50mm 1.8 II Build Quality

I just took delivery of a nifty fifty, obtained for mucho cheapness via Ebay. From previous online investigation I came to learn that it's pretty much the cheapest lens that Canon produce, and as such, is made from yogurt pots and glue.

What I didn't expect was to feel so much 'play' when removing the lens cap for the first time. Is this normal?

There must be close to 1mm fore and aft movement. From what I can tell from my LCD, the pictures it's taking are sharp (when it finds focus). I received a 2 year warranty with it, but I'd quite like to avoid sending it back to HK if I can. If this 'play' isn't normal, is it easy enough to dismantle and reassemble the lens?

Normal for mine!

you get what you pay for. The 1.4 isnt as bad.

comparing the 1.8 to the 1.4 is like comparing iron and gold

Its a whole lot better than the kit lens, so if you're on a budget, this is a great lens. Case closed.

I don't feel any movement on mine. Also, haven't had any problems with focus even when using f/1.8. Give it some time and if you don't feel comfortable, return it.

What are the main reasons why you have all purchased this lens? as im thinking F1.8 lets a lot of light in, always a good thing, but useless DOF for landscapes, what are the main uses, where it REALLY shines? is it just mainly portraits & stuff?

Nick

A stunning lens for the money, but the build quality won't leave you with anything more than a "Fisher Price" feel. Heck, consider it a 'disposable'. The AF is slow and hunts a lot and the manual ring is a little pain, but hell - it takes VERY sharp images. I actually like the plastic build as it's one of the lightest lenses you'll ever use too. I've never heard someone judge a lens by how the lens cap mounts though. I've honestly never even really noticed except for a particular Nikon and my Peleng 8mm only because the loose cap ends up damaging the front element. Is there something I'm missing here? Is lens cap mount quality an indicator of something else or part of a larger issue?

'Iron'? Sure, it's very abundant, cheap, workable and very useful. 'Gold'? Hardly.

thanks for the replies!

I knew before I bought it that it wasn't exactly a 'masterpiece' of a lens in terms of build quality and I'm not complaining! I just wanted to know if a good bit of 'wobble' is normal or if something was damaged internally during shipping.

I'm not judging the lens by the fit of the lens cap! I just stated that I noticed a lot of 'play' in the lens itself when removing the lens cap.

As I said, sharp images from what I can see on my LCD, so I'm happy. As for the 1.4, my budget and abilities forbid me for the time being.

I would've bought a 1.8 Mk I, but the last few I tracked went for more than double what I paid for the new Mark II.

Sorry, I thought you meant play in the lens cap itself when mounted. Should have re-read.

I don't have any play at all between the mount and lens on my 50 1.8 Mk II on a 20D body. Slop in the mount of any lens has always bugged me. Since you didn't buy it locally a replacement seems out of the question considering the cost, but maybe you should take a second look at it? Holding the lens in hand while on the body you can actually feel movement at the mount itself? What body are you using?

Not sure if you're overlooking this, but I feel like in general on this board people tend to overlook that not everyone has their budget. I am in college, I have a crappy job that I want to replace, and I want to start saving for retirement (yeah yeah, I'm young, but the earlier you start, the more you get for less), and in all of that, I just don't have money for a 1.4, or an L, or whatever. I'm making the most of my resources, and after finally saving enough extra money up and learning a lot, I'm making turning my resources into a used 350d instead of a point and shoot.

I'm happy with my old fifty

Nick_C wrote:
What are the main reasons why you have all purchased this lens? as im thinking F1.8 lets a lot of light in, always a good thing, but useless DOF for landscapes, what are the main uses, where it REALLY shines? is it just mainly portraits & stuff?

Nick

At least in my case, this lens really shines when I want to take a quick picture in low light conditions, or when I want a picture that I know will be sharp. You can always stop down for a more useful DOF if desired.

I've used this lens with great sucess for landscape shots, just stop it down to f/8 or so.

The only limiting factor is that it isn't wide at all but there are sometimes situations where you want to isolate part of a landscape and for this task it performs excellently.

"Statement" makes a very valid "statement." Not too many years ago (ok, ok, many years ago) 35mm cameras came with a 1.8 (about) 50mm lens and nothing else. I still see people with 20-30-40 year old Minoltas, Pentaxes, Olympus and (yes) Canons with that lens and that lens alone. The 50 is the mother of all lenses. Look at the work of Henri Cartier-Bresson. Almost all with a 50. Money does not make a photographer or a photograph. Fancy zooms do not make a photograph.
If a 50 f1.8 is the photographer's lens, then make the most of it. What, in my opinion, is important, is the composition, followed by exposure and focus. The latter two can be subjective. (Actually, they are all subjective)
What I agree with is if you are a beginning photographer, use what you can afford, learn how it works, concentrate on composition and content. Don't worry about not having an L lens.