this lens. Case in point- as of this writing the baby in pink in the customer images section of this lens is one of the top-ten rated images of all pics uploaded on Amazon! This lens will allow you to dazzle friends and relatives used to snapshots from point & shoots. It will be the start of what you upgraded to a DSLR for in the first place. For you, the 1.8 is still, by far, the best value in photography!
Customer Review: Worked great for my son's hockey game
Summary: 5 Stars
I needed a fast lens to take pictures of my son's hockey games. Hockey rinks are probably the hardest place to take great pictures. The lighting is usually poor, the surface bright (forcing a manual overexposure thereby giving up some shutter speed), and the action is very fast. Also, focusing through a puck-scuffed glass panel is another challenge in itself.
I recently purchased a Canon Rebel XS with the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens kit. The pictures from the first hockey game were not very good. The rink was one of the best in terms of overhead lighting intensity. I set the ISO to 1600, zoomed the lens to max (55mm), set the focus to servo mode (continuous focus of moving objects), set the camera to aperture priority, and set aperture to the fastest setting for 55mm (f/5.6). Since hockey rinks (surface and boards) are white, I had to set the exposure compensation to +2/3 so my son's image would not turn out too dark. Since 55mm is not a large zoom range, I stood next to the glass near the other team's goalie (my son's a forward). Unfortunately the shutter speed for all the pictures was between 1/50 and 1/80; way too slow to capture a fast moving sport. The only pictures that looked acceptable were face-offs and when my son was parked in front of the net.
I purchased this 50mm 1.8 lens and used it this weekend for a hockey tournament. The rink was at the other extreme in lighting; i.e., one of the worse lit. For the 1PM game there was a bit of sun light coming in from a few small windows, so I set the ISO to 800. I again set the exposure compensation to +2/3. I used shutter priority this time and set the speed to 1/125. That was fast enough to freeze the body motion and allowed for a nice blur effect of the hockey stick and puck when my son took a shot. The aperture bounced between f/1.8 and f/2.8; the higher f-stops gave me a little deeper depth of field that helped put my son and the goalie in better focus. The lens had no trouble with servo focus mode (continuous focusing of a moving object). The biggest issues with focus was the marks on the glass and the other players skating in front of my son when I had the focus locked on him. In spite of that, the pictures turned out very nice; exceeding my expectations. The lack of image stabilization didn't seem to matter. The fact that I captured a nice shot of my son scoring the first goal of the tournament (cool shot where my son and the goalie were in focus and you can see the puck under the goalie heading for the net) already justified the $100 purchase. When I came back for the evening game, there was obviously no sun light boost from the windows, so I had to bump the ISO up to 1600. Again, I captured many nice shots.
I can't wait for a game at one of the better lit rinks. I plan on using shutter priority and setting the speed to 1/250 or 1/500.
This lens is definitely staying on the camera. I took identical pictures comparing the lens kit and this lens, and I can see the difference in clarity. I did notice a slight darking of the corners at f/1.8 when I took a picture of the sky; however, if I wasn't looking for it, I probably would not have noticed it.
This lens is a must have for parents with kids who play indoor sports (e.g., hockey, basketball, karate, wrestling, gymnastics, ballet, etc).
BTW - The f/1.8 lens may be the sweet spot for lens speed. There is a good (but highly technical) discussion in the DP-Review Open Talk forum titled "Light loss on current sensors at big Fstops, part II" regarding light loss on high speed lens. Basically, fast lens (f/1.2 - f/1.4) pass light to the digital sensor at a very sharp angle and, as a result, there is signal loss of about 1/2 stop. That makes an f/1.4 the equivalent to an f/1.8 lens. The dSLR camera bodies (all manufacturers) detect the high-speed lens and compensate by "electronically" increasing the sensor signal gain. That kind of defeats the purpose of spending the extra (and large) sum of money for a fast lens.
Customer Review: Great price for priceless portraits
Summary: 5 Stars
I've owned the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens for a year now since October 6, 2009 mounted on my Canon EOS XTi [400D] from Amazon.com and at least 85% of the shots I have taken over the year was from this lens. No joke.
Honestly this was the first lens I ever bought without any thorough research, but I just read how everyone is saying that this lens is a must have for portraits. The overall rating above for this lens speaks for itself.
Do you want to make creative portrait shots? Then this lens is for you.
Are you on a budget and you're tired of that kit lens you use now? Then this lens is for you.
For the price I would say it is well worth it since its the glass on this lens that matters in my opinion. I normally set my aperture priority (Av) on f/1.8 and it works well in and outdoors. I would agree bumping the aperture to f/2.8 may increase the sharpness slightly many report that in can be soft at f/1.8, so use it when you need it. The overall "Bokeh" or blur-effect of this lens is spectacular and I constantly receive compliments when I post my shots online and as you can see on the sample pictures. Nothing can go wrong with this lens!
Yes the overall build quality is completely plastic and it can be noisy while it focuses. That would be expected if you paid the premium for higher quality lenses which can cost almost ten times as much as this lens, but you get what you paid for when it comes to lenses. I have taken care of this lens the whole year taking on and off constantly switching between my kit lens with this one and I have not encountered any mechanical problems so far or any problems taking it on and off.
