Why is the Nifty Fifty so cheap?

drumsfield wrote in post #15114004
...and add to that the fact the lens is made from .25 cents worth of plastic. They're making a killing selling it for $115.

You think the metal for other glass costs $400? heh maybe $5 more than plastic

If you drop it, it breaks. It's a pretty flimsy device. Great picture quality though.

and comes with a little robot inside turning the focus ring for you. $100 for that technology is a steal

It's cheaply priced because its cheaply made, but the optics are still very good
It's my stealth lens.

Christina.DazzleByDesi​gn wrote in post #15115016
and comes with a little robot inside turning the focus ring for you. $100 for that technology is a steal

It's cheaply priced because its cheaply made, but the optics are still very good
It's my stealth lens.

Christina.DazzleByDesi​gn wrote in post #15115016
my stealth lens.

BUZZZZZZZ.... BUZZZZZZ.. BUZZZZZ.. BUZZ ... BEEP, SNAP!

Yeah, real stealthy there. Just kidding of course.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #15113801
Still about $100 new street price.

I believe the next cheapest new prime from Canon is the 35mm f/2 , and that's $200 more.

And obviously the 50mm is a great bang for the buck. Is Canon willing to forego large profits on the 50mm to get people to buy it as a "gateway drug" into more expensive lenses down the line?

It's the easiest design of all to produce at solid quality and combine that with ultra cheap build quality and there you go.

For the record. the 50 was the lens that started all this camera crap for me, so I guess I owe it a debt of gratitude.

That being said, I tried to microfocus adjust my copy once and even under strong lighting it wouldnt focus accurately enough for me to ever determine if it was front or back focusing.

Out of 5 shots, 1 is backfocused, 2 is frontfocused, 3 and 4 are dead on, and 5 is backfocused.... grrr none of my other lenses have had a problem under the same test procedure.