Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 10 May 2015 (Sunday) 23:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

The New EF 50mm f/1.8 STM is here!

 
msowsun
"approx 8mm"
Avatar
9,269 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 374
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
     
Jun 04, 2015 18:18 |  #556

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17584429 (external link)
And, if I may ask, why do you have both the 18-55 and 18-135? I've been wondering a while.

The 18-55 STM came as the kit lens on my SL1. I keep thinking I might use it one day when I don't feel like carrying the extra weight of the 18-135 STM. I can't see myself getting rid of it because it is not worth much but it is still a very nice lens. So it sits on the shelf most of the time. (along with a bunch of other rarely used lenses)


Mike Sowsun / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 100-400 II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Immaculens
THREAD ­ STARTER
creeped by the TF....
Avatar
13,242 posts
Gallery: 82 photos
Likes: 3312
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Southern Canada
Post edited over 5 years ago by Immaculens.
     
Jun 04, 2015 19:58 |  #557

I have the 18-55 IS STM and have invested some filters in it now. I don't do landscape much so the 18-24mm of the 18-55 STM is just fine for me - the IQ is actually surprising for the price.
That said - I've also looked at the 18-135 STM and the IQ is impressive!

But... like I said, I have invested in a few filters for the 18-55 STM.

Back to the 50 STM.

I'm experiencing somewhat of an enigma.

I was shooting at f/1.8 and f/2 and f/2.2 and f/2.5 and f/2.8 and of all my 600-800 images taken - I have quite frankly as of yet to see a shot I'm quite pleased with... with "my" copy.

I've most recently been shooting purple Iris flowers at f/4 and f/4.5 and f/5.6 but dang if I can't nail the "yellow tongue" of an Iris as Sharp! (Iris shooters will know what I mean...)

I'm tempted to blame my copy but am as yet blaming myself....

But, previous shots with the 24-105L IS and even the 18-55 IS STM have yielded really good results so I have to ask what the f#%K is so difficult in taking quality flower shots with this lens versus others!??!


again, I qualify this who thing with "what's wrong with my copy?!"

All that said - please please someone post some shots of flowers that are better (sharper) than this...
(and the below image is Lightroom'd)


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Will immaculens.com (external link)

7Dmk II gripped | 5Dc | 150-600 (Σ) OS C | 55-250 IS STM | 100L f/2.8 IS Macro | 15-85 IS | 50 f/1.8 STM | 30 Σ f/1.4 'A'
Learn to love to do well, and you shall. ~ C. Poseidon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,344 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 3055
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jun 04, 2015 20:09 as a reply to  @ Immaculens's post |  #558

have you tried stopping down the lens some more even? i mean at near the MFD you're looking at like 3/8's of an inch of DOF at f5


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Immaculens
THREAD ­ STARTER
creeped by the TF....
Avatar
13,242 posts
Gallery: 82 photos
Likes: 3312
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Southern Canada
Post edited over 5 years ago by Immaculens.
     
Jun 04, 2015 20:30 |  #559

DreDaze wrote in post #17584580 (external link)
have you tried stopping down the lens some more even? i mean at near the MFD you're looking at like 3/8's of an inch of DOF at f5

That has crossed my mind and will try it but yeash... I figured f/5.6 would get me the sharpness of the Iris Tongue I need...


Will immaculens.com (external link)

7Dmk II gripped | 5Dc | 150-600 (Σ) OS C | 55-250 IS STM | 100L f/2.8 IS Macro | 15-85 IS | 50 f/1.8 STM | 30 Σ f/1.4 'A'
Learn to love to do well, and you shall. ~ C. Poseidon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
05Xrunner
Goldmember, Flipflopper.
Avatar
5,750 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 502
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Pittsburgh PA
     
Jun 04, 2015 20:34 |  #560

that looks fine to me with the thin DOF and any swaying of your body will move the focus. If copy I had acted like that with all the shots I woulda loved to keep it. if you have any issues like mine you will get one shot focused and then next shot will be a total miss. As not even close just really blurry.


My gear
Fuji X-T2, Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 OIS, Fuji 35 f2, Fuji 50 f2, Fuji 90 f2, Fuji 55-200 3.5-4.8 OIS
Sony RX100 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
repete7
Member
Avatar
205 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Nov 2010
     
Jun 04, 2015 21:20 |  #561


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

My iris flowers are done, so I can't help you there. I think focusing on iris is difficult because there's no real "center" to the flower. Here's a photo of my geranium, wide open, 1/200 sec. I was focusing on the center of the flower on the right, but this is slightly back-focused. Not on a tripod and I was probably swaying so, not complaining.

Karen Flickr (external link)
Canon 6D2|Canon Eos-m|Canon ef-m 22|Samyang 14mm f/2.8|Canon 40 stm|Canon 50 f/1.8 stm|Canon FD 50mm macro|Canon Macro 100L|Canon 16-35 f/4L IS USM |Canon 24-105L IS USM II|Canon 70-300 IS II USM|Canon 100-400L|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
repete7
Member
Avatar
205 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Nov 2010
Post edited over 5 years ago by repete7.
     
