Anyone here use the 50mm F1.8 on a 5D?

This guy bellow does with, IMO, spectacular results ...

http://www.terraspirit​.com/

Lol @ some of the posts in this thread.

The 50mm 1.8 is a lens that has an excellent performance-to-price ratio. Its worth every penny paid for, and if you take care of it, it'll last as long as you want.

Some people need to get over themselves.

BEEEsH wrote in post #4445588
Lol @ some of the posts in this thread.

The 50mm 1.8 is a lens that has an excellent performance-to-price ratio. Its worth every penny paid for, and if you take care of it, it'll last as long as you want.

Some people need to get over themselves.

Some people are far more into gear than actually taking photographs.

^ this is true, but the gear is so damn good & interesting!!

Looking at the nifty strictly in isolation, sure, I would say it's a great deal at that price. And if you could get great results with it on the 5D, then that's great.

Yeah, yeah...we know...gear doesn't make the photographer.
Yeah, yeah...we know...some of you were/are a "professional" photographers...and we should look at your results.

But the bottom line is, the nifty is mechanically inferior to the 1.4. This cannot be disputed.

The AF on the nifty sucks. Will you see a dramatic improvement when mounted on the 5D? Probably not. It'll still be slow, loud, and pathetic. That DOES NOT stop you from taking a good image. The AF on the 1.4 isn't anything to write home about, but there is a clear advantage over the nifty with its micro-USM AF.

When you stop the nifty down (and who does that right?:rolleyes, the 5 blades will come into play in the form of ugly bokeh highlights. Might bother you. Might not. But it's there. Absolutely.

The 1.4 is sharper at 1.8 than the nifty is wide open.

Build? Well they both aren't great. The nifty is ESPECIALLY bad...dare I say below the kit lens. That's bad. This might or might not matter to you.

On and on this goes.

Personally, I sold the nifty as soon as I was done with it (learning phase) and quickly got myself the 1.4.

But sure...it's all about shooting, and not gear...

BEEEsH wrote in post #4445588
Lol @ some of the posts in this thread.

The 50mm 1.8 is a lens that has an excellent performance-to-price ratio. Its worth every penny paid for, and if you take care of it, it'll last as long as you want.

Some people need to get over themselves.

Be honest though... if you cared enough about your pictures to spend $2000 to $3000 on a camera BODY, then shouldn't you care enough to pony up a little more than $70 for a lens? Sure, if you're just going to screw around with it, then its fine, but if you really care its obviously not the best option. It's built like a toy, the AF sucks, the aperture blades produce odd looking OOF highlights...

Its sort of like buying a Porsche but putting generic tires on it... sure they're black and round and hold air, and maybe they'll get you around town, but would you trust them on a racetrack, when you're pushing the limit?

The only reason I was (dare I say it) contemplating getting the 1.8 was because I really only ever do landscapes & panoramics with the occasional indoor shots (churches etc), I guess I dont NEED the f/1.8 aperture for my work, its probably just me fancy buying something again

The 1.4 is no doubt much better but I cant help thinking for that price its just not good enough, if the 1.4 had ring usm I wouldnt hesitate, but hearing people saying the AF motor is weak & breaks easily doesnt exactly inspire confidence either (heard this on another thread ages ago).

50mm is not a focal length that I use a lot, hence my posting this thread up to ask about the 1.8, build quality isnt that important to me, but I must say the AF accuracy is a turn off with that lens, but I cant help thinking I wouldnt be that happy with the 1.4 either, the 1.2 would be beyond overkill

I was thinking about buying another 50 1.8 to slap on my 1D II out of morbid curiosity, but ultimately I think it'd be a waste of 70 bucks. If I want unreliable focusing, I have a Pentax Tak 50 I can (and do) slap on the 1D via an adapter.

timnosenzo wrote in post #4445749
Be honest though... if you cared enough about your pictures to spend $2000 to $3000 on a camera BODY, then shouldn't you care enough to pony up a little more than $70 for a lens? Sure, if you're just going to screw around with it, then its fine, but if you really care its obviously not the best option. It's built like a toy, the AF sucks, the aperture blades produce odd looking OOF highlights...

Its sort of like buying a Porsche but putting generic tires on it... sure they're black and round and hold air, and maybe they'll get you around town, but would you trust them on a racetrack, when you're pushing the limit?

I agree with this 100%, thats why 90% of my images are taken using my L lens & the other 10% with my 70-300IS, however that leaves the very odd occasion when I might want to mess around with a product photo at very wide apertures, its only under these situations that I would say a lesser lens would be better suited, BUT not if its a complete pile of horse sh*t as I am beginning to think it is

cdifoto wrote in post #4445794
I was thinking about buying another 50 1.8 to slap on my 1D II out of morbid curiosity, but ultimately I think it'd be a waste of 70 bucks. If I want unreliable focusing, I have a Pentax Tak 50 I can (and do) slap on the 1D via an adapter.

I do have a "Pentacon 50mm f/1.8" lens from my practika days, I have this converted to an EOS mount.

I wonder how the Canon 50mm f/1.8 compares to this lens? ok the pentacon is MF only, but if the Canon's AF is truly that bad then its really MF only too

I dunno but the Tak is surprisingly good if it nails focus. ;

Just for shats n gaggles, I shot some first dance wedding photos with it and missed about 90% of the shots, but got a few keepers that are on my website right now.

Here we go.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Its funny you ask, b/c it was just this morning that I did a shootout between my 50 1.8 II, 50 1.4, tamy 28-75, and canon 24-105, on a tripod, MLU, remote release.
yes, i was bored.
Findings? 50 1.8 is an excellent lens on 5d, 1.4 is better. I rarely used my 50 on xti, instead using my sig 30 1.4. When I bought 5d, I discovered the 50 1.8 performs a lot better, and even wide open, its acceptably sharp. Its also a great focal length. The auto focus is a little nervous though. however that combination is quite capable of excellent images.
The 1.4 gives you sharper images between 1.4 to 2.8. It has slightly more distortion, and slightly more CA. It focuses more quickly and confidently, and of course is 2/3 stop faster. It also gives a more pleasant bokeh between 2.8 and 5.6, where 1.8 can be a little harsh.
The 50 1.8 is an excellent lens on the 5D. For most, not owning either, the extra 200 maybe worth it to go with 1.4. My 2 cents.

Get the 50 1.4. Its a bit more in price but its well worth it and still damn cheap for such a gem. ($75 compared to $290)

kevindar wrote in post #4445938
Its funny you ask, b/c it was just this morning that I did a shootout between my 50 1.8 II, 50 1.4, tamy 28-75, and canon 24-105, on a tripod, MLU, remote release.
yes, i was bored.
Findings? 50 1.8 is an excellent lens on 5d, 1.4 is better. I rarely used my 50 on xti, instead using my sig 30 1.4. When I bought 5d, I discovered the 50 1.8 performs a lot better, and even wide open, its acceptably sharp. Its also a great focal length. The auto focus is a little nervous though. however that combination is quite capable of excellent images.
The 1.4 gives you sharper images between 1.4 to 2.8. It has slightly more distortion, and slightly more CA. It focuses more quickly and confidently, and of course is 2/3 stop faster. It also gives a more pleasant bokeh between 2.8 and 5.6, where 1.8 can be a little harsh.
The 50 1.8 is an excellent lens on the 5D. For most, not owning either, the extra 200 maybe worth it to go with 1.4. My 2 cents.

I don't suppose you have any 100% crops to see? all I find online are crops taken from 1.6x bodies which is a useless test for me.