50mm 1.8 not all it's cracked up to be?

I've owned the 18-55 IS and the 50 1.8 II. The 50 1.8 should beat up on the 18-55 IS badly. I've also dropped mine in a river and cracked the front element, and it's still razor sharp.

You may need to MFA the prime.

I continue to use mine, and am always thrilled with the results. Very sharp and fast.

Your first image is in nice light. The second image looks like harsh light, and there's all kinds of trash laying around. Is that a garbage dump in the photo? The second photo also looks out of focus. Try another copy if it happens consistently.

If I know that I'm going to take a close up picture of a pointing dog, I remove my walk around zoom and put on the 1.8. Works for me, it's sharp enuf for my taste, color is good and it's easy for me to focus. Winner, winner, chicken dinner!!

Somebody complained about 50mm being "wrong" FL for crop - but it is in fact a classical portrait FL (80mm FF equivalent). I really enjoyed my copy (Mk I) when I had it; took it for an overseas trip as a travel portrait lens, and brought back a bunch of superb family and friends portraits. With reasonably bright light, AF was always spot on (much better than with my current Sigma 17-50 OS). As long as you stop down a bit (to 2.2-2.5) the lens is capable of producing sharp and contrasty photos. At f5.6 it is super sharp; great for studio work.

as others have said, back to teh drawing board OP and like many pro togs say.

just keep shooting. not keeping buying

It's always struck me as strange when people complain about this lens. Sometimes I think it's been a victim of its own hype -- just because it doesn't perform to the level of the 50 1.2 doesn't mean it's not still an incredible bargain at $100.

Sorry. I feel like a lot of posters thought that I was complaining. That wasn't my intention at all. I was just asking for some tips as to what I could do better. I went out shooting this evening and was really impressed with how some of the shots turned out.

I guess my problem is that the majority of the photos I've taken have been in decently low light, and I wasn't super impressed, but I'm sure that was my own fault. I feel like I worry more about aperture than I do shutter speed, and that could be a big issue. Also, for some reason, my camera was set to just one AF point rather than all 19, and that seems to have made a big difference once that was switched back on.

Here are some sample images from this evening:

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

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

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

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

brycematheson wrote in post #16763755
Also, for some reason, my camera was set to just one AF point rather than all 19, and that seems to have made a big difference once that was switched back on

using all AF points isn't really the best idea...you're smarter than the camera, and you know what you want to be in focus...so pick your focus point that's closest to the subject...doing focus recompose can work sometimes, but i wouldn't recommend it when there is shallow DOF, as it can throw the focus off sometimes

DreDaze wrote in post #16763798
using all AF points isn't really the best idea...you're smarter than the camera, and you know what you want to be in focus...so pick your focus point that's closest to the subject...doing focus recompose can work sometimes, but i wouldn't recommend it when there is shallow DOF, as it can throw the focus off sometimes

So for every shot, do you manually select the focus point(s)?

brycematheson wrote in post #16763816
So for every shot, do you manually select the focus point(s)?

yes

brycematheson wrote in post #16763816
So for every shot, do you manually select the focus point(s)?

Yes, of course.

By the way, that last image you posted, the one of the gasoline pump, is wonderful. I love the color palette!

Tom Reichner wrote in post #16763847
Yes, of course.

By the way, that last image you posted, the one of the gasoline pump, is wonderful. I love the color palette!

Thanks! I'm flattered! I'd really like to get more into photography. I'm slowly learning, little by little!

It seems pretty tedious to manually set each focus point for every shot. I didn't know that's the way you were supposed to do it! Good to know!

brycematheson wrote in post #16763854
Thanks! I'm flattered! I'd really like to get more into photography. I'm slowly learning, little by little!

It seems pretty tedious to manually set each focus point for every shot. I didn't know that's the way you were supposed to do it! Good to know!

well a lot of times you can just use the center point, and do focus recompose...

but for instance on your bolt shot, where you are at a shallow DOF, if you were to focus recompose there, then there is a chance that the focus would end up lying behind the bolt

also a lot of times you can just leave it at that certain point...my camera spends many time with it set at one of the slightly off-set points...for your first three photos you probably could've used the same focus point for all of them

The 50F1.8 was never more than a decent lens, hyped up due to the fact that it's cheap and that the competion in the 50mm segment is quite slack. You are finding out what many of us knew all along.

brycematheson wrote in post #16763854
It seems pretty tedious to manually set each focus point for every shot. I didn't know that's the way you were supposed to do it! Good to know!

It takes less than two seconds. Literally. Not really very tedious at all.

I am sure I am repeating others here, but here's my take on this. I have been using the 18-55 IS kit lens and the 50 1.8 on my T1i for about three years now. I find the nifty-fifty has the following advantages:
1. Shallow DOF.
2. Excellent low-light ability because of the 1.8 aperture. AF can be a pain in low light.
3. Hardly any distortion (especially on a cropped sensor). If I am shooting architecture and cars, then this is very important.
4. Bokeh is acceptable, though not great.
5. At $120, it does the job well, better than any other lens in its price range.

Obviously I am not comparing this lens to any other lens which costs three times (or many more times) as much. But at the price it is available, it is a great lens. Which is why the adulation. Adulation tends to become hype very easily on internet forums.