Is the f/1.8 II 50mm worth the $70?

[RebelXT-WH2CYK]

is this lens worth the $70? does it take a sharper picture than the digital rebel kit lens? What are your thoughts on this lens? thanks!

[dmm96452]

is this lens worth the $70?..

Yes.

..does it take a sharper picture than the digital rebel kit lens? ..

Absolutely!

..What are your thoughts on this lens? ..

Light weight, sharp and fast. It may lose a little at the widest apetures but still very usable images. Difficult to get more bang for the buck on any camera equipment. Best $70 I've spent so far!

..thanks!..

You're welcome.

[ekstasis16]

I've been wondering this myself. How big a difference is there between the 1.8 and the 1.4? I've been looking to get the 50 1.4, but if there isn't much of a noticable difference, maybe I should put the money toward something else?

I know there's a build quality difference, but what about sharpness and CA? I think I might just be skeptical of the extremely low price, which is even cheaper than the Rebel kit lens which I still use as my only wide angle.

Does anyone know if a review comparing the 1.4 and 1.8 versions exists with sample shots?

[JSPhoto]

Depends on what your needs are. If your using it for sports it's not the best choice, but for everything else it's great, and you can't beat the quality even at $70. The best cheapest plastic lens I have seen.

JS

[Photo-John]

I think it's worth it. Have you checked the reviews here? It's got a 4.44 out of 5 rating with 133 reviews. Most of the criticism has to do with the build quality. But are you really going to drop it? And for $70 you could replace a couple before you spent as much as the f/1.4 version would cost you. I don't see anyone faulting the image quality. The 50mm prime lens optics have been around and been refined so well that it's one of the best bets - with any manufacturer.

Here's a link to our review page for the EF 50mm f/1.8: http://www.photographyreview.com/cat...2_3111crx.aspx

Make sure to also click on the sample images link below the product image. That will take you to a gallery of all kinds of images captured with that lens.

I actually have the f/1.4 lens. I did feel better about spending more. And the build quality is better. But if you're on a budget, you should have no concerns about f/1.8 lens. There's an interview, in the Learn section, of award winning professional sports and commercial photographer, Joe DiMaggio. He can shoot with whatever he wants, and we had a big conversation about how he likes and uses the f/1.8 lens. That should make you feel good about it

[Photo-John]

Autofocus isn't so great on the f/1.4 version, either. I wouldn't use either one in AI Servo. But for low light action, where you can prefocus, I happily use my 50mm f/1.4, and I'd happily use the 50mm f/1.8, too. It will help you get photos where you otherwise would get nothing.

[mwfanelli]

is this lens worth the $70? does it take a sharper picture than the digital rebel kit lens? What are your thoughts on this lens? thanks!

It is a good lens. But you must ask yourself: "How often do I choose 50mm on my zoom"? If the answer is not much, it may not be worth the money. Many people prefer a shorter or longer focal length. My personal favorite prime is a mild telephoto, about 90mm. I find that 50mm is boring for a "use-a-lot" lens.

[Stephen Lutz]

A 50 1.8 is a great deal at $70. It is sharper than the kit lens, but mostly the advantage is that you can add a 3D effect to your pictures by blurring out the background. More than that, though, at, say f2 or so you can have the eyes sharp and the nose and ear a little soft. This is a very nice effect in some portraits.

So, yes, it is worth it for that and as a learning tool. Shoot at various apertures and observe the results. You will find your photos have more "depth" and that the kit lens photos will look flat by comparison.

[Lionheart]

I've been wondering this myself. How big a difference is there between the 1.8 and the 1.4? I've been looking to get the 50 1.4, but if there isn't much of a noticable difference, maybe I should put the money toward something else?

I've got both, and I use both. Not much difference. I've got the older f1.8, the one with real metal body parts. The bokeh is a little different between them (has to do with the number of blades in the diaphragm), but otherwise identical in sharpness. The f1.4 is of course an ultrasonic, so it focuses NOTICEABLY faster and quietly. However, I hardly ever use my 1.4. In fact, I probably use my f2.5 compact macro and f1.8 versions much more than my 1.4 (smaller, takes up less space in my camera bag). Just my experience and two bits with these two lenses, take with a grain of advil.

[Peter_AUS]

Very good lens for the price, I have one in my bag and suggest it often to those looking for a 50mm lens.

[seeingclearly]

If you want to compare the 50mm f1.8 amd the f1.4, look at http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html. This has a full technical review. In essence, the 1.8 is as good as the 1.4 in terms of image; it just is and feels a bit of a tacky build. But for the price? It's a winner.

[Alison]

I would say YES DEFINITELY!!!

Meet my 2 whirlwinds. 99% of their photographs have been blurry, up until a couple of days ago when my hubby bought me this lens!

Mind you, he also bought me the 430EX speedlite which I bounced off the ceiling for these shots. Means I can have my SS set to 1/100.

I'm well happy!!! The lens is well worth the money!!!

[SmartWombat]

That lens looks worth it.

[Lionheart]

What cuties!!! After this reading this thread I went out of my way to shoot with the 50mm f1.4 and 1.8. I can't tell the difference, but it's a great in the house lens where lighting is typically low. Some pics of my two whirlwinds using both the 1.4 and 1.8.

[livin4lax09]

it's a great portrait lens, IMO.

[yogestee]

Ok folks,,,while we are comparing 50mm lenses and "babies" this is one of my "baby" taken with my 50mm f2.5 Compact Macro..
Just to let you know this is my daughter Cheridan aged 21..

Canon 350D
Exp 250th@f5.6
ISO 800

Jurgen
Australia