How good is the Canon 50mm 1.8

gblades

gblades

Messages
481
Name
Gareth
Edit My Images
Yes
I know the canon 50mm 1.8 is supposed to be very good for what it costs but what is it like compared to pricier lenses?
I also have a 28-135 IS USM and don't want to be in a situation where when I want the wider aperture I have to sacrifice some quality when switching to the 50mm.
I have £80 of jessops vouchers coming via the tesco rewards offer so was planning to get on with those. However I could use them to get a monopod and head for the sigma 150-500 and get the canon 50mm 1.4 from panamoz instead. The 50mm is not going to be a frequently used lens but I don't want the quality to be inferior otherwise I would use it even less.
 
The build quality is very cheap however I believe the optics are rather good, mines has a chip in it's element however its still pretty dang sharp :P
 
it a very cheap lens but if you get a goon one it awsome
,ine lasted about a year them try to focus it it sounds like it full of sand
but still a awsome lens for the price
 
Bang for buck is probably the best lens Canon make. Sure, it feels like a toy, but the pictures you can get with it are stunning!
 
Personally the angular rendering of bokeh highlights would put me off but I agree that for the price it seems like a good deal.

I went for the Sigma 50mm f1.4. It is more expensive but the shape of the out of focus highlights is so much better IMVHO.
 
Optically the 50 f1.8 is far better than the 28-135, if you think the 28-135 is sharp you will be amazed by the 50.
 
Dave1 said:
Optically the 50 f1.8 is far better than the 28-135, if you think the 28-135 is sharp you will be amazed by the 50.
Click to expand...



:thumbs: +1 cracking lens, sure the build quality is a bit naff but the IQ and results you get will soon tell you this is the best £80 you've ever spent on you photography.

Its also great to go out with just the 50mm on and shoot old school for the day, it makes you think about your shots and takes you into new territory with your photography.
 
If you could quantify sharpness and express it as a ratio against cost I struggle to think of another lens that would compete.
 
Sharpness is but one measure of a lens. Yes the 50mm F1.8 is good value, but mine suffers badly with chromatic aberration and as a PP has said, the bokeh is not greatly appealing. I find it back focusses at distance too. It may be mine is a duff example (I picked it up second hand for peanuts) as others love them.
 
What's the 1.4 version like by comparison and especially the bokeh as most times I will use it will be to get the shallow dof.
 
gblades said:
What's the 1.4 version like by comparison and especially the bokeh as most times I will use it will be to get the shallow dof.
Click to expand...

Like chalk and cheese, think mercedes and yugo.
 
Thanks. The price for the 1.4 from panamoz is £255 which is still pretty good value and if it is much better quality then the better option.
 
gblades said:
Thanks. The price for the 1.4 from panamoz is £255 which is still pretty good value and if it is much better quality then the better option.
Click to expand...

£245 @ panamoz
 
The 50mm 1.4 is £265 from Ian (Kerso) on his web, but I believe we get a slight discount via TP.

HDEW have it listed for £250.

I am looking for the 1.8 (I think) for my daughter as for the money, it's a cracker of a lens. I have thought about the 1.4, but it's over 3 times the price and I'm not sure she / we'd use it that much.
 
I went for the Sigma but at the time I did think that there couldn't be much between it and the Canon f1.4 but a poster here posted some results of focus testing with some software he was at the time developing and the focus performance Canon lens was... less than confidence inspiring.

Even if the actual image quality, sharpness and bokeh of the Sigma and Canon f1.4's are within spitting distance of each other or down to personal preference I think there's at least the suspicion that the Sigma is a much better performer by design when it comes to focus accuracy and although smaller apertures may mask poor focusing it'll matter when you start using the very widest of apertures.

Just food for thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top