Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II - Quality Test

After years of using zooms, I have decided to return to primes.

After reading the reviews (and due to budget contraints), one prime

I am considering buying is the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II. From what I

have read the optics of this lens are outstanding for the price.

BUT, on the other hand I also have read that the build quality of

this is not on par with many of canon's other lens. Which brings me

to my question:

 

What is the best way to test a new 50mm f/1.8 II within the 10-14

day return period, to ensure that the lens I have is one of

the "good" quality examples? Thanks.

I believe the quality of the build will be at most fair on each of the examples but that the performance of all of them will be very good considering the price. To figure out if your sample is below the standard (for this lens) you'll need at least another sample anyway.

I think that you're a little confused between general quality of component, and something which is substandardly built and therefore prone to failure.

 

The Canon 50mm 1.8mkII lens is of cheap plastic construction, it's not got a metal lens mount, and has no weather sealing. However I have never heard of one failing to work (except after massive trauma).

 

So it's not on a par with the L series lenses, the 50mm 1.0L is discontinued but cost 30 times as much. However it focusses fast and accurately, and produces clear bright sharp images, better than some produced by zoom lenses costing 15 times as much.

They are all good, just not as rugged as some of the more

expensive lenses, just don't bang it around and you will

be fine.

If you can find a Mk-I it is a much better built lens, and the price you'll pay for it supports that. I picked up a second one back when the prices were closer. There is more cheapening on the Mk-II than just the plastic lensmount, but that would be enough for me to avoid it if you're a serious photographer and tend to change lenses frequently.

So many people out there relying on the 50/1.8 II... do you really believe you're among the

worst lens beaters around and that this one isn't gonna survive ? :)

 

I say don't bother, buy and shoot. Have fun.

 

BTW, the metal mount of the 50/1.8 Mark I is an non understandable fetish, much like

Leica.

>>>> So it's not on a par with the L series lenses, the 50mm 1.0L is discontinued but cost

30 times as much.

 

It beats the 50/1.0L anytime... the 1.0 sucks at sharpness.

The build qulaity is crap. The lens hood is terrible, so bad that I wonder why I bought it.

On the other hand this lens is pin sharp and has great bokeh. Apparently it's every bit as sharp as the f1.4, though the f1.4 is said to have even better bokeh.

No L zoom will touch this lens for image qulaity, I doubt any of the L primes will even touch it.

I've had it for two years and used it a lot. It's compect so you are unlikely to damage it. It's an optical bargin, buy it.

Frankly, it's a throw-away lens. You have to be aware that it can break quite easily, and if

it does that's just something to be accepted. As many others have said, it's the 'value for

money' that's important here - it's a very good performer at a stunningly low price. If

you're a serious 'standard lens' photographer you might do better with the f1.4 which is

indeed sturdier but is also 5 or 6 times as expensive (because you never find any of them

at cheap s/hand prices).

 

All the above said, I have to say that I've never had any problems with my f1.8, and I abuse

it quite a bit - I use it sometimes with my old 600, and I stick the camera body in one

pocket of a (non-camera) bag I carry, the lens in another, and marry them up when I'm

going to take a shot. While it's being carried around in the bag it'll get dropped, kicked,

etc, etc. It's never let me down yet. If it does I'll think of all the good images I got with it

and then replace it as cheaply as I can.

Look, if you bought 50 units of them I would be very surprised if even one came apart just by itself. The stories you hear are about people dropping it, hitting it, or mistreating it in someways. I have both the MKI and MKII and I don't think the MKII is "inferior". In fact, the AF is a LOT smoother and less noisy on the II than the older model. As far as the hood, I use the cheap, collapsible rubber hoods on both and they work great.

 

The only reason I am selling mine is that I got a 1.4 as a gift so, I don't see keeping the 1.8s anymore.

