Canon 550d + 50mm 1.8 lens - happy snapper
Discussion
I cannot get over how good this lens is, even on a middling camera such as the 550d.
It has been on my camera for ages, so much so that I haven't bothered with my 15-85 lens for a while.
I love it - light, very sharp with terrific colours, saturation and contrast. I really enjoy walking around to find the best shot whether it's portraits or landscapes, and manually focusing too. Next up is stitching panoramas using a tripod - I'm heading off to the Swiss Alps in July for a hut to hut hike around the Matterhorn/Weisshorn/Monte Rosa region. I Can't wait.
I will have my wide angle zoom lens too.
Sorry if I'm covering old ground but I'm loving this lens.
It has been on my camera for ages, so much so that I haven't bothered with my 15-85 lens for a while.
I love it - light, very sharp with terrific colours, saturation and contrast. I really enjoy walking around to find the best shot whether it's portraits or landscapes, and manually focusing too. Next up is stitching panoramas using a tripod - I'm heading off to the Swiss Alps in July for a hut to hut hike around the Matterhorn/Weisshorn/Monte Rosa region. I Can't wait.
I will have my wide angle zoom lens too.
Sorry if I'm covering old ground but I'm loving this lens.
Podie said:
Good to hear people enjoying photography.
Don't buy an L series lens. Nothing else will ever do after that!
I rented one once, but I dont think my 400D was up to the task really (with its AF system). Just as well because the few shots that did come out, were incredibly good. Now I have a 7D, I daren't rent one again!Don't buy an L series lens. Nothing else will ever do after that!
Just to provide a contrary view - I too have a Canon 50mm f1.8 and it is currently gathering dust in a drawer! Found the lack of zoom restrictive and shooting wide open it was a b*tch to focus. If you're not wide open then what's the point ?!
Now that I've given it the hard sell - anybody want to buy it?
Now that I've given it the hard sell - anybody want to buy it?
dibbly dobbler said:
Just to provide a contrary view - I too have a Canon 50mm f1.8 and it is currently gathering dust in a drawer! Found the lack of zoom restrictive and shooting wide open it was a b*tch to focus. If you're not wide open then what's the point ?!
Now that I've given it the hard sell - anybody want to buy it?
I use mine wide open for video. I bought a 550d a while ago and was happy using the kit lens, then bought a 70-200F4L and hated using the kit lens, so found that I was walking around everywhere with a ridiculously long lens for normal snaps.Now that I've given it the hard sell - anybody want to buy it?
I bought the 50mm 1.8 because it was cheap and had heard good things about sharpness higher up the F stop scale so for me it was just a more compact lens to have on the camera for normal stuff.
I don't think you can get anything that sharp for anywhere near that price.
Here's a test shot at ISO 100 F7.1 and the crop of it ETA they look really pixelated in my browser for some reason but the originals look better!
Edited by andrewrob on Wednesday 11th April 15:14
I really like the 50 1.8, I'd like it a lot more if the focus was better as mine can be a little random at times and you only find out when you view on the computer.
For the money it's not bad at all, when the pictures are sharp they're very sharp indeed with good colour.
I took mine on a portrait course (1 day groupon thing) and was very impressed with results. Of course if I'd picked up the 17-70 instead of the 10-20 I would have had something to compare it with!
I'll post up a couple of examples later on, the web on the rig is running paticularly slowly today.
For the money it's not bad at all, when the pictures are sharp they're very sharp indeed with good colour.
I took mine on a portrait course (1 day groupon thing) and was very impressed with results. Of course if I'd picked up the 17-70 instead of the 10-20 I would have had something to compare it with!
I'll post up a couple of examples later on, the web on the rig is running paticularly slowly today.
Agreed.
Wide open is half the fun. A few stops down and it gets better, still with decent bokeh. It's marvellous at F8-11 if composition is dealt with properly. The lack of zoom doesn't bother me in the slightest, as I have a handy 15-85 lens if I need the width. For portraits and walking around on the street or in the wilds, it's amazing. It's so cheap, light and small that it's liberating.
As an aside, I think it's a bit of myth that you need a wide angle lens for landscape photography, it certainly helps in some situations but more often than not, (in my experience) I don't need to go wide as it doesn't have the desired effect. However, when you're in the middle of something big, a wide angle does make sense.
I'm fairly new to this so just my thoughts.
