-
UPDATE
The forum will be moving to a new domain in the near future (canonrumorsforum.com). I have turned off "read-only", but I will only leave the two forum nodes you see active for the time being. I don't know at this time how quickly the change will happen, but that will move at a good pace I am sure. ------------------------------------------------------------
Canon 50mm F1
- Thread starter Razor2012
- Start date
- Status
It wasn't a best seller when released but has become a collector's item over the years. IQ and focus should not be too great.
Here's the FM review:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=153&sort=7&cat=2&page=3
Here's the FM review:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=153&sort=7&cat=2&page=3
Upvote
0
The EF 200mm F1.8L does cost about the same and is a collector's item than can be put to great use.
Upvote
0
Speaking of which, I keep seeing from time to time the 200 1.8 being sold in the 3.5-4K range and my shutter finger is itching every single time. Does anyone have first hand experience with it? Is there a major reason to avoid it? Is there a big difference in IQ between it and the newer 200 2? I've read positive things about it but I'd like to know if I missed any negatives.
Sorry for the hijack.
Sorry for the hijack.
Upvote
0
DavidRiesenberg said:Speaking of which, I keep seeing from time to time the 200 1.8 being sold in the 3.5-4K range and my shutter finger is itching every single time. Does anyone have first hand experience with it? Is there a major reason to avoid it? Is there a big difference in IQ between it and the newer 200 2? I've read positive things about it but I'd like to know if I missed any negatives.
Sorry for the hijack.
Heh, not a problem. I'm curious about that too.
Upvote
0
I am having an eye on it too. IQ and bokeh must be great but for 20-30% more you get the successor, EF F2L IS, which got IS and hasn't been discontinued so it could go into service if ever necessary...
Upvote
0
P
photophreek
Guest
At one time, I was looking at the 200 f1.8 and then I stumbled onto a review at TDP. The review listed a few issues with the lens:
> rather heavy at 6.6lbs (3010g)
> focus-by-wire - which really doesn't bother me
> not sharp wide open
> partially weather sealed
> glass is not lead free
> not serviced by Canon (lens released in 1988)
As a result, I put the f1.8 on the wishlist and decided the 200 f2 was a better alternative.
> rather heavy at 6.6lbs (3010g)
> focus-by-wire - which really doesn't bother me
> not sharp wide open
> partially weather sealed
> glass is not lead free
> not serviced by Canon (lens released in 1988)
As a result, I put the f1.8 on the wishlist and decided the 200 f2 was a better alternative.
Upvote
0
I'm a little bit curious of the test reports of 50/1.0. In real life, I find it sharper wide open than 50/1.4 wide open. In my photos, 50/1.0 (@ 1.4) is considerably better than 50/1.4 (@ 1.4). Maybe my 50/1.4 is out of whack, but then again, I have seen similar quality in other pictures taken with similar lenses.
If anyone plans on buying this lens, a couple of comments, as this lens does have a learning curve:
- First, 50/1.0 is really a special purpose tool. There are better day-to-day lenses available for good light, unless you are specifically looking for effects it enables.
- Don't try to photograph people too close with it wide open. It just doesn't work that way. Instead, it is the best I have seen for half-body or full body sized photos in dark environments or when the depth of field is of importance.
- I also find that its AF is way more reliable than 50/1.4s. However, AF is also slow, so it cannot be used to photograph kids if they are moving.
- The way it renders bokeh requires some testing and experimenting. There are several things that one should know about it: faraway backgrounds tend to smoothen out great. Close by background might become a little tedious, and if photographing through leaves or random high contrast areas in background, vignetting causes a swirling sort of look into photos.
- It is great for old style half-body pictures! You don't believe it until you see it!
The only actual annoyance in this lens is flare, but on the other hand that is to be expected with such a fast lens.
About the lead based glasses, do you know the stuff it was replaced with? Prohibition of lead based glasses is a prime example of Green stupidity, if anything.
If anyone plans on buying this lens, a couple of comments, as this lens does have a learning curve:
- First, 50/1.0 is really a special purpose tool. There are better day-to-day lenses available for good light, unless you are specifically looking for effects it enables.
- Don't try to photograph people too close with it wide open. It just doesn't work that way. Instead, it is the best I have seen for half-body or full body sized photos in dark environments or when the depth of field is of importance.
- I also find that its AF is way more reliable than 50/1.4s. However, AF is also slow, so it cannot be used to photograph kids if they are moving.
- The way it renders bokeh requires some testing and experimenting. There are several things that one should know about it: faraway backgrounds tend to smoothen out great. Close by background might become a little tedious, and if photographing through leaves or random high contrast areas in background, vignetting causes a swirling sort of look into photos.
- It is great for old style half-body pictures! You don't believe it until you see it!
The only actual annoyance in this lens is flare, but on the other hand that is to be expected with such a fast lens.
About the lead based glasses, do you know the stuff it was replaced with? Prohibition of lead based glasses is a prime example of Green stupidity, if anything.
Upvote
0
- Status
