Yongnuo EF YN 50mm F/1.8
- Thread starter henrywang
- Start date
I suppose the whole point for the company is to gain experience and develop production capacity. I don't see any point from a consumer's point of view given such small price differential. If they have the know-how to copy premium lenses, that'd be a different story. It's not a bad thing for consumers though, for more choices.
Upvote
0
I'm surprised they didn't try to differentiate even a little bit by adding a metal mount. This seems like just flat out IP theft.
Upvote
0
henrywang said:
Imho no need to, looks like a straight clone of Canon's ancient 50/1.8 for the low-budget Chinese market.
henrywang said:
I've read they're also going to clone the 50/1.4 - call me if they release the 50L, 135L or 85L at 1/3rd the original price :->
raptor3x said:
Indeed, and I'm really wondering if Canon will take legal action and prevent them from importing the lens for example into the EU. Or if Canon sits there, doing nothing - why?
Upvote
0
The pictures of the 50mm f/1.4 that I saw also appeared to have a plastic mount. Somebody nick-named it the ‘shifty-fifty'! 
Here is the thread about the f/1.4 version:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22957.0
Here is the thread about the f/1.4 version:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22957.0
Upvote
0
I don't see the point. The EF 50 1.8 and the EF 40 2.8 are already good budget "normal" primes -- and the 40 is particularly sharp. For those of us who want reliable, powerful, manual flash, at a bargain price, Yongnuo has done a nice job filling this need. I don't care about ETTL, just consistent power, temp and quick recycle -- should be easy to do for a third-party. It doesn't matter to me whether Yongnuo did a good job on the ETTL side. But, I'm far more demanding with glass.
Upvote
0
This is just a clone of the old Canon 50/1.8II. If for you the saving is worth it, give it a try. I don't shoot 50mm focal lenght. I had all three 50mm (1.8, 1.4 & 1.2L) versions and sold them.henrywang said:
Upvote
0
Marsu42 said:
You pointed out the reason. If it rips off any Canon patents, it's likely expired ones.
Expired patents = public domain prior art = no cause of action for a lawsuit
Unless there is some current intellectual property that is still enforceable and applicable to that lens, Canon would be setting itself up for immediate dismissal, and outside of the U.S., attorneys fees on both sides in many cases.
Upvote
0
Mitch.Conner said:
Right, that would be it - I'm forgetting just *how* old this lens is and how long Canon has been developing lenses. Probably just the reason why Yn is releasing 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 just now, they had to wait for the oldest lenses to be not protected anymore.
Imho suits Canon right, still producing a dinosaur like the 50/1.8 needs to be punished.
Upvote
0
Marsu42 said:
Yeah but the Mark 1 is a solid, little workhorse... with the Mark II they added a nifty feature where the lens barrel pops right out of there! Imagine what they can do with a Mark III when considering all the more recent developments in thrifty plastic manufacturing!
Upvote
0
Confirmed: is not a complete clone of the Canon!
"
"
- After extensive surgery, i can confirm that the YongNuo 50/1.8 is NOT a direct copy of the Canon. The internal barrel seems to be structured the same, but the gearing, the motors, the chip and cords, and overall construction are very distinctly different
- Prepped for surgery: http://imgur.com/e34Jx5q
- During the procedure: http://imgur.com/ORK60zv
Upvote
0
Also, some bad news?
"
"
- AF Works in live view (Using a T3i and 5DII for most of the tests, with priority going towards the T3i) but does not fire.
- Aperture locked at 1.8 - likely either a one-off issue, or an issue with this series, maybe discards / didn't pass QC.
Upvote
0
henrywang said:
The bokeh on these shots is beautiful, but for some shots, a deeper dof might make sense :-> as the lens parts in the back cannot be recognized.
henrywang said:
Welcome to the world of Yongnuo! After a very bad experience with my st-e3 rt "clone", I know they're selling products they know won't work as advertised - like the af assist beam on said transmitter. And I've not even started talking about qc...
Upvote
0
Similar threads
