50 mm 1.8 - does it have focus issues?

[dinucringuri]

Hey guys...i'm into portraits a lot and i'm thinking of going for a 50 mm 1.8 for my 550D. From what i read it has slow/imprecise focus. I'm goint to test the lens at a local store in a couple of days, but i'm interested in hearing your opinion, too. I'm only interested in the speed and accuracy of the focus in the central point, as that is the way i focus most of the times. So, any advice...is it worth it?

 

[The_Traveler]

yes

 

[schim24]

The 50 1.8 is a bit noisy focusing and it does feel a little "delicate", but for a bit over a hundred dollars its a good buy. Focus issues wont be bad with decent lighting and center focus.

 

[Pallycow]

For me, I have noticed its speed fine for what it is, a sub 200 dollar lens. As far as focus, I find I'm fine within 5 feet for portraits, but if I'm trying to get a full body shot and have to back up....it does not get sharp as I would like, a bit frustrating. Within 5 feet though...it's a great little sharp lens.

I think last night in the studio I tried to get a full body shot and had to backup a good 15 feet or so...and as always locked in on eyes...yet none were sharp. Very unhappy with it. Tripod shots even.

 

[Justman1020]

You can get that lens for 90$ on adorama. It drops in price when you add it to the cart. For 90$ that lens is so worth buying...

 

[subscuck]

For 90$ that lens is so worth buying...

I disagree. Ignoring it's other flaws for the moment, the jagged, dizzying, nausea inducing bokeh characteristics make it so worth avoiding, unless someone gives you one for free. Even then you'd do better to sell it rather than use it. While it may be good value for the money, it's a far cry from a quality ​lens. Save for a Canon or Sigma 1.4 if you want a dependable, reliable 50mm that will perform as you expect a fast prime to perform. Straight up, the 1.8 doesn't perform, and will more often than not disappoint.

 

[cgipson1]

I have also heard horror stories of that lens, literally falling apart! I don't use Canon, so haven't used it personally.. but have seen several complaints of that!

 

[subscuck]

I have also heard horror stories of that lens, literally falling apart! I don't use Canon, so haven't used it personally.. but have seen several complaints of that!

You, sir, are correct. That's one of the "other flaws" I spoke of. Focus motor jamming up is another.

 

[o hey tyler]

I disagree. Ignoring it's other flaws for the moment, the jagged, dizzying, nausea inducing bokeh characteristics make it so worth avoiding, unless someone gives you one for free. Even then you'd do better to sell it rather than use it. While it may be good value for the money, it's a far cry from a quality ​lens. Save for a Canon or Sigma 1.4 if you want a dependable, reliable 50mm that will perform as you expect a fast prime to perform. Straight up, the 1.8 doesn't perform, and will more often than not disappoint.

Buutttttt... The 50/1.8 is so GOSH DANG AFFORDABLE!

Who cares if I shed pounds from projectile vomiting whilst looking at images shot at f/2.2 with a shallow depth of field? You've never heard of the pentagonal bokeh diet?

Also, so WHAT if the lens breaks in half because of poor design and manufacturing? For 100 bucks, I could have a new one. For the price of the Canon 50/1.4, I could buy three and a half 50/1.8s!!! That's 3x 50/1.8s and one 25mm f/.9!

All of you "full frame camera" and "high grade glass" snobs never seem to see the value in truly crappy optics! Jeeeze

 

[jaomul]

I always found it ok to focus and i like the Image Quality (but some of the guys above are pro and are better sources of info). It is plasticky but should be ok if not abused. Im my opinion its a steal at the price and can prob be got secondhand for 70 or so dollars

example with ext tubes from a 10d

Not making honey by jaomul, on Flickr

And handheld in lower light

winebar lazise lake garda by jaomul, on Flickr

 

[Dao]

I own or used to own the cheap 50mm f/1.8 mk2, then I bought the mk1 version and sold the mk2. Now I own the f/1.4 instead.

The mk2 version is cheap and also feel cheap. The 20 years old (it had a date code on the lens) mk1 I used to own built better than the mk2 version. However, it did not make me feel it will break anytime soon. But if I need to choose again between the 2, I will pick the mk1 version again. I like it better for 2 main reasons. The old one built better and the manual focus ring is located in the middle of the lens instead of at the very front. And the lens mount of the mk1 is metal.

Shooting with the 50mm f1/.8 at f/1.8 is not as sharp as 50mm f/1.4 at f/1.8. And that is one of the reason I switch to f/1.4 version. But it cost more. For me it worth to upgrade to f/1.4 because it cost me only $275 used and I made some money selling the mk1 version.

As for the pentagon shaped bokeh when the lens is stopped down a little, it really depends on the situation. To be honest, it did not happen often at all. If know know how to choose a background, it may not be a issue at all.

Take a look at this sample photo from photozone

http://images.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_50_18/samples/IMG_1408-01.jpg

You can tell a little, just a little hint of pentagon shaped bokeh, but not a deal breaker to me. However, I believe if the background is further away, you may not able to tell much.


So is the 50mm f/1.8 is a good lens. I will say it is the best bang for the buck lens. It is good for what it cost. I will not say it is a junk lens. It is just a good lens has limitations. And again, for a little more, I will find the mk1 version instead of the mk2. If you have extra money, f/1.4 is better. Is it worth the extra $200 more, it depends.