How to tell if a lens is in good shape and if its a good copy? 50mm & 85mm Content

I just purchased a 50mm 1.4 off of another forum member here (I should be getting it later this week) I also ordered an 85mm 1.8 and should be getting it tomorrow.

I've read some reviews that the 50mm 1.4 doesn't have a true USM motor and it is more prone to failing. Is this true? I bought it used so I don't really know the history of the lens but it looked clean and seller said it was in perfect working order and sharp. Is this a lens that is very reliabile if you take care of it? I take exceptional care of all my gear.

With respect to both lenses, how do I tell if the focus is on point? I've heard of some lenses needing micro adjustments but I have the 60D so I don't have the option to adjust them.

I've heard of front focusing or back focusing which please excuse my ignorance I'm not familiar with. I'm really looking forward to both of these lenses. Any guidance would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance for the help!

Go out and shoot pix. Do what you normally do, shoot what you bought them for. Forget lines of batteries and test charts, rulers.

Yes go out and take pictures. If you find them to be soft, then look for problems.

Ok great I appreciate the feedback. In general do I have anything to worry about buying the 50mm 1.4 used? Or should I be good for a long while with reliability/durability​?

giballi wrote in post #16731544
I just purchased a 50mm 1.4 off of another forum member here (I should be getting it later this week) I also ordered an 85mm 1.8 and should be getting it tomorrow.

I've read some reviews that the 50mm 1.4 doesn't have a true USM motor and it is more prone to failing. Is this true? I bought it used so I don't really know the history of the lens but it looked clean and seller said it was in perfect working order and sharp. Is this a lens that is very reliabile if you take care of it? I take exceptional care of all my gear.

With respect to both lenses, how do I tell if the focus is on point? I've heard of some lenses needing micro adjustments but I have the 60D so I don't have the option to adjust them.

I've heard of front focusing or back focusing which please excuse my ignorance I'm not familiar with. I'm really looking forward to both of these lenses. Any guidance would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance for the help!

The Canon 50mm f/1.4 is one of Canon's least reliable lenses, it has a failure rate around 15% per year, based on reliability data with pro usage, meaning out of 100 lenses 85 remain working after the first year, 72 after the second, 61 after the third etc. This is based on constant hard pro usage though, if you're more gentle it should last years easily, but it's 2-5 times less reliable than other lenses.

The Canon 50mm should not really be used for shots wide open, it's a lens that is designed to be sharp stopped down, it's bokeh is extremely busy and ugly wide open as a consequence of it's optimization for being stopped down and it isn't very sharp at f/1.4. It's an architectural and product lens. If you want something reliable to shoot wide open you should have gotten the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (which isn't as good stopped down but much better wide open and has much better bokeh) and Canon 85mm f/1.8, which is a great choice.

You can micro adjust your new lenses if you want, just print out a focus target and see if it focuses behind or infront.

Legion5 wrote in post #16731674
The Canon 50mm f/1.4 is one of Canon's least reliable lenses, it has a failure rate around 15% per year, based on reliability data with pro usage, meaning out of 100 lenses 85 remain working after the first year, 72 after the second, 61 after the third etc. This is based on constant hard pro usage though, if you're more gentle it should last years easily, but it's 2-5 times less reliable than other lenses.

The Canon 50mm should not really be used for shots wide open, it's a lens that is designed to be sharp stopped down, it's bokeh is extremely busy and ugly wide open as a consequence of it's optimization for being stopped down and it isn't very sharp at f/1.4. It's an architectural and product lens. If you want something reliable to shoot wide open you should have gotten the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (which isn't as good stopped down but much better wide open and has much better bokeh) and Canon 85mm f/1.8, which is a great choice.

You can micro adjust your new lenses if you want, just print out a focus target and see if it focuses behind or infront.

Wow I'm starting to regret buying the 50mm, I thought it would be much more reliable than the 50 1.8. Maybe I was wrong.

gasrocks wrote in post #16731606
Go out and shoot pix. Do what you normally do, shoot what you bought them for. Forget lines of batteries and test charts, rulers.

This.

Legion5 wrote in post #16731674
The Canon 50mm f/1.4 is one of Canon's least reliable lenses, it has a failure rate around 15% per year, based on reliability data with pro usage, meaning out of 100 lenses 85 remain working after the first year, 72 after the second, 61 after the third etc. This is based on constant hard pro usage though, if you're more gentle it should last years easily, but it's 2-5 times less reliable than other lenses.

The Canon 50mm should not really be used for shots wide open, it's a lens that is designed to be sharp stopped down, it's bokeh is extremely busy and ugly wide open as a consequence of it's optimization for being stopped down and it isn't very sharp at f/1.4. It's an architectural and product lens. If you want something reliable to shoot wide open you should have gotten the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (which isn't as good stopped down but much better wide open and has much better bokeh) and Canon 85mm f/1.8, which is a great choice.