You can try finding used Mark I version! Optically it should be identical, but it is heavier and has metal mount. I think that at the time of its introduction, it was the first/only EOS 50mm lens so it was built to last. A friend of mine just brushed his EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens against the door knob (the camera was on a strap over his shoulder) and it did split in two - front portion of the lens falling out, leaving internal electonics visible... On the other hand, I was in a rush changing lenses in my studio, when my mark I version fell on a hard wooden floor from a height of some 3.5 feet, bounced and kept rolling. I picked up the lens, absolutely no damage so I continued shooting. I happened six months ago and everything is fine to this day.<br><br>

 

<a href="http://www.yurope.com/people/kujucev/index.html">Aleksandar Kujucev Photography</a>

Yeah, heavier is essential. As for metal... so many lens around there ripped appart with

their thread still stuck into the body :-) you _have_ to get metal :)

On the other hand, you can allow yourself to drop a 50/1.8-II five times on the floor for

the price of one 1.4 :-) And I'm not counting the times when it survives. Now that's a

bargain.

as someone once said to me...

 

You should STEAL your mom's COLOR TV and sell it, then go rob a BANK, so you can afford a REAL camera. When the COPS come for you, you can KILL them with it, because a REAL camera is HEAVY and SOLID, not like those cheap PLASTIC newfangled TOYS you YOUNGSTERS like to PLAY with. I'm so GODDAM mad and worked up RIGHT NOW, I'm going down to the camera STORE with a BASEBALL BAT (cont'd. p.97)

 

<P><FONT SIZE="1"><I>Disclaimer: the preceding was a fictitious and satirical post. any resemblance to REAL posts on photonet is entirely coincidental.</I></FONT></P>

>>A friend of mine just brushed his EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens against the door knob (the camera was on a strap over his shoulder)<<

 

That's not a brush, that's a *hit* (unless your friend moves at 0.00000000000001 ms per hour).

 

My 24-70L fell to the Studio floor (while still attached to the 10D) and I had to send it in for repair. Does that make it a "cheaply built lens"? Hardly!

 

Bottom line is the 50 mkii is a good lens and if one takes *reasonable* care of it (doesn't drop it, bang it, hits it, etc...) it will last as long as any. I don't think any lens (even the multi-thousand dollar ones) is/are *tested* against drops, falls, bangs and hits :)

 

(I can see the dummy photographer in Canon's testing room: "ready for drop off the cliff. 5-4-3-2-1-drop!!!" "well the dummy sustained skull trauma, a fractured shoulder and pelvis but, the zoom is in one piece!. Now, on to the Eiffel Tower drop test")

I think you should find a used MK I (about $100).<P>Not so much for the metal mount but for the depth of field scale window and the real live focusing ring (albeit a grinding, loosey goosey focusing ring) half way down the lens barrel.<P>The MK II does without that ring, instead you twist the hell out the front of the lens barrel. (How do you do that with a hood on? I guess you twist the hood?).

"However it focusses fast and accurately..."

 

Accurate yes, fast... Well, it gets the job done. All Canon's 50s are on the slow side AF-wise.

If you plan on doing much manual focusing, both versions of the

1.8 are pretty unpleasant. Version II seems a bit faster and

quieter when autofocusing, however. The build is sturdy enough.

I used one heavily for 10 years before giving it away to a family

member. Don't try opening beer bottles with the plastic mount, is

all I say.

"<i>...depth of field scale window...</i>"<P>I meant a distance and DOF scale window...kinda like the old fashioned pre-digital manual focus lenses had -- remember those?

I don't know if you can find a mark I lens for $100 anymore. Everyone's looking for the metal mount/distance scale version and prices I've seen recently are more like $130.

 

I think the poor and (relatively) unloved mark II can be had for as little as $60 used. My mark II rolled off the bed onto a hardwood floor and is fine and has also taken other "brushes" while on the camera. It looks and feels cheap but it does not spontaneously decompose. I would wait before buying a lens hood for it because a. from other's comments the construction of the hood seems to be crappier than the lens and b. flare may not be a problem for you...the lens is significantly recessed and so almost has a built in hood.

 

Optically speakin I haven't read anything here (photo.net) or elsewhere that identifies a problem with quality control or a signifigant difference between version I and II.

