Thinking about the Canon 50mm f1.8 mkII..

10/01/2006 07:34:59 PM · #1

Someone please talk me into it. I really need f1.8 for venue shooting. Plus I heard it was REALLY sharp. Can anyone back that up? I wanna see some pics too.

Prof_Fate

10/01/2006 07:38:59 PM · #2

It's fast and cheap. for the price it's not bad, but it's no L lens. It's pretty sharp stopped down but then it's not a fast lens anymore.

10/01/2006 07:44:56 PM · #3

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

It's fast and cheap. for the price it's not bad, but it's no L lens. It's pretty sharp stopped down but then it's not a fast lens anymore.

Anything sharper for that price range?

elsapo

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 50mm f1.2L

10/01/2006 07:46:43 PM · #4

here are the top images on DPC with the lens...50mm f1.8

I like it a lot! specially for the price :)

10/01/2006 07:52:04 PM · #5

It's way better than the 300D kit right? The Canon 18-55mm

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

10/01/2006 07:54:16 PM · #6

Originally posted by jfriesen:

Anything sharper for that price range?

Is there anything else IN that price range?!? lol

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/01/2006 07:55:38 PM · #7

Originally posted by jfriesen:

It's way better than the 300D kit right? The Canon 18-55mm

I wouldn't knock the 18-55 for what it can do for you. For an 18mm lens, you won't find anything else in *that* price range either.

But the kit lens isn't going to give you the sharpness or the shallow DOF that the 50mm 1.8 gives. So in that respect, the 50 is a better lens.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

10/01/2006 07:57:10 PM · #8

You can't buy a sharper or faster lens for twice the price. This was taken wide open:

...and this one was at f/2.0:

Message edited by author 2006-10-01 19:59:04.

10/01/2006 08:03:49 PM · #9

Sweet I'm pumped.. Now I gotta look around some more.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

10/01/2006 08:04:24 PM · #10

Stop thinking. Go buy it.

Tamron 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD

10/01/2006 08:05:22 PM · #11

Originally posted by routerguy666:

Stop thinking. Go buy it.

What's your thoughts?

MadMan2k

Sony Alpha a6400

10/01/2006 08:08:48 PM · #12

Personally, I'd go with the 1.4 for the better build quality, focusing, bokeh, shallow DOF and extra half-stop of light wide open.

Here's a test I just did comparing the 50mm 1.8 and my Tamron 28-75 at ~50mm, at 2.8 and 8.0, and a reference shot of the 50 at 1.8 too. They're similar at 2.8 and 8.0, but I would say the Tamron is a little sharper, and has better color. They were shot in Manual mode, RAW, ISO 200, and converted with the same settings in ACR (including white balance). All 100% crops, unsharpened and only cropped to 800x533 with Canvas Size.

Tamron @ 2.8
50 @ 2.8
Tamron @ 8.0
50 @ 8.0
50 @ 1.8

Now, the wide-open shot from the 50 is not indicitave of real-world performance - the shallow DOF is pleasing, and with some sharpening and correction of CA and increasing contrast, you can easily get good shots out of it.
I usually shoot it at 8.0 on my film camera, and it's definitely a good lens when you don't pixel peep.

Hope this helps.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/01/2006 08:12:38 PM · #13

It's sharp wide open, it's sharp stopped down. It's fast as hell so it's good for low light. It's 1.8 so you get great bokeh if you are going for that. It's very, very inexpensive. You can do so much with this lense, it is a great tool.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

10/01/2006 09:29:43 PM · #14

Originally posted by routerguy666:

It's 1.8 so you get great bokeh if you are going for that.

That's one aspect that I don't necessarily agree on. You CAN get a very shallow depth of field, but the bokeh itself seems harsh to me. The out-of-focus areas have rather sharp, rough edges that aren't as flattering and the smooth, creamy blur of some more expensive lenses.

tryals15

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Carl Zeiss Planar T 50mm f/1.7

10/01/2006 09:49:05 PM · #15

Buy it. Worth every penny.