Jun 04, 2015 21:27 |  #562

05Xrunner wrote in post #17584607 (external link)
that looks fine to me with the thin DOF and any swaying of your body will move the focus. If copy I had acted like that with all the shots I woulda loved to keep it. if you have any issues like mine you will get one shot focused and then next shot will be a total miss. As not even close just really blurry.

I've been reading your posts and I can't help but think you got a bad copy. Mine's not perfect, it's been a little off here and there, and I haven't put it on a tripod yet, but it hasn't been wildly inconsistent like yours. I guess that's the chance we take when we buy a newly released lens. Sorry yours didn't work for you.


Karen Flickr (external link)
Canon 6D2|Canon Eos-m|Canon ef-m 22|Samyang 14mm f/2.8|Canon 40 stm|Canon 50 f/1.8 stm|Canon FD 50mm macro|Canon Macro 100L|Canon 16-35 f/4L IS USM |Canon 24-105L IS USM II|Canon 70-300 IS II USM|Canon 100-400L|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
05Xrunner
Goldmember, Flipflopper.
Avatar
5,750 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 502
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Pittsburgh PA
     
Jun 04, 2015 21:39 |  #563

I might buy another down the road.


My gear
Fuji X-T2, Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 OIS, Fuji 35 f2, Fuji 50 f2, Fuji 90 f2, Fuji 55-200 3.5-4.8 OIS
Sony RX100 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vorlon1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,240 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 768
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Miami, Fl.
     
Jun 04, 2015 22:32 |  #564

Immaculens wrote in post #17584603 (external link)
That has crossed my mind and will try it but yeash... I figured f/5.6 would get me the sharpness of the Iris Tongue I need...

If you haven't tried MFA, that might help. I have mine at +5 and am pleased with the sharpness. When I first got it it seemed just a very little soft without adjustment. Mine at least seemed quite sensitive to adjustments, and I'm happy with it now. Perhaps something similar would happen if you adjust yours. Good luck.


"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." -- Anais Nin
5Dc Gripped, 6D Gripped, Nikon D300, Olympus OMD-EM1, Fuji XT-20, Pentax 50 1.4, 40mm f/2.8 Pancake, 24-105 mm L, 85mm 1.8, 18-200mm 3.5-5.6, Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8, Tamron 60mm f/2 Macro, 70-200mm f/4 L, etc.
Smugmug: http://paladinphotos.s​mugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Immaculens
THREAD ­ STARTER
creeped by the TF....
Avatar
13,242 posts
Gallery: 82 photos
Likes: 3312
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Southern Canada
     
Jun 04, 2015 22:35 |  #565

Yeah, each of you write like you have a good understanding of the challenge of my subject ~ Cheers ~

DreDaze wrote in post #17584580 (external link)
have you tried stopping down the lens some more even? i mean at near the MFD you're looking at like 3/8's of an inch of DOF at f5

05Xrunner wrote in post #17584607 (external link)
that looks fine to me with the thin DOF and any swaying of your body will move the focus. If copy I had acted like that with all the shots I woulda loved to keep it. if you have any issues like mine you will get one shot focused and then next shot will be a total miss. As not even close just really blurry.

repete7 wrote in post #17584640 (external link)
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by repete7 in
./showthread.php?p=175​84640&i=i176606186
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

My iris flowers are done, so I can't help you there. I think focusing on iris is difficult because there's no real "center" to the flower. Here's a photo of my geranium, wide open, 1/200 sec. I was focusing on the center of the flower on the right, but this is slightly back-focused. Not on a tripod and I was probably swaying so, not complaining.


Will immaculens.com (external link)

7Dmk II gripped | 5Dc | 150-600 (Σ) OS C | 55-250 IS STM | 100L f/2.8 IS Macro | 15-85 IS | 50 f/1.8 STM | 30 Σ f/1.4 'A'
Learn to love to do well, and you shall. ~ C. Poseidon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Immaculens
THREAD ­ STARTER
creeped by the TF....
Avatar
13,242 posts
Gallery: 82 photos
Likes: 3312
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Southern Canada
     
Jun 04, 2015 22:42 |  #566

vorlon1 wrote in post #17584722 (external link)
If you haven't tried MFA, that might help. I have mine at +5 and am pleased with the sharpness. When I first got it it seemed just a very little soft without adjustment. Mine at least seemed quite sensitive to adjustments, and I'm happy with it now. Perhaps something similar would happen if you adjust yours. Good luck.

