Is the 50mm 1.8 really better than the 18-55 ???

[yb98]

I have made some tests and don't see real difference in sharpness...
here are 2 100% crop pics which have been taken with the 18-55 (at 48mm) and the 50 mm 1.8. Both were taken at 1/80 s, f8.0, ISO 200.
I don't see a real difference in sharpness, do you ?
http://bellik.free.fr/5481.jpg
http://bellik.free.fr/5482.jpg

Yacine.

[cgratti]

I have both lenses, and I definately see a difference in sharpness from my camera. I use the 50mm 1.8 whenever I can.


JMO

--chuck

[CyberDyneSystems]

Yes it is.


As for the demo images.. I can't really find an area of sharp focus on either of them.. this is perhaps a matter of having been reduced in size so dramatically?

[Orogeny]

Yes.

Tim

[yb98]

Yes it is.


As for the demo images.. I can't really find an area of sharp focus on either of them.. this is perhaps a matter of having been reduced in size so dramatically?

These are 100% crop, there is no size reduction...

May be the difference is more visible at others f-stops ??

[gcogger]

From what I've read elsewhere, the 18-55 is variable in quality - maybe you've got a good one :-) Also, doing the test at f/8 will show the least difference, since even cheap lenses are pretty good at that aperture.
FWIW I've the same lenses and also see little difference at f/8. I'll have to do some tests at other apertures...

[drisley]

Actually I've seen tests that show the 18-55mm is just as sharp as the 17-40L when they are both stopped down to F8, atleast at the center.

Set both the 18-55mm and the 50mm II to F5.6 (the largest aperture on the kit lens at 50mm), and then do a comparison, especially at the edges.
I suspect you will see a diff.

I might go try it right now.

[maderito]

Bob Atkins performed an excellent review of the EF-S 18-55 vs. selected other Canon primes and zooms in the same range. At 50mm, he compared the 18-55 to the 50/1.8 prime and 28-105 zoom.

His review is here (http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/review/). His findings are consistent with most observations I've read about low-priced, consumer zoom lenses. They perform well when stopped down, especially in the center of the image. At wide open apertures, they are noticeably inferior to primes and L lenses.

[drisley]

...Ok, I tried them both at F5.6 and here were my results.
Both are 100% crops.

EFS 18-55mm @50mm F5.6
http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/rebel/18-55mm.jpg

EF 50mm F1.8 II @50mm F5.6
http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/rebel/50mm.jpg

EDIT:
These pictures are better. Both crops are at the center of the frame (the focus point).

[maderito]

Drisley,
Your results remind me of my initial experience with the 10D when I used my old Canon consumer zoom lenses. I thought the shots were soft, out of focus, or both. Then I purchased a 50mm prime and saw the difference. With my current set of lenses, at least I know who to blame when the image comes up blurry on my computer monitor. :)

[drisley]

I just changed the pictures from the towels to this radiator.
Initially I thought the 18-55mm image had focused on the wrong part of the image, but now after looking at these images, I can see exactly where it focused, and wow, there is still an amazing difference. :o

[blackviolet]

the 50mm 1.8 may not be as sharp as the 1.4, but for the price, it's a great little fast lens. it's great for portraits. i'm with CDS - i don't think either of them is *that* sharp. looking at drisley's examples, however, i think that it's a good example of the prime's quality.

[yb98]

Well, I did some other tests, now at 5.6 and I confirm what drisley said. At 5.6 there is a real difference.
Drisley, I see in your signature that you have a 70-200 F4L. As I'm interested by this lens, can you please make the same shot of your radiator with your 70-200 and post it ? Thanks in advance.
http://bellik.free.fr/1855at5.6.jpg
http://bellik.free.fr/50at5.6.jpg

[drisley]

The radiator is in a small room, so I can't get back far enough to allow the 70-200F4L to focus. I may try another comparison for you tomorrow.

However, EVERYBODY that has the 70-200F4L will tell you it is an awesome lens... perhaps the sharpest zoom lens you can buy!
Some say it might even by a tad sharper than the 70-200mmF2.8L .

BTW, did you notice that in your last set of pictures that the contrast and colour of the 50mm II is much nicer than on the 18-55mm. The same can be said of my radiator example.

[ron chappel]

Hey,i too will be interested in the 18-55/50,1.8/70-200 comparo!
Yes the 18-55 has no chance but still keep it in as an example :wink:

[Guillermo Freige]

Those are my tests. I've also included a shot for a 28-135IS. All at 50mm f/5.6. The crop was choosen in the most difficult lighting area (high contrast) and in the middle bottom of the image.

18-55
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/18-55-51-f56.jpg

28-135
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/28-135-50-f56.jpg

50/1.8
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/50-f56.jpg

As you can see, the 50 is the best, folowed closely by the 28-135, and the 18-55 way behind. At f/8 the results are pretty similar.
To be fair, the tele end of the 18-55 is the worst part of it. At 28mm it is much close to the 28-135IS and it even outperform it in the borders in CA issues, despite being softer.

[Lamplight]

This is a very useful thread for me as I own the 18-55 and plan to get the 50mm 1.8 and most likely the 28-135 as well. :) I'd like to have the 50mm for some shots I plan to take Monday, but I don't think that's going to happen. :(

[ron chappel]

As with many tests i've seen on the net,the better zooms can at first look better than the 50/1.8 until one looks real close :)

[c0ntr0lz]

thanks for all the info guys