My only warning to you is that you should be careful with focusing as with the shallow depth of field is that it may be a hit or miss as the camera may focus on something else other than the subject causing unwanted blurriness. So I recommend some experience in using the auto focus, but practice makes perfect. Also, at 50mm on a crop sensor would turn out as 85mm in reality so there can be times when you can't get everything you want to shoot in the picture. From my experience I can fit at most two to three people [of their heads to hips in portrait] at a general distance of approximately twelve feet if you were indoors at a party, but outdoors can be less limiting.
So expect to have a slightly far distance from the subject if you want more in the picture, but you'll get the hang of it after a few weeks of experience.
Other than that this lens is a must have and I'm sure you'll become addicted with this lens.
For the price and quality of pictures taken I give it a five-star rating despite the cheap build and motor quality. It's definitely worth the shot and it's so affordable I could skip lunch for maybe a couple weeks. :)
Reiteration: If you don't want to read all that.
The Good:
- Image Quality. I guarantee you'll see a difference from your kit lens.
- Bokeh. Excellent for blurring subject background and impress friends/family.
- Price. For about a hundred bucks, it's the cheapest lens out there with obvious drawbacks listed below.
The Bad:
- Plastic. It's plastic all around, but feels like its not cheap plastic like at the toy store. But remember, the glass matters A LOT more than its casing. If that's the case then you should go for a higher tier lens (L-series) which costs substantially more than this lens.
- Noise. It sounds like an R/C car motor when it has a hard time focusing in dim light indoors without strobing the on board flash. But in broad daylight you will hear it for a second or two as it focuses faster.
If you have the extra money to burn, then I would recommend the more better build and image quality of the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4.
Customer Review: Best bang for buck
Summary: 5 Stars
When I was starting with photography, I had a 35mm Nikon and three lenses, a 35mm, 85mm and 135mm. Between those three primes (or a similar combination) you could do pretty much everything. That was a long, long time ago. Or was it?
Now-days, it seems like you need 4 or 5 or 10 lenses to "cover" everything. Especially if you read the forums, populated with those who prefer to look at charts and read specs as opposed to get out and shoot with what they have. With all these megapixels at our disposal, what's going on?
For many this 50mm 1.8 will be their first prime. They got an entry-level digital camera and it probably came with a kit lens, probably a variable aperture zoom. They got a bit into it and decided to upgrade to a zoom with a fixed 2.8, the mythical f/2.8 that allows them to shoot in the dark.
Then they started getting more into it, what else is there in digital photography that I'm missing? Why are these people's photos on the web (flickr, smugmug, whatever) so much more saturated and sharp? How can I get that level of detail in my photos? Sooner or later the stumble on the mention of primes.. primes vs zooms.. maybe they read about Leicas.. and they start to question if they really know what they're doing, maybe there's a solution with a better lens yet??
And so the hunt starts.. some photographers will find their happy place and others will forever chase technology.
There's not much I can add after 100s of other reviews. This lens is a fabulous little gem from Canon. The stories about it' sharpness and colors are true. Let me discuss some of the downsides, and how they play out in practical use.
FYI, I've paired this lens up with various bodies, including 20D, 40D, 5D, and a 1D Mark II-N. It performs well on all.
Build Quality: Plastic. Not sealed. Rattles a bit. Loud focusing. I see none of these as a negative. They are commensurate with the price point and are honestly quite reliable. I've used this lens at dozens of weddings, photojournalism assigments, etc. I've had it caked in sand and salt water with no issues. Would I bring a $350 1.4 or a $1200 1.2 into those conditions? Definitely not. I like having something near-disposable that I can abuse.
Related to build quality, this thing is light as a feather. If you're hiking, climbing, traveling.. pair it up with a newer Rebel T1i or T2i, and you have an awesome little package for stills and video that weighs next to nothing. Beats the hell out of humping a couple bricks (e.g. 24-70 2.8 on a 40D) for a 3-day hike. It'll be a bit long in the focal range, but I've never complained.
Focusing: It's not USM, so it's not super fast. But there are ways to make it faster. For one, manually designating your AF point speeds AF dramatically. This is true on any lens, from a $90 50mm to a $4500 300mm. For two, pay attention and anticipate. Having your lens pre-focused in an area where you suspect something to happen is going to decrease search time by 50%. Finally, know how your AF works and get your AF point over a high contrast step. There's a theme here... it's the photographer, not the camera/lens, that makes it happen. You do your part, and the equipment will do it's part.
I do have a gripe about the focus ring. This is one aspect of the lens that is really lacking. I'd gladly pay an extra $15-20 for a decent rubberized ring with slightly smoother action. But, it is what it is.
It's also clumsy to attach the hood to this thing, with the adapter piece. But honestly it looks so silly I usually leave it off. Haven't noticed any ill-effects from lens flare, just don't shoot into the sun or use your hand.
If you've never used a prime, pick this up. Stocking stuffer for yourself.