Thanks, yes I tested mine with a chart and it was bang on....
After shooting so many with nothing up to my standard - I did some in-camera adjustmensts, and I was led back to -0-
So I will continue to shoot my Iris subjects with a wider DOF and patience, hopefully I will capture detail in the Iris fuzzy tongue yet ;-)a


Will immaculens.com (external link)

7Dmk II gripped | 5Dc | 150-600 (Σ) OS C | 55-250 IS STM | 100L f/2.8 IS Macro | 15-85 IS | 50 f/1.8 STM | 30 Σ f/1.4 'A'
Learn to love to do well, and you shall. ~ C. Poseidon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
msowsun
"approx 8mm"
Avatar
9,269 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 374
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
     
Jun 04, 2015 22:59 |  #567

vorlon1 wrote in post #17584722 (external link)
If you haven't tried MFA, that might help. I have mine at +5 and am pleased with the sharpness. When I first got it it seemed just a very little soft without adjustment. Mine at least seemed quite sensitive to adjustments, and I'm happy with it now. Perhaps something similar would happen if you adjust yours. Good luck.

For the benefit of some "Newbies" who might be reading this, I wanted to point out that Micro Focus Adjustment doesn't make your lens sharper. It just makes the focus point more accurate. It moves the focus point ever so slightly which can be critical when shooting at large aperture lenses like f/1.4, f/1.8 etc.

Some people might think it magically makes lenses sharper. If the photo looks sharper after MFA it just mean your focus was off slightly.

If you shoot at f/5.6 or f/8 MFA probably would make no difference and the photo won't seem any "sharper" no matter what you set MFA to.


Mike Sowsun / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 100-400 II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vorlon1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,240 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 768
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Miami, Fl.
     
Jun 05, 2015 03:11 |  #568

msowsun wrote in post #17584741 (external link)
For the benefit of some "Newbies" who might be reading this, I wanted to point out that Micro Focus Adjustment doesn't make your lens sharper. It just makes the focus point more accurate. It moves the focus point ever so slightly which can be critical when shooting at large aperture lenses like f/1.4, f/1.8 etc.

Some people might think it magically makes lenses sharper. If the photo looks sharper after MFA it just mean your focus was off slightly.

If you shoot at f/5.6 or f/8 MFA probably would make no difference and the photo won't seem any "sharper" no matter what you set MFA to.

That's a good clarification. I wasn't meaning to suggest that the lens was magically sharper, just that the focus was more accurate and therefore the images were sharper, i.e. in focus and therefore sharper than when focus was slightly off.


"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." -- Anais Nin
5Dc Gripped, 6D Gripped, Nikon D300, Olympus OMD-EM1, Fuji XT-20, Pentax 50 1.4, 40mm f/2.8 Pancake, 24-105 mm L, 85mm 1.8, 18-200mm 3.5-5.6, Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8, Tamron 60mm f/2 Macro, 70-200mm f/4 L, etc.
Smugmug: http://paladinphotos.s​mugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mwsilver
Goldmember
3,962 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 513
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Central New Jersey
Post edited over 5 years ago by mwsilver. (3 edits in all)
     
Jun 05, 2015 10:42 |  #569

05Xrunner wrote in post #17580224 (external link)
just double checked to make sure its maybe not the body. tried same thing with my 85 1.8, 24-105, and 70-200 and taking multiple shots with them every shot was dead on focus. the 50 is the only one that is all over the place with accuracy. So it seems like it has the same inconsistent AF as the old MKII

Just got mine yesterday and mine is inconsistent as well, especially wide open, on three different bodies.i was shooting one shot in manual mode. Indoors in moderate low light it misses AF 30-40% of the time. Often it's just missing slightly, but it's still missing. Even stopped down it misses far mre than it should. It seemed to pass the battery test with 5 double A batterie, so I don't think it's front or back focusing and it passed the centering tests. I took shots of the same subjects with my only other STM lens, the 10-18, and when zoomed in it nails focus almost 100% of the time. So far very disappointed with my copy of the new 50.


Mark
Canon 7D2, 60D, T3i, T2i, Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, 30 f/1.4. Canon EF 70-200 L f/4 IS, EF 35 f/2 IS, EFs 10-18 STM, EFs 15-85, EFs 18-200, EF 50 f/1.8 STM, Tamron 18-270 PZD, B+W MRC CPL, Canon 320EX, Vanguard Alta Pro 254CT & SBH 250 head. RODE Stereo Videomic Pro, DXO PhotoLab Elite, ON1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mwsilver
Goldmember
3,962 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 513
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Central New Jersey
     
Jun 05, 2015 10:56 |  #570

05Xrunner wrote in post #17581072 (external link)
well maybe you can tell my lens that. it acts much better closer. and its junk further away.
if it cant keep proper focus on a target that is flat on a wall not moving with easy high contrast to focus on then its not reliable in anyway.

Agree, I'm frustrated as well. I may send mine back to B&H and try one more copy before I give up.


Mark
Canon 7D2, 60D, T3i, T2i, Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, 30 f/1.4. Canon EF 70-200 L f/4 IS, EF 35 f/2 IS, EFs 10-18 STM, EFs 15-85, EFs 18-200, EF 50 f/1.8 STM, Tamron 18-270 PZD, B+W MRC CPL, Canon 320EX, Vanguard Alta Pro 254CT & SBH 250 head. RODE Stereo Videomic Pro, DXO PhotoLab Elite, ON1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

131,498 views & 60 likes for this thread
The New EF 50mm f/1.8 STM is here!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is genobinia
831 guests, 300 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.