Canon Lens question?

[FoundMyCamera]

Those of you that are experienced Canon lens users...of what benefit is the USM? I understand the autofocus on these lenses are supposed to be very quiet...but if I am not taking photos of weddings or other sacred/quiet events, is it worth the extra expense? OR is there something else that I'm missing? For instance, a 50mm f/1.4 USM is $520, while the 50mm f/1.8 II is $150. Is there something else that makes for such a difference in price? I know normally the faster the glass, the more expensive, but 1.8 vs. 1.4 doesn't seem much.

Just looking to get the most for my money...

Thanks for your help!

 

[Derrel]

USM allows full-time manual focusing override, without the need to flip a switch to go to manual focusing mode. The 50/1.4 EF is a professional-caliber 50mm lens with good coatings, very pleasant bokeh, and high quality construction,and it autofocuses accurately,reliably, and repeatably with ease,and it does so reasonably quietly.

The 50mm 1.8 EF-II is built very cheaply, lacks full-time manual focus override, so you have to disengage the AF switch to focus manually, or risk damaging the lens. IT also focuses very loudly, with high-pitched whirring noise, and its AF is somewhat erratic and not nearly as dependable at the 1.4 model. It's bokeh is much harsher,since it has a 5-sided diaphragm, but more importantly, its bokeh is harsh because it has overcorrected spherical aberration to boost sharpness and acuity.

The 50/1.4 EF is a professional-caliber 50. The 50 1.8 EF-II has cut a LOT of corners, to get the weight down and to make is absolutely as cheap as possible. One is a pro-level lens, the other is very,very basic.

 

[FoundMyCamera]

Thanks Derrel! That's the kind of info I needed. I am learning quickly that the old saying "you get what you pay for" really does apply to lenses. I bought a "good deal" quantaray 17 -200 lens last year and am really noticing a difference in image quality.

 

[chammer]

i think more and more people are giving the 50mm 1.8 more of a bad name these days than it deserves. i have no issues with the af motor noise, or focusing issues with my 1.8. im not a person that needs the absolute sexiest bokeh on the planet just so i can have people drool over it. no, instead, i just want a nice, clean, sharp image that can stand on its own and pull the subject away from the background. in that regard, the 50mm 1.8 is an absolute steal and should be in everyone's kit.

i already know derrel disagrees with me, and im sure many more will follow. why the hate on the 1.8 these days, i don't know. the only thing about the 50mm 1.8 is that yes it's plastic and thus doesnt look professional, but who really cares? you go ahead and spend 5x more on the 1.4 and look cool...meanwhile i'll be there getting the shots with my cheap 1.8. full time manual hasnt been something i have used to date either.

there are times when yes, you do get what you pay for, however...there are other times when you go the bang for your buck route and get pleasantly surprised by the results. just as with the 50mm 1.8, the tamron 28-75mm 2.8 is another such lens. its $389 on amazon right now, and is constantly compared against the 24-70 2.8L which goes for over $1000 more.

its true that in the future i do plan on getting a 50mm 1.4 (though it probably wont be canon's - the sigma 50mm 1.4 is looking more attractive to me at this point in time), but it will be later down the road. i love my 50mm 1.8's image quality too much right now to care about all the other minor stuff, and build quality of the lens is only an issue if you're rough with your gear. which i'm not.

 

[Samanax]

For instance, a 50mm f/1.4 USM is $520, while the 50mm f/1.8 II is $150.

Where did you get those prices from? The EF 50mm f/1.4 USM is $399 and the EF 50mm f/1.8 II is $109.95 at B&H.

I know normally the faster the glass, the more expensive, but 1.8 vs. 1.4 doesn't seem much.

The jump from f/1.4 to f/1.2 doesn't seem like much either, but the price difference is bigger and crazier. The EF 50mm f/1.2L USM lens is $1599 at B&H.

Just looking to get the most for my money...

If you're kinda new to photography, the EF 50mm f/1.8 II is a good lens to start out with. It's one of the best values on the planet.

 

[Derrel]

Take the $110 you'd spend on a 50mm 1.8 prime and put it toward the price of a decent zoom lens--now that is the best value on the planet. Seriously, there's something called value and there's flat-out low-priced and cheap. I'd say look at the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 as being a much better place to put $110 on your lens budget.

Tamron SP AF28-75/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Review
Note the MTF scores-- the Tamron outperforms the Canon 50 1.8 at the center and at the edge across most of the aperture range.

