EF 50mm 1.8 MkII

Hey everyone! Possibly a dumb question,and possible Im not seeing the picture correctly.

Am looking for a nifty fifty,but noticed there seems to be two MkII's. Or Im not seeing the color. I noticed on one lens there is a yellow macro flower,and on the other its white (or light grey). Im looking on ebay,and all of the posts seem to have color pics. Are they actually the same and maybe I should put my glasses on?

mine
EF 50mm 1.8 MkII with a white macro flower
like this one
http://www.kenrockwell​.com …0mm-f18/D3S_1542-1200.jpg

but why this one in yellow lol
http://3.static.img-dpreview.com …ages/frontpage.​jpg?v=3009

maybe the first version EF 50mm 1.8 MkI with metal amount ?

I believe one is made in Japan (yellow), the other in Malaysia (white) or something along those lines.

Sirrith wrote in post #17274064
I believe one is made in Japan (yellow), the other in Malaysia (white) or something along those lines.

I think you're right. Likely not a difference between the two,but I think I will look for the Japan made unit.

ItsJustEd wrote in post #17274132
I think you're right. Likely not a difference between the two,but I think I will look for the Japan made unit.

Earlier production versions of the EF 50mm 1.8 II were made in Japan with a yellow macro flower and "Made in Japan" on the front of the lens. Newer versions just say "Canon Inc." I suspect that Canon just quietly changed production from Japan to Malaysia and also the color of the flower at the same time and any new lens will be made in Malaysia.

I seriously doubt you can tell which version you will get just by looking at the photo. Photos on ebay are notoriously inaccurate. Sellers often use someone else's photos because they are to lazy to take your own.

If you are planning to buy used, you might be able to get one made in Japan but there should be no difference in quality. You are better off getting a used Mk I version with the metal mount.

msowsun wrote in post #17274970
Earlier production versions of the EF 50mm 1.8 II were made in Japan with a yellow macro flower and "Made in Japan" on the front of the lens. Newer versions just say "Canon Inc." I suspect that Canon just quietly changed production from Japan to Malaysia and also the color of the flower at the same time and any new lens will be made in Malaysia.

I seriously doubt you can tell which version you will get just by looking at the photo. Photos on ebay are notoriously inaccurate. Sellers often use someone else's photos because they are to lazy to take your own.

If you are planning to buy used, you might be able to get one made in Japan but there should be no difference in quality. You are better off getting a used Mk I version with the metal mount.

Funny you mention ebay sellers - seems that a lot deliberately position the lens so the flower cant be clearly seen. Also,perhaps Im chasing the wrong lens. I do have the MkI,metal mount 50mm. But everything I have read puts the el'cheepo lens on a throne. Very rare to hear praises of the MkI version. One big difference between MkI and MkII is that wide open the MkII version is pretty impressive.

What say you?

You don't need to see the flower as it plainly says "Made in Japan" right on the front.

The Mk I and Mk II versions have the same optics. Any reported differences will be due to copy variation or user error. All Mk I's are made in Japan.

The Mk I is better than the Mk II because ....

- Better build quality (same build quality as the EF 28mm 2.8 and 35mm 2.0)
- Metal mount
- Depth-of-field scale
- Distance scale
- Proper manual focus ring (focus ring does not rotate during AF)
- Can accept a clip-on EW-65, ES-65, or ET-65 lens hood (the Mk II uses a clumsy filter thread adapter and an ES-62 hood)


And... it has a date code.. (if you like that kind of thing)

Sirrith wrote in post #17274064
I believe one is made in Japan (yellow), the other in Malaysia (white) or something along those lines.

Yup.

ItsJustEd wrote in post #17275681
I do have the MkI,metal mount 50mm. But everything I have read puts the el'cheepo lens on a throne. Very rare to hear praises of the MkI version. One big difference between MkI and MkII is that wide open the MkII version is pretty impressive.

What say you?

Like Mike said, the mk1 and mk2 have the same optical design. The mk2 is just made to have cheaper build. There are lots of reports of the mk2's AF motor going out or just the lens falling apart. The mk1 I have is over 20 years old and still going strong.

I have owned the mk2 and now own the mk1. I can say that if you own the mk1 do not buy a mk2. Optically you gain nothing (my mk1 is actually better wide open then my mk2 was) and build quality you lose everything.

