Canon 50mm /1.8

The jury is out, 50mm /1.8 seem the best buy of the lot.
Not that it is a Swiss knife, but it is a must lens in every bag.
Does this seem right to you? Should all 10D owners own this lens.

I would say that ONE of the 50mms is a must. Which one depends on your budget and low light needs. I prefer the 1.4 myself but the 1.8 can't be beat for "bang for the buck".

I don't have one of these yet, but I will get one. Someone pointed out the utility of having it on hand for low light shots where a flash wasn't practical or desirable. The lowest stop I currently have is in this focal range is f/3.5, so for the price it makes sense. That's what sold me.

I agree with DaveH

You should own one of these lenses.

I think which one depends on how often you think it will come in handy for you.

The f/1.8 you just don't need to consider,. you just get it for the price off a UV filter for an 86mm lens you can have the 50 f/1.8

Although I prefer the 50/1.4 myself, the 50/1.8 is, for the price, a no brainer. If you get nothing else you should get at least one of the two 50mm lenses and I always recommend the 50/1.8 because of the cost versus quality for people wanting to spend a minimum amount of money on lenses.

I am of the opinion that they should have sold the 10D with the 50/1.8 as a kit, although I am occasionally really glad I have that little extra bit of the 50/1.4, although not very often. Usually I find f2.0 is as open as I need to go for most situations and anything below that and the depth of field is so small it starts getting in the way.

Just my opinion,

Is the price difference between 50mm 1/8 and 50 /14 really justified?

Yes.



Faster, metal mount, USM, full-time manual, slightly higher test scores (it's hard to make a lens both faster and better.) For me it's a no-brainer but that's why Canon has three 50mm lenses. There's no "always right" answer.

Thanks to advice I saw on this forum (well, either this one or Rob Galbraith's), I bought a 50mm/1.8 and I love this little beauty. I got it for 80 quid from Jessops and it's my favourite portrait lens. I love the subject isolation you can get from opening it up and I also love the bokeh. It seems to give lovely skin tones too.

Well worth the money!

Is there any optical difference between the MkI & MkII 50mm f1.8 lenses ?

I've had my 50mm f1.8 mkII for over 10 years, it's durable, lightweight and very useful. I use it as a body cap when I put my camera in it's bag so that I'll always have a lens on it if I have to grab that fleeting shot. I use it a fair about for portrait work. I think the bokeh on the 1.4 is better but not 300 dollars better.
Buy one, you won't be sorry.

By all reports, no.

To the original poster: Note that there are four alternatives to consider. The 1.8 is the cheapest, and within the impulse-purchase horizon of anyone who can afford a 10D. That's why everyone suggests it. There's just no reason not to have it--unless you have a better 50.

The others include the 1.2L (fabulously expensive), the 1.4, and the 2.5 macro. The 1.4 you've heard about. I opted for the 2.5 macro, because it provides all the optical quality of the 1.4, a flat field for copy work, and 1:2 close focusing. The macro range is optimized by use of a floating element, and it is critically sharp. And it's a bit cheaper than the 1.4. The only thing it lacks are the extra two stops. If you don't need the speed, then it is an option.

Rick "who may leave behind some lenses on a trip, but who carries the 50 everwhere" Denney

Just a short comment on Rdenneys last post.

Almost correct, but its not 50mm F1.2, it's 50mm F1.0 and more money that you can shake a stick at. It is also now discontinued which makes it a little less painful. I think you had in mind the 85mm F1.2 which by all acounts is a very nice piece of work too.

Best Regards

BearSummer

Dependig on what you use the lenses for, I can recommend all the primes
28/2.8;35/2;50/1.8 Mk1
for the 10D. You can get them used for 100-200€, which is a bargain price for each of them if you want high optical performance without paying the price and carrying the weight of the 24-70L Zoom.

I have seen reference to both f/1.0 and f/1.2L's. I don't know which is current--it has always been completely out of my range, considering that the slower 50's work just as well optically.

Rick "who wonders why people play zillions for a stop or less" Denney

Hi Rdenney,

You had me worried there for a minute :> I thought canon might have snuck a new lens out. Checked the online lens lists and currently the only ones listed are 1.4/1.8/2.5 macro. The F1 is no longer listed on the american site (see previous post). So did a little more research and it turns out there are 50mm f1.2 in both L and non L varieties, only problem is they are FD mount so wont work with the newer EF mount.

Hope that clears up that mystery

Best regards

BearSummer