new 50mm lens... not as good as they used to be?

[punch]

I had a Canon 50mm f/1.8 from the 90's that my husband had used on his 35mm camera. I've been using it on my Rebel with a lot of success... I loved that lens. Recently my husband dropped it in Italy and it broke so he replaced it with a new one.

Call me crazy but a) every thing seems soft with the new one and b) there seems to be more noise at the same ISO in my images (which I realize is more related to the sensor but that didn't change, so is that even possible).

Is the build quality just that much ****tier 20 years later? :'( I should have just waited a week and gotten the f/1.4.

 

[vtf]

Maybe I'm confused, weren't the 50mm from the 80's fd mounts? Were you using an adapter?
All lenses I've held seem more fragile in today's standards than those of the past, even my L. The 50mm tho does have poor construction but still a sharp lens.

 

[punch]

no it's from the 90's. sorry! i just asked him and he confirmed that he bought it used in the early 90's.

at any rate, it didn't require an adapter.

hmmm. so i'm not sure what i'm doing wrong then. i had noticed that there was a spot on any bokeh (i posted a thread about it a while ago). but it went away after i cleaned the lens exterior. it's just always seemed to be less sharp (even before I cleaned it).

 

[Josh66]

There were two versions of the 50mm 1.8. The earlier version is said to be much better...

 

[Crollo]

Please tell me you are in fact getting the focus point right [I'm sorry but the one complaint about sharpness is pretty much user error 99.9% of the time, not picking on you specifically] and the f/stop is the same. Because if the lens is stopped down more then you had your previous 1.8, then your camera has to compensate for the lesser light somehow.

Also O|||||||O, everything I'd read points towards the opposite, the optics quality being improved in the II version, and the build quality being reduced.

 

[Josh66]

Also O|||||||O, everything I'd read points towards the opposite, the optics quality being improved in the II version, and the build quality being reduced.

Possible. From what I read, I was under the impression that the earlier version was more sought after. I know the earlier version does have better build quality, but I'm not sure how they compare optically...

 

[Crollo]

Definitely, I personally if I could would go for the first version due to the metal mount and distance gauge, but all I can vividly recall reading about in comparisons of the two is that the Mark II was slightly better optically. It could definitely have been the opposite though, I really can't remember.

 

[usayit]

Two versions of the 50mm f/1.8 which can be easily identified by build; metal vs plastic mount and with/without DOF markings. As far as I know, they are optically the same even though there may be fluctuations with in manufacturing runs. I had the first version... It was very very very sought after. I kept having people come up to buy it from me on the spot. The lucky fellow to shoot with it now is my cousin.

In regards to
a) You should have the lens checked for back or front focus. I would recommend taking it back.
b) I can't think of any reason the lens would have an impact in image noise.

Oh and build quality of lenses have generally gone down hill since the 50s.... keeps the cost down (i guess)... hopefully to be re-invested in superior optics.

 

[punch]

Please tell me you are in fact getting the focus point right [I'm sorry but the one complaint about sharpness is pretty much user error 99.9% of the time, not picking on you specifically] and the f/stop is the same. Because if the lens is stopped down more then you had your previous 1.8, then your camera has to compensate for the lesser light somehow.

Also O|||||||O, everything I'd read points towards the opposite, the optics quality being improved in the II version, and the build quality being reduced.

fair enough question, but yes, the user (myself), aperture, focus point, etc. remained the same... i'm simply seeing what i perceive to be less crispness. it's even the same room and time of day.

the builds felt different, but i can't say other than the plastic feeling smoother and the lens itself feeling heavier that there was much difference in materials.

all in all, you guys don't think it's a lens model issue, per se? i guess i'll take it in to have it looked at. it's been giving me trouble since i brought it home for one reason or another.

thanks.