If you're not happy with the proformance of you mk1 then I'd suggest getting the f1.4 version (which has its own faults) or save up for a sigma 50mm f1.4 Art or canon 50mm f1.2 L.

msowsun wrote in post #17275760
You don't need to see the flower as it plainly says "Made in Japan" right on the front.

The Mk I and Mk II versions have the same optics. Any reported differences will be due to copy variation or user error. All Mk I's are made in Japan.

The Mk I is better than the Mk II because ....

- Better build quality (same build quality as the EF 28mm 2.8 and 35mm 2.0)
- Metal mount
- Depth-of-field scale
- Distance scale
- Proper manual focus ring (focus ring does not rotate during AF)
- Can accept a clip-on EW-65, ES-65, or ET-65 lens hood (the Mk II uses a clumsy filter thread adapter and an ES-62 hood)


And... it has a date code.. (if you like that kind of thing)

Mike,you have quite completely satisfied my need for detailed information ...
Thanks for the detailed information.

gremlin75 wrote in post #17275806
Like Mike said, the mk1 and mk2 have the same optical design. The mk2 is just made to have cheaper build. There are lots of reports of the mk2's AF motor going out or just the lens falling apart. The mk1 I have is over 20 years old and still going strong.

I have owned the mk2 and now own the mk1. I can say that if you own the mk1 do not buy a mk2. Optically you gain nothing (my mk1 is actually better wide open then my mk2 was) and build quality you lose everything.

If you're not happy with the proformance of you mk1 then I'd suggest getting the f1.4 version (which has its own faults) or save up for a sigma 50mm f1.4 Art or canon 50mm f1.2 L.

I do have the MkI. Hadnt used it much because of the high praises of the performance of the MkII. I tried to find a review of the MkI but came up empty. Found tons of stuff on the MkII. But what I recieved here is more than enough reason to keep what I have.

ItsJustEd wrote in post #17275820
I do have the MkI. Hadnt used it much because of the high praises of the performance of the MkII. I tried to find a review of the MkI but came up empty. Found tons of stuff on the MkII. But what I recieved here is more than enough reason to keep what I have.

Doubt you'll find many reviews on the mk1. It went out of production in 1989/90. Internet reviews weren't a thing back then......hell the Internet was barely anything back then :P

Here's one:

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=7zrP9vmu0DI

and another:

http://cannonfastrevie​ws.com …m-1-8-ef-mki-metal-mount/

and another:

http://www.kenrockwell​.com/canon/lenses/50mm​-f18-ef.htm

and one more for fun:

http://www.prime-junta.net …duel_--_f1.4_vs_f1.8.html

oh yeah. one more:
http://www.lightandmat​ter.org …anon-ef-50mm-f1-8-mark-i/

google is an amazing thing.

ItsJustEd wrote in post #17275820
I do have the MkI. Hadnt used it much because of the high praises of the performance of the MkII. I tried to find a review of the MkI but came up empty. Found tons of stuff on the MkII. But what I recieved here is more than enough reason to keep what I have.

If you every find anything comparing the Mk I to the Mk II, the Mk I will come out on top. Same optics with better AF and build.

I've had both. I still have the Mk I.

You seem content now, but here is another perspective on the merits of the MKI that coincides with what others have said.

The MKI was introduced in 1987. It was replaced by the MKII in 1990. (So) There are much more MKII lenses and users around. For the price it is an excellent lens, because of this many will sing praises about the MKII. (But) Much fewer have/used the MKI to sing praises for the lens.

I actually had the MKII before the MKII. I got rid of the MKII after getting the MKI. The MKI is much better built than the MKII. IMO it is better built than the Canon 50mm f/1.4, since it is not prone to AF failure like the f/1.4.

The MKI & MKII seemed about equal in IQ which is good (better by F/2.0). I also feel the same about the f/1.4 (better by f/2.0).

Besides build, my MKI seems a bit more accurate at AF in lower light compared to the MKII I owned. But that is my opinion and could be all in my mind; as I never tested that. Neither is as good in low light compared to some of my other lenses. I’ve never heard anyone else say any improvement in AF accuracy in low light, so it could be just individual copy variation.

The negatives of either f/1.8 version (IMO), I like to f/2.0 before sharpness is typically good enough. It has pentagon OOF highlights (so I typically will not use it where that might be a big issue). Bokeh is not all that great in general.

Also some are willing to pay a premium for the MKI. Paying more for it than a new MKII and more than the MKI originally cost. Even though I consider it the better lens, I would definitely not pay more than a new MKII - but that is me.