You can micro adjust your new lenses if you want, just print out a focus target and see if it focuses behind or infront.

Bull. I've shot two copies of the 50/1.4, both worked perfectly and were plenty sharp wide open. People spend far too much time reading into this junk on the web and even more time pixel-peeping the heck out of their shots. My friend's 50/1.4 is at least 5 years old at this point, works perfectly and he doesn't exactly baby his gear.

I will say that the Sigma is overall better from what I've seen (haven't shot with it in person), but it's also a lot bigger and from what the internet tells us (again, I never take too much stock in that) has just as may if not more focus issues.

I have owned 2 Canon 50 1.4s. I did not like either, have Sigma 50 1.4 now and very happy.
I have loved my 85 1.8 longtime!
Easy to tell you have a good one. Just look at all the results!
For head / head shoulder portraits, I find at F2.8 you get great background blur with stunning eyeball sharpness.

Yep, had a 50mm 1.4 for 4 years now and it's still as sharp and reliable as it used to be...if youre a photog that has heavy duty usage and the lens gets bumped around a lot maybe thats why it can cause failures cause it's build is super cheap. But what "pro" buys this cheap build to rely on it? Thats what the 1.2L is for imo.

Ok great, thanks for the replies, I've made mistakes in the past buying things that aren't relibable and have it bite me. I try to avoid that on any purchase I make. I'm excited about both and hope they'll last a long time. I just don't want to be stuck with a motor failure as I hear they are very expensive.

I can't wait for them to come in and take pictures, I'm getting anxious.

giballi wrote in post #16732160
Ok great, thanks for the replies, I've made mistakes in the past buying things that aren't relibable and have it bite me. I try to avoid that on any purchase I make. I'm excited about both and hope they'll last a long time. I just don't want to be stuck with a motor failure as I hear they are very expensive.

I can't wait for them to come in and take pictures, I'm getting anxious.

Get the hood for the 50 f/1.4. The issue is that the motor can get messed up when there is enough force on the extended barrel, so falling off a chair and landing on the front side, putting it in your bag face down with the barrel extended, pushing on the front of the lens to focus instead of the focus ring, etc could all lead to early demise. It can be repaired at home but requires a little handwork and fine hands.

I dont remember if the 85 f/1.8 has an extending barrel. I did not have a hood for this one, I heard it is a little funky to work with.

In re: to MFA and going out and shooting, it is true, the more experienced you are with the thin DOF lenses, the faster you will pick up something is wrong with your focusing. But if you don't know what you are looking for, it may take a while before you are aware of it. Now I use magic lantern to help confirm and adjust. Worst case without MFA, you might have to send in the camera and offending lens to Canon for calibration.

giballi wrote in post #16731544
I've heard of front focusing or back focusing which please excuse my ignorance I'm not familiar with.

Front or back focussing means you point the lens at an object, use the autofocus, and when you inspect the images find it actually focussed in front of or behind (US English: in back of) the object. So that's how to tell whether it occurs.

Possible causes:

- actually you locked onto something else, and the lens is fine. In my experience, with some Canon bodies, the marked box is not where the focussing point really is. Fitting an -S screen makes this easier to detect.

- some lenses do move the focussing point when stopped down. If it happens, all copies of the lens will do it: it's the lens formula. The Canon AF system focusses with the lens wide open. However, I don't think either of your lenses is known for this.

- the lens was badly adjusted in the factory. To lower their costs, Canon included "autofocus microadjustment" in the firmware of some cameras. If you do not have such a camera and it is required, you can only return the lens as defective, or get it serviced.

So my 50 is sharp, even wide open it looks like

This is the 85mm at 2.8 which I'm thinking should be sharper. Does it need focus adjustment or is this because I used a $3 UV filter from Ebay? My brother took the shot, I thought the 85 was super sharp even wide open at 1.8

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

A $3 ebay filter will kill sharpness. This shot looks to have been manipulated in post, I dont know whats been done to it, but anything that pulls back the highlights can add to a sense of softness.

gonzogolf wrote in post #16753421
A $3 ebay filter will kill sharpness. This shot looks to have been manipulated in post, I dont know whats been done to it, but anything that pulls back the highlights can add to a sense of softness.

I guess its my ignorace that thought that a UV filter was a UV filter, I'll be trashing it and buying a better one.

Are they even necessary?

Actually, on second thought, I had a cheap one on my old nifty fifty and it was still sharp, did I get lucky with the UV filter?

I'll have to mess with the 85 again, its still within return policy so I can exchange it if necessary.