Lenses: 50m Prime f/1.8

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:44 am

Going to get one of these, but I must as the simple question. Why are they so cheap ??
The f1.4 is $500ish yet the 1.8 is $130

norbs you have one of these don't you ? What do you think of it ??

Post by **norbs** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:57 am

Yes Nige, I do, and I think one Mr Dexter is getting one as well.

They are bloody unbelievable value for money imho. I paid $80 for mine and it is fantastic. Considering what I am about to pay for the 17-40 f4L the 50mm is awesome value.

I don't know alot about the f/1.4 or the f/1.2 apart from the fact they go up exponentionally (speeling) in price. The f/1.8 is great in low light. I love the warm in the photos in low light.

Overall, a great lense.

A couple of sample shots.

macca · Post by **macca** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:04 pm

That prime really is an amazing price, but a 17-40L, my God, Norbs has won the lottery

Look forward to seeing pics from both those lenses, might be tempted on the prime myself

CLP · Post by **CLP** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:30 pm

i've got a pentax 50mm f1.7 A lens which, from it's limited use, was well worth the money paid

($95 on ebay including a hard case)

first time out in anger with this lens was yesterday at the tour down under, so i'm hoping to have a few shots posted during the week once i filter out the crap

CLP

Post by **Shonky** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:01 pm

Top little lens the 50 f1.8, been seriously considering one myself just cause of the bang for your buck factor, and I lack something for low light conditions atm.

Peptis · Post by **Peptis** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:33 pm

fourthof5 wrote:Going to get one of these, but I must as the simple question. Why are they so cheap ??
The f1.4 is $500ish yet the 1.8 is $130

I basically figure that the large aperture means that the lens has to be made a lot better to avoid distortions. A good analogy would be how squinting allows you to see better.

This guy kinda backs me up. From http://www.amazon.com/Canon-85mm-1-2L-L ... B00009XVDM - he talks about a f1.2 lens (so even more expensive). It's not really the best explanation though.

I bet if you are considering buying the 85mm 1.8 you came across this lens and thought to yourself why is the 85mm 1.2 so much more expensive? Is it sharper? Is it that much better?

Not necessarily. This is a specialty lens, and that's one reason I don't own it (I also can't afford it, lol). Photographers who buy it are aiming for a specific look that's created with 1.2 aperture. The look this lens creates tends to be very sharp at center and smoothly moves to dreamy blur towards the edges. It's that very special effect that you see in some of the top fashion photography that photographers seek in this lens.

Other than the special effect that the extra stop offers there are few basic differences. The 1.2 produces more contrast and saturated colors, but it isn't anything beyond what you can replicate in Photoshop. On the other hand the 1.8 focuses faster. Also, the 1.2 extra stop accounts for the huge size and weight difference. The 1.2 weight 2.3 pounds!! vs. the 1.8 which weight slightly under 1 pound. I am guessing that due to this weight difference the 1.2 focuses slower (much heavier and bigger glass), but that's just a guess.

Keep in mind that the 1 stop difference in aperture accounts for the stark difference in price. Both lenses are designed differently (element count for example). There are many other lenses that serve as an example of big difference in pricing due to only 1 extra stop. Take for example the 16-35 2.8 and 17-40 4.0; one stop difference doubles the price in the case of the first lens.

I hope that you found this information helpful in deciding if this great lens is for you or not. As for me, I decided to sacrifice the extra stop in aperture and go with the 85mm 1.8. It represents a better value for me plus if I ever need a higher aperture I would just buy the 50mm 1.4, which provides an 85mm field of view on my 1.6 crop factor camera. Defiantly a lower quality lens, but greater value for me!

Ps. many fashion photographers own both lenses (1.8 and 1.2). They use the 1.8 most of the time along with the 135 2.0 (another great lens!) and only pull out the 1.2 when the job calls for its special effects.

DarrenM · Post by **DarrenM** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:49 pm

The 1.4 has an extra lens element, 8 diaphragm blades instead of 5 and a usm motor. Not entirely sure but it might have a metal body as well, while the 1.8 is all plastic because it's 160g heavier.

I bought one a while ago and the first few times I used it I though it was crap as the pics were worse than my 17-40, but when I tried it again later they were ok and I like it now

bertie · Post by **bertie** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:42 pm

Here's a good comparison between the two:
http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:12 pm

Thats a good link bertie. Ta everyone, gonna get the 1.8 for a birthday present.

