Canon 50mm f1.8 really the best?

[pakman010]

Hello everyone I just wanted to know if this article that I read on the 50mm f1.8 is true. Because I was planning on buying one but I just want to make sure all the facts from this this site are accurate. Click here to view the article. Best Canon Prime Lens For Beginners | Lifeanswerz

Any info helps. Thanks!

 

[Pukka312]

It's generally considered a great buy because it's a pretty great lens in relation to the price. It's certainly one of the only ones I've heard recommended under the $300 price point. Unless you can swing the 50mm 1.4, the 50mm 1.8 is a good buy

 

[desmondlewissmith]

Yeah, I think it's more of a bang for you buck kinda thing.... I can recall when I purchased my Nikon 50mm f/1.4 lens and thought I owned the world. It was like $200

Now fast forward to today and I'm going gaga over the 135mm f/2.0 lens.

I'd argue for a beginner it's a great lens to show the importance of controlling depth of field. Prime lenses are one less distraction that allow you to focus on your talent and distance from subject.

 

[o hey tyler]

Cheap =/= quality

 

[TCampbell]

Wait! Let's put things into perspective.

There are a LOT of qualities in lenses that need to be considered.

One of the first considerations that comes to mind is the optical quality of the lens. Some would say "sharpness" (which is really a combination of a lot of other factors). It turns out that if the ONLY thing you consider is "sharpness" then the 50mm f/1.8 is one helluva lens. But if we're going to be bold and consider all the features of lens design then we can't stop now.

The EF 50mm f/1.8 lens is cheap... there's not a lens in the lineup that costs less. When you get the physical lens and can hold it your hands, you'll notice that it both looks and feels cheap. I think it's the only Canon lens I know of that does not have a focus distance index anywhere on the lens. If you choose to manually focus (something you must ONLY do AFTER switching the lens AF mode from automatic to manual... never attempt to over-ride focus on this lens when it's in automatic mode) you'll notice the focus ring is a thin little ring at the front of the lens. Basically the build quality is really cheap... but then this lens does only cost about $100-125.

Also, the focus motor performance is slow (and noisy). It's not a snappy lens. Don't use it for action photography... it wont keep up with the action. If you try to lock focus on a subject whose focus distance keeps changing then the lens will always be lagging to catch up.

The camera has 5 non-rounded aperture blades. That means out-of-focus points take on the form of a pentagon. The out-of-focus quality (bokeh) is poor... among the poorest quality of any lens. The out-of-focus background quality (usually you want a smooth creamy out-of-focus quality) looks nervous and jittery from this lens.

Is it a "bad" lens?

Not at all... it just depends on what you want to use it for. If you're not going for out-of-focus blur in your images and you're not shooting action photography (so basically you have the luxury of being able to wait for the lens to lock focus on mostly stationary subjects) then the quality is actually quite good.

But don't have any illusions that it's "the best". The EF 50mm f/1.4 USM lens is VASTLY better in every way... but it costs about 3x more. The EF 50m f/1.2L is even better still... but it's about $1400 (and then only because there's a Canon authorized $180 instant rebate on the lens... otherwise it's closer to $1600. One should HOPE it'd be a better lens at those prices.)

The EF 50mm f/1.8 is considered to be the most "affordable" lens and if you just constrain the judgement to the quality of in-focus parts of the image, it's quite a bargain.
The EF 50mm f/1.4 USM is probably the best deal... in that it makes up for nearly every deficiency of the f/1.8 version at about 3x the price tag.
The EF 50mm f/1.2L USM is the best... if money is no object. It's about 3x the price of the f/1.4 and while it's better, it'd be hard to argue that it's 3x better.

If you can afford the EF 50mm f/1.4 ... then that's the lens I'd recommend. Otherwise get the f/1.8 version... but keep in mind that it wont compete with the f/1.4 in focus speed performance nor in the quality of out-of-focus areas.

 

[pakman010]

Thanks for the help guys! I think I am going to go for the f1.8 because the f1.4 is slightly out of my price range.

 

[o hey tyler]

Thanks for the help guys! I think I am going to go for the f1.8 because the f1.4 is slightly out of my price range.

You could always save more money.

 

[pakman010]

This is true but I am going on a trip soon and would like to have a new set of glass for the trip

 

[Derrel]

This video is hilarious. It demonstrates what "barrel separation" and the Canon 50/1.8 are allllllllll about. Do a Google search.

 

[cynicaster]

I rented the 1.4 for a long weekend and then later I borrowed a spare 1.8 from a friend. I wish I had them both at the same time to do some proper A/B comparisons, but it’s worth noting that in absence of a controlled apples-to-apples pixel-peeping experiment, I’m hard-pressed to see any obvious quality differences whatsoever in the results. Granted, the usage was pretty casual and non-technical in both cases, but it’s still interesting to note. Ultimately, I went with the 1.8 and put the extra cash toward some speedlights.

Build quality of the 1.4 is head and shoulders above the 1.8, no doubt there.

OP, if you’re posting such a question on an internet forum, I’m going to go out on a limb and assume you’re fairly new to the hobby. Unless money is no object at all, just get the 1.8 and learn what you can with it before spending 4x as much on the more expensive gear. Heck, you might find that you don’t even enjoy using 50mm prime lenses.

Most of the time, I see merit in the old adage “buy cheap, buy twice” , but in this case, even if the 1.8 falls apart in 2 years (which it shouldn’t if you take care of it), the lessons you can learn with it and the very decent quality photos it’s capable of make it well worth the paltry sum of $100 brand spankin’ new (with a factory warranty).

 

[KmH]

Just don't expect the warranty to apply if you drop the lens and it breaks in 2.

 

[KenC]

As you probably gathered from the responses, like everything else "it depends." If, like me, you rarely break things, hardly ever shoot at large apertures so the quality of the out-of-focus areas isn't of much concern, and never do "action" photography, then it's one of the most amazing deals to come along. If some of these conditions don't apply to you, then perhaps it isn't.

 

[Cannoneer]

Unless u need large aperture . The 40mm f2.8 is also a great lebs and about only 40$ more then the 50mm 1,8 . ive had better results in sharpness with it and a bit wider pictures makes it a bit more versatile in areas were you cant back away too much . 2.8 aperture still gives pretty decent blurred background for portraits . I carry bolth 40 and 50 . the 40 taking almost no space in my bag

 

[cynicaster]

This video is hilarious. It demonstrates what "barrel separation" and the Canon 50/1.8 are allllllllll about. Do a Google search.

Of course I can only speculate, but I'd almost be willing to bet that all four of those guys are carrying $500 iPhones in their pockets. I wonder what would happen to those if they were dropped from 5 feet above a concrete floor? Probably the same thing that happened to my iPad when it slipped out from under my arm and crashed into my driveway.

The fact that the plastic $100 lens gets ruined by smashing into concrete makes for neat slow-motion YouTube ruin-porn, but it's hardly going to be a revelation to anybody who holds the thing in their hands before buying it, so I'm not sure what point these sanctimonious d-bags are trying to make.

 

[David444]

I will never recommend this lens to anyone. The focus is slow, noisy, and inaccurate in low light. Build quality is embarrassing, here is a photo of a friends lens after he extended a simple collapsible hood.
View attachment 39554

Go for the 1.4