Tamron SP AF28-75/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Review
Note the absolutely horrible, dismal performance of the Canon 50/1.8 when shot toward the sun--the 50mm 1.8 prime is simply terrible, while the Tamron 28-75 handily outperforms both the Canon 28-135,and the Canon 50mm 1.8. My own 50/1.8 EF-II experience is similar; the antireflection coatings and optical design and performance of the 50/1.8 are nowhere near "modern" standards. Nikon's 50 1.8 is significantly better coated and more flare-resistant,as is Nikon's 50/2, a 1960's design. Same with Canon's 50/1.4--much better against the light. When a multi-element, 3rd party zoom lens shoots *significantly better* toward the sun than a 50mm prime lens, there's something wrong with the design of the 50mm prime. Canon EF 50mm – F1.4 vs F1.8 MK II - photo.net

 

[NateWagner]

or you could get a used 50mm 1.8 for in the 60 dollar range, which is a steal, and for the sharpness of the images again is a steal.

60 bucks (what I have seen them go for) is an amount you can spend on a lens and then go out and get a zoom or different lens a little later on. A 50mm provides a much better image quality than a kit lens and is great to learn on/with.

 

[syphlix]

Where did you get those prices from?

Those are the MSRP prices listed on canon's website.

My suggestion... buy a used one on craigslist... look at the general value of them on there and get a fairly priced one...

Use it for a while. If you are happy with it, great you just got a cheapass lens you like... if you don't, sell it on CL for what you paid for it (or more)...

 

[flyin-lowe]

I bought a like new used 1.8 for $70 at my local camera shop. Find a used one, see how you like it and if you don't sell it. You will never have a problem moving a 50mm 1.8.

 

[Village Idiot]

I gave one away. It's a great lens, but I didn't have a need for it so it went to a friend along with an old 300D. For the price, it's great lens and it's extremely sharp once you start to step it down. Plus you can do fun things with it, like send it around the world and have everyone take a turn taking pictures with it. Speaking of which, TPF Canon people want to do this?

 

[shortpballer]

USM allows full-time manual focusing override, without the need to flip a switch to go to manual focusing mode. The 50/1.4 EF is a professional-caliber 50mm lens with good coatings, very pleasant bokeh, and high quality construction,and it autofocuses accurately,reliably, and repeatably with ease,and it does so reasonably quietly.

The 50mm 1.8 EF-II is built very cheaply, lacks full-time manual focus override, so you have to disengage the AF switch to focus manually, or risk damaging the lens. IT also focuses very loudly, with high-pitched whirring noise, and its AF is somewhat erratic and not nearly as dependable at the 1.4 model. It's bokeh is much harsher,since it has a 5-sided diaphragm, but more importantly, its bokeh is harsh because it has overcorrected spherical aberration to boost sharpness and acuity.

The 50/1.4 EF is a professional-caliber 50. The 50 1.8 EF-II has cut a LOT of corners, to get the weight down and to make is absolutely as cheap as possible. One is a pro-level lens, the other is very,very basic.

Derrel is so awesome!!!! and so helpful

 

[shortpballer]

I gave one away. It's a great lens, but I didn't have a need for it so it went to a friend along with an old 300D. For the price, it's great lens and it's extremely sharp once you start to step it down. Plus you can do fun things with it, like send it around the world and have everyone take a turn taking pictures with it. Speaking of which, TPF Canon people want to do this?

im down

 

[FoundMyCamera]

Thanks all for the input. Yes, the prices were the MSRP on Canon's site. A search on Amazon found me the 1.8 for $93. Interesting info on the Tamron, thanks for the links. In all honesty, I've always had zoom lenses because I like the versatility, the 50mm would be basically to take portraits of the kids or a specific project. My own experience has shown me canon glass is far superior to my quantaray, but have never tried a tamron. Will look into it. Thanks.

 

[Hardrock]

I gave one away. It's a great lens, but I didn't have a need for it so it went to a friend along with an old 300D. For the price, it's great lens and it's extremely sharp once you start to step it down. Plus you can do fun things with it, like send it around the world and have everyone take a turn taking pictures with it. Speaking of which, TPF Canon people want to do this?

im down

Im also down!
I have the 1.4 version and love it !

 

[bp4life71]

To answer your main question...the usm is simply a quieter focus. When someone says focusing is loud....not like, your kids yelling loud, more like loud in reference to extreme quiet.

If you were 15 feet away and I was focusing on you without a USM, then you still wouldnt hear the focus.

It is DEFINITLY NOT WORTH buyingg a USM over a non-USM...unless your one of those guys always snapping pictures of bugs and close-ups of flowers.

What the hell is with that fascination anyways?