The New EF 50mm f/1.8 STM is here!

BlakeC wrote in post #17583647
I'm with you guys on this one! I think some people are too picky, some have unrealistic expectations and forget that it is just a $125 lens (not a $2,000+ lens), some convinced themselves there was something wrong with it and are determined to find something wrong, and some people actually have a bad copy. Hard to tell who is who though.

Just shoot with it. If you are happy with the photos then keep it, if you are not then don't. No need to break out charts and start pixel peeping on a $125 lens to prove it is crap or not.

Exactly. It is what it is and Im happy with mine.

wish i coulda been happy with mine. but if it misses focus on almost 50% of shots outdoors on a subject basically standing still. No thanks. I dont care how cheap it is. it should atleast focus properly that way

05Xrunner wrote in post #17583811
wish i coulda been happy with mine. but if it misses focus on almost 50% of shots outdoors on a subject basically standing still. No thanks. I dont care how cheap it is. it should atleast focus properly that way

Your experience is not the norm. Why not try another one?

i got an 85 1.8 that i feel will get much more use then the 50. so just going to stick with that for now. If the 50 would have worked properly I would have kept both. but just return it for now instead of replacing because I know it wont get a ton of use

Many people seem to think that test charts are being used as a substitute for real life use and get all bent out of shape about it.

A test chart is to evaluate what a lens/camera is capable of under ideal, controlled conditions that can be replicated by other users. It can show real issues which are nearly impossible to quantify when shooting birds, landscapes or sports. Does a great lens chart photo mean it's a great lens? No. It means that we have some idea of how sharp and repeatable the lens is under ideal conditions. If it fails the chart test (won't focus, decentered, poor resolution) then you may have issues with the lens in real life. Better to know that before you shoot that once-in-a-lifetime event.

I always test my new lenses before shooting a critical event for the first time because that way I know there are no mechanical/optical defects which will surprise me later. If you want to slap that lens on your camera, don't check MFA or focus, and shoot away, fine. I salute your trust in the equipment. I like to run a test where if there's a problem, I can attempt to isolate it rather than being puzzled about why half of my photos are out of focus. Did that blade of grass confuse the AF? Was I holding the camera perfectly steady? Or is the lens a piece of junk?

GregDunn wrote in post #17583997
Many people seem to think that test charts are being used as a substitute for real life use and get all bent out of shape about it.

A test chart is to evaluate what a lens/camera is capable of under ideal, controlled conditions that can be replicated by other users. It can show real issues which are nearly impossible to quantify when shooting birds, landscapes or sports. Does a great lens chart photo mean it's a great lens? No. It means that we have some idea of how sharp and repeatable the lens is under ideal conditions. If it fails the chart test (won't focus, decentered, poor resolution) then you may have issues with the lens in real life. Better to know that before you shoot that once-in-a-lifetime event.

I always test my new lenses before shooting a critical event for the first time because that way I know there are no mechanical/optical defects which will surprise me later. If you want to slap that lens on your camera, don't check MFA or focus, and shoot away, fine. I salute your trust in the equipment. I like to run a test where if there's a problem, I can attempt to isolate it rather than being puzzled about why half of my photos are out of focus. Did that blade of grass confuse the AF? Was I holding the camera perfectly steady? Or is the lens a piece of junk?

This is why I shot those charts, just to have a somewhat controlled look at the auto focus. I was happy with the shots I was getting of various subjects, but since some folks were having issues with the AF, I thought a few minutes checking it would be interesting.

After reading the whole thread, it seems to me that if you don't have the II it would be a good little lens, but if you already have the II, it may be not worth it, regardless of the low cost. I was originally going I preorder and keep the II and the STM, after reading, I think I'll just keep what I have for now.

Frodge wrote in post #17584111
After reading the whole thread, it seems to me that if you don't have the II it would be a good little lens, but if you already have the II, it may be not worth it, regardless of the low cost. I was originally going I preorder and keep the II and the STM, after reading, I think I'll just keep what I have for now.

I disagree. Sell the 50mm 1.8 II for what ever you can(maybe $75) and then get the 50 STM for about $50 more.

You get smoother, quieter, more accurate AF and better image quality because of the better lens coatings.

You also better build quality and a metal mount so you will never have to deal with a self-destructing lens or being stuck on your camera.

Ouch, that's ugly.

msowsun wrote in post #17584126
I disagree. Sell the 50mm 1.8 II for what ever you can(maybe $75) and then get the 50 STM for about $50 more.

You get smoother, quieter, more accurate AF and better image quality because of the better lens coatings.

You also better build quality and a metal mount so you will never have to deal with a self-destructing lens or being stuck on your camera.

Hosted photo: posted by msowsun in
./showthread.php?p=175​84126&i=i83142513
forum: Canon Lenses

Hosted photo: posted by msowsun in
./showthread.php?p=175​84126&i=i225601480
forum: Canon Lenses

It's funny you say that. Back when I first bought my plastic fantastic, I started a thread about the mount sticking being unable to remove it from the camera or breaking. I was more or less told not to worry about it because it was likely never going to happen, and that I was more or less worrying about nothing. Now there is a new mount and people are saying the old one will implode. (Not saying you are saying that, I'm just saying)

I disagree as well. if my copy focused good i would have kept it. i have had 2 50II in the day and If i already owned a II i would buy this in a heartbeat. The build alone makes it worth it. I would throw my 50II away after that.

05Xrunner wrote in post #17584202
I disagree as well. if my copy focused good i would have kept it. i have had 2 50II in the day and If i already owned a II i would buy this in a heartbeat. The build alone makes it worth it. I would throw my 50II away after that.[my emphasis]

Canon probably spends more than the total cost of one of these on QC for an L lens. At this price-point I'm sure there's only so much QC they can afford so it's quite possible you simply had a bad one. That's a PITA, and the fact that mine seems fine is certainly no help to you. But one bad copy doesn't mean that all copies are bad.

...Mike

I'm totally pleased with my 50 STM. I've had a 50 FD, EF V1 and EF V2 and really believe this is the best of them for build quality and performance. Build Quality means an awful lot to me. I hate the idea of ever buying something twice. I'd rather buy less as long as what I buy last a long time. There are aspects of STM that I don't care for, such as requiring power. I don't shoot video, so USM would have been fine with me.

Having shot a Car Show, War Memorial and my Class Reunion now, I believe the weakest link continues to be the one behind the camera body. The 50 STM is a dream!

CanonCameraFan wrote in post #17584422
. I don't shoot video, so USM would have been fine with me.

MicroMotor USM is cheap, but not very good at anything. Ring Type USM is very good, but would it put in a totally different price category.

I am very happy that it has STM. Canon has once again hit a home run with this lens. All of the STM lenses are very good and all are incredible value for the performance you get from them.

msowsun wrote in post #17584427
MicroMotor USM is cheap, but not very good at anything. Ring Type USM is very good, but would it put in a totally different price category.

I am very happy that it has STM. Canon has once again hit a home run with this lens. All of the STM lenses are very good and all are incredible value for the performance you get from them.

Mine just arrived, and dammit even though the hood wasn't backordered when I ordered, it's shown as B/O on the packing slip. BAH!

And, if I may ask, why do you have both the 18-55 and 18-135? I've been wondering a while.