 

Cheers,

 

Doug

You can't drop any lens and EXPECT no damage to occur. You may be lucky, and drop a

lens, and the lens may not be damaged or destroyed. Whoopee! You can say this about

any SLR lens. Having said that, the lens isn't exactly flimsy, but it has the feel of being

engineered with very loose tolerances. Everything on the lens is a tad bit cheap. It does

produce great images, however. It's surely one of Canon's top performing lenses. For

$69, just stop vacillating and buy one!

 

For fairness to this lens, I have never had nor even heard of the plastic mount being a

problem. I change lenses a lot, and can't really notice any wear on the mount plastic after

at least 500 changes.

No it's not 'L' quality build as we all know.

 

I accidentally dropped mine on to a stone path one day from around hip height. It bounced high enough to just about give me a heart attack.

 

The result, a tiny chip on the manual focussing ring and it still works as well as the day I bought it.

 

At present this is the only prime lens I own, I bought it to see the difference in using a prime as to a zoom. It is a damn good lens and an absolute bargain.

 

buy it, you won't be disappointed. It's a lens, not a hammer.

 

Cheers

Bevan

<i>If you plan on doing much manual focusing, both versions of the 1.8 are pretty unpleasant.</i>

<br> <br>

I disagree. The MKI does not focus as nicely as my M42 Pentax SMC 50/1.4 (or 55/1.8) or what I remember of my Nikon Series E 50/1.8 - but it does focus rather nicely imho and is not at all unpleasant.

<br> <br>

On my 650 body the lens tends to hunt a lot - so I leave it in MF and it's fine that way. It really is. Not as smooth as a "true" MF lens - but really, not much worse than any other AF lens I have used - including FTM on USM lenses. Yes the USM are nicer to MF but not by much.

The original poster's question was essentially answered long ago. The "build quality" issues with the 50 1.8 II are not quality control issues, but rather the choice of cheaper components, which make it as inexpensive as it is. The optical qualities of the lens are not in doubt. It's a great value. Some people merely prefer less plastic / etc.. To add to the answer; you can test a lens by shooting through the aperture range and by focusing at various distances. If the results are reasonaly sharp according to what you'd expect due to DOF and shutter speed differences, and sharper than typical zooms, then you have a fine lens.

 

Aside:

 

The first day I got my 50 1.8 II, I put in in my pocket, and a little later dropped it while changing lenses. This was waist-high onto a floating wood on concrete floor. The lens is fine.

 

There may be something about a cheap light small lens that seems to make silly handling problems greater than for other lenses. I've never considered putting one of my Zeiss MF lenses in my (non-lint-free) pockets, nor ever dropped them though they are much larger, heavier, and more frequently changed. Perhaps the weight helps in this regard -- you have to have a firmer grip with a heavier lens. Perhaps the greater price helps in this regard -- I'm much more aware of what the replacement / repair costs would be.

 

Moral: That was silly -- IMO the 50 1.8 II is optically an L-quality lens (it is at least as good as some L zooms at 50mm), and deserves to be treated and regarded as such. Although I can afford to replace it if I need to, there's no sense in wasting money that way.

I had one for more than 12 years. It's got a lousy plastic feel, a very narrow manual focus ring (not a real issue for me as I usually shoot in AF mode) and the AF/MF switch is difficult to operate (ditto). Yet in the most important area - picture quality - it scores very high. I got excellent pictures from this lens, even wide open.

 

When I compared wide open pictures from the 50/1.8 II and other good lenses (ISO 100 Fuji negatives up to 20X30 cm) - the ones from the 50 were visibly sharper. It was also much better (sharpness, distortion, flare resistance etc.) than all my other former lenses (Tokina 100/2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105/2.8, Canon 17-35/2.8 USM L, Canon 70-200/4 USM L, Canon 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM). Only my new primes - 24/2.8, 35/2, 85/1.8 and 200/2.8 - equate or top it.

 

After 12 years of use it looked brand new. It gave me no mechanical problems or worries of any kind. Just a peace of mind and thousands of excellent pictures. I only sold it because I came to realize that I do not like this focal length. I replaced it with the 35/2 and 85/1.8.

 

Happy shooting ,

Yakim.