Wide open is half the fun. A few stops down and it gets better, still with decent bokeh. It's marvellous at F8-11 if composition is dealt with properly. The lack of zoom doesn't bother me in the slightest, as I have a handy 15-85 lens if I need the width. For portraits and walking around on the street or in the wilds, it's amazing. It's so cheap, light and small that it's liberating.
As an aside, I think it's a bit of myth that you need a wide angle lens for landscape photography, it certainly helps in some situations but more often than not, (in my experience) I don't need to go wide as it doesn't have the desired effect. However, when you're in the middle of something big, a wide angle does make sense.
I'm fairly new to this so just my thoughts.
I picked up a nifty fifty a little while ago and I'm really impressed with it - it's a great value lens for low light and portrait work. I did some outdoors portrait shots with it (switching from my 18-55mm IS II halfway through) but what surprised me most was that when I looked back through the shots there wasn't much difference in IQ - in fact some of the best shots were with the 18-55 (mostly at 50-55mm.) I'd heard that the IQ had improved on the IS II but didn't actually realise it until I used it side by side with the 50mm.
That being said, being new to prime lenses and being forced to zoom with my feet seemed to help my composition.
That being said, being new to prime lenses and being forced to zoom with my feet seemed to help my composition.
Some fairly ramdom shots! The 2nd one is from the portrait course.
Triumph Bonneville by Brent Leport, on Flickr
Louise Veitch by Brent Leport, on Flickr
Howie by Brent Leport, on Flickr
It is sharper than a very sharp thing when you get it right. I tend to just take one or two lenses at most when I go out for walks with the dog, mainly to make me think more about composition and spend less time faffing about.
The 50 is good for this because it's nice and light, work well in the dark and makes you zoom with your feet (or crop loads).
Triumph Bonneville by Brent Leport, on Flickr
Louise Veitch by Brent Leport, on Flickr
Howie by Brent Leport, on Flickr
It is sharper than a very sharp thing when you get it right. I tend to just take one or two lenses at most when I go out for walks with the dog, mainly to make me think more about composition and spend less time faffing about.
The 50 is good for this because it's nice and light, work well in the dark and makes you zoom with your feet (or crop loads).
Edited by Speed addicted on Wednesday 11th April 21:19
cjm said:
Is there anything a bit wider for a cropped canon that is of a similar price and quality?
Quality yes, price no.The 50/1.8 design is simple and easy to produce and has been around for ages, uses few and simple elements. So its a cheap lens to make.
Canon have a 35/2.0 and a 28/1.8 both of which are good but a fair bit more money.
The 50/1.8 is a gateway prime...
dibbly dobbler said:
Just to provide a contrary view - I too have a Canon 50mm f1.8 and it is currently gathering dust in a drawer! Found the lack of zoom restrictive and shooting wide open it was a b*tch to focus. If you're not wide open then what's the point ?!
Now that I've given it the hard sell - anybody want to buy it?
Now that I've given it the hard sell - anybody want to buy it?
Get a proper 50mm lens. This is mine and it only cost 7£ from a charity shop 
IMG_5779.jpg A S P by killwilly, on Flickr
IMG_5779.jpg A S P by killwilly, on Flickr
RobDickinson said:
Quality yes, price no.
The 50/1.8 design is simple and easy to produce and has been around for ages, uses few and simple elements. So its a cheap lens to make.
Canon have a 35/2.0 and a 28/1.8 both of which are good but a fair bit more money.
The 50/1.8 is a gateway prime...
I was thinking about the 35/2.0 for the composition and faffing reasons a few other posters have mentioned.The 50/1.8 design is simple and easy to produce and has been around for ages, uses few and simple elements. So its a cheap lens to make.
Canon have a 35/2.0 and a 28/1.8 both of which are good but a fair bit more money.
The 50/1.8 is a gateway prime...
Is it a good lens, am I likely to noticed a big improvemnt over the 18-55mm kit lens on my 450d?
cjm said:
Is it a good lens, am I likely to noticed a big improvemnt over the 18-55mm kit lens on my 450d?
It will crucify the kit lens.Work your way back from here.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php...
I find the nifty-fifty a sublime travel companion (on a full-frame sensor). When you've had enough of lugging around your entire kit it's so refreshing to head out for a day with just the 50; light and small enough to fit in a man-bag and gives you options after sunset or indoors too. This will at least give you a day to recover from the effort of carrying around a big heavy bag without sacrificing the quality of shots, albeit making you think a bit harder to figure out a composition that works! 
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff