Is the Canon 50mm f/1.8 worth it?

R

RedSpectrumPictures

Well-known member
Im thinking about purchasing the canon 50mm 1.8, its low priced, however the quality in some of the test videos I have seen is amazing. I have also heard its the best £65 or $100 you can ever spend on a lens.

What are peoples opinions, Im about 90% sure on purchasing it at the moment. :)
 
What camera are you mounting it on, and what do you want to shoot with it? Also, are you talking about the "Mark I" (metal lens mount) or "Mark II" (current production, plastic lens mount) version of the lens?

- Greg
 
I use the canon 600d/ t3i. I tend to film anything, I currently use the 18-135mm kit lens, which is amazing all round. I have a short film planned out, which will be an interior shoot, and also I might film a music video for my mates band soon, with strobe lights and everything
 
Oh yer I am looking at the mark II, plastic lens mount. Do you know what the difference between the two is, apart form the lens mount, is the mark II better for quality?
 
They are optically the same. The older version is mechanically sturdier and is considered the more desirable type, but the newer one has faster autofocus (although neither one is up to the performance of more expensive USM lenses). Among Canon stills shooters, the 50/1.8 is considered a terrific bargain and an almost "must-have" lens considering its excellent optical quality and low price. You can't go wrong to pick one up.

I asked what you were shooting with because although this is a great lens for native EF cameras, I wouldn't especially recommend it if you're using it with a M4/3 camera or any other that requires a lens mount adapter. The lack of a manual iris ring makes it harder to use without an electronic interface to the camera. You should be fine with your T3i, though.

- Greg
 
Thanks for the fast reply Greg. I would be using the lens for about 99% cinematography and I would probably use it for stills just to test it out. Thanks for making me feel better about getting the lens,
-Brad - Red Spectrum Pictures
 
For your camera, the 600D, its perfect. Bang for the buck really.
At the level of cinematography, it sounds your at...(kit). Your going to love this lens.
You've got great low light, a nice shallow depth of field, and its a prime*
If you want to do serious work, there are better... and 50mm with your crop is still a bit high, probably want to look into buying a 24/28 or 35mm... but they cost tons.
 
Moving this to the Canon DSLR Lens Discussion forum, where it will get much more appropriate traffic. You might also want to look around in Lens Discussion, where this lens has been discussed ad nauseum.

On a personal note, regarding the lens... I have one, and the optics are very nice. There are several drawbacks, however:

  • The focus ring is terribly thin and on the very front of the lens. If you plan to use a follow focus, good luck getting a lens gear on there.
  • The throw on the focus ring is very short (less than 45º, if I had to estimate). This means that manual focus control isn't as easy.
  • Construction on the lens is not very robust. If you handle the lens with protective care, it'll last you quite a while. It's easy to break, though. To me, this is the least worrisome of the drawbacks... the short throw and the focus ring design weigh more in evaluating this lens.

If you can put money into a better lens, do it. Don't buy this just because it's cheap. Yes, it has great glass. I still use mine once in a while... but I have another 50mm that I much prefer because of things like manual aperture ring, 180º throw on the focus ring, and metal construction. If it's all you can afford right now, you'll be happy with the image quality, but again if you can afford more look to a better lens.
 
Don't get the 50mm f/1.8. Easy as that.
The Mark I is a LOT more than the Mark II. The Mark I runs you 150$+ easily.

Get a m42-EF/Canon adapter and get yourself an SMC-Takumar or Super-Takumar 50mm f/1.4. MUCH better in every aspect. The only thing it lacks is autofocus, but that doesn't matter for video anyway. f/1.4 instead of f/1.8, great build quality, nice focus ring, smooth focus ring, scales and much better optics at a lower price.
Just get one on ebay (search for: 'm42 takumar 50mm') and buy an M42 to Canon adapter (should run you about 10-15$). And you're set.
 
I wasn't really impressed with the 1.8. Glass is an investment, so I got the Canon 1.4 instead. Much better build, works great with my follow focus.
 
I'd get the 50mm F1.4 instead of the 50mm F1.8 if I were you. Sure, it's a good deal more expensive but honestly in DSLR cinematography light is everything, and that makes fast lenses extremely valuable. When I first bought my DSLR I thought about saving money by going with the 50mm F1.8 but instead went with the 50mm F1.4 and haven't looked back. It's the best lens in my bag, and certainly the fastest. It's a wise and prudent investment.
 
RedSpectrumPictures said:
Im thinking about purchasing the canon 50mm 1.8, its low priced, however the quality in some of the test videos I have seen is amazing. I have also heard its the best £65 or $100 you can ever spend on a lens.

What are peoples opinions, Im about 90% sure on purchasing it at the moment. :)
Click to expand...

It's worth it if you need a sharp 50mm lens with auto focus and only and have a hundred bucks. I shot a 5D job with a Zeiss 85 Planar, a Canon 24mm 2.8 and the Canon 50mm 1.8. They all worked well together and I posted frame grabs to compare here , that was a year ago, but somewhere on this site if you're interested.
All comes down to your budget and also if you plan to stick with Canon. If so you are probably better off with the 50mm 1.4. only a few hundred more. I bought the 55-250 over the 70-200 f4 because of budget. Although the 55-250 is a good lens for the price and quite sharp, I'm still kicking myself for not getting the L lens and I had the cash in my hand. I will upgrade the first chance I get.
Light isn't always a bad thing. The 50 1.8 is so light you can take it backpacking without breaking your back. I probably will sell it with the 55-250 thought, I only used it one day and it's still in the box.
 
Last edited:
the 1.8 is a very, very sharp lens, not any worse in that respect than the 1.4 or even the 1.2 - but the bokeh is horrible (not that the 1.4 is stellar, either, but it is a lot better; the one with the super nice bokeh is the -very expensive- 1.2L) - check my sharpness and bokeh tests here: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html - http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html - if you don't know how to interpret those bokeh tests, go here: http://www.similaar.com/foto/tuten/330.html - - - also, on a side note: besides vintage glass, the best bang for buck right now are samyang primes; they don't have a 50mm out yet, but if you want a fast portrait lens and can live with an 85mm on APS-C (some people love that 135mm equivalent focal length, some people complain it is too long, specially shoting indoors), the samyang 85mm f/1.4 is absolutely amazing (comparable to the canon 85mm 1.2L or the zeiss 85mm 1.8) and at $240 is a steal: http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html#samyang - focal length for portrait tests here: http://stepheneastwood.com/tutorials/Tutorials_Lens_Perspective.htm
 
Not that I have buckets of cash to throw around, but the 50mm 1.8 is definitely worth picking up if you can't get something like the 1.4 for a few months. Its a small price to pay for some great images and video you'd be missing out on if you just wait around and save up for a 1.4 or 1.2L.
 
Thanks for all the great replies everyone. I have had a look at the 1.4, even though the current lens I use, the 18-135mm was what I would call an expensive lens, the 1.4 is too much money. Im hoping to get the 1.8 for my Christmas present, and looking at reviews and tests on youtube, and with the help from everyone on the forums, I think I will purchasing it.
- Red Spectrum Pictures
- Brad
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top