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:07 pm

OK so I know a bit about media and I know a bit about photography. I have always assumed that a prime lens with a static f/stop was just that. ie f/1.8 is it. Thats what the lens does. While a lens which states that f/2 - 5.6 has a shifting fstop. I was apparently wrong in that assumtion.

Post by **norbs** » Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:38 pm

fourthof5 wrote:OK so I know a bit about media and I know a bit about photography. I have always assumed that a prime lens with a static f/stop was just that. ie f/1.8 is it. Thats what the lens does. While a lens which states that f/2 - 5.6 has a shifting fstop. I was apparently wrong in that assumtion.

Not sure what you mean Nige. But my understanding of a prime was its focal length was static, not its aperture.

Post by **Shonky** » Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:35 pm

As Norbs said, a prime relates to the focal length being static, apeture is still adjustable, with f22 being the minimum apeture of the 50mm f1.8 I believe.

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:42 pm

Its ok. My brain failed. I was thinking of the fact that on some lenses focual lenth effects the apature, while others don't. Never mind all sorted now.

bertie · Post by **bertie** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:43 am

My understanding is that the variable f/stop measurements relate to the maximum aperture for the zoom range. e.g: a 25-100mm f/2-5.6 lens would mean a max of f/2 at 25mm, and max of f/5.6 at 100mm, but you can still step down to f/22. Does that sound right???

Post by **norbs** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:09 am

bertie wrote:My understanding is that the variable f/stop measurements relate to the maximum aperture for the zoom range. e.g: a 25-100mm f/2-5.6 lens would mean a max of f/2 at 25mm, and max of f/5.6 at 100mm, but you can still step down to f/22. Does that sound right???

Yup, thats how I see it Bertie. And just tried it on the 28-135mm and thats how it works.

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:40 am

bertie wrote:My understanding is that the variable f/stop measurements relate to the maximum aperture for the zoom range. e.g: a 25-100mm f/2-5.6 lens would mean a max of f/2 at 25mm, and max of f/5.6 at 100mm, but you can still step down to f/22. Does that sound right???

Yep thats right. For some strange reason my brain failed to realise that, and assumed that a 50m f/1.8 was a constant f/1.8. I was dumb.

bertie · Post by **bertie** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:02 pm

kewl - some of this SLR stuff is starting to make sense to me

Just need to find the time and motivation to get out and practice more. Find it hard to go out and take pics for the sake of taking pics, if you know what I mean. Anyone else suffer this?

Post by **norbs** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:08 pm

bertie wrote:kewl - some of this SLR stuff is starting to make sense to me

Just need to find the time and motivation to get out and practice more. Find it hard to go out and take pics for the sake of taking pics, if you know what I mean. Anyone else suffer this?

Nope. Not at all. I love just grabbing the backpack and heading out. Bertie, maybe a night out in Sydney will help.

bertie · Post by **bertie** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 4:07 pm

I think you're on the money there, champ

That's the thing I struggle with - knowing what to shoot when just "shooting". Different if I have something in mind (like a party, or day at the races or something). It's a skill I'm keen to learn though, oh master

Post by **norbs** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 4:13 pm

bertie wrote:I think you're on the money there, champ

That's the thing I struggle with - knowing what to shoot when just "shooting". Different if I have something in mind (like a party, or day at the races or something). It's a skill I'm keen to learn though, oh master

Mate, Im not a master, thats for damned sure. Macca and I had a couple of photo outings and I reckon I learnt more than he did. Was great fun.

bertie · Post by **bertie** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 5:39 pm

It's all relative. Compared to the average stuff I'm taking, you're up there. (Actually, compared to a lot of the stuff I see, you're up there. And I'm not just pissing in yer pockets there).

A photo outing sounds like the goods - when's your next one?

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:09 pm

Walk around. What ever takes your interest you shoot. The More you do it, the more you shoot things of interest. And yes going out an shooting in a group does wonders. I have only been out once with others (that was with norbs for about an hour) and I still learnt something. Even if its just the self confidence you get shooting in a group, you will learn heaps.

Post by **norbs** » Thu Jan 25, 2007 9:06 am

fourthof5 wrote:Walk around. What ever takes your interest you shoot. The More you do it, the more you shoot things of interest. And yes going out an shooting in a group does wonders. I have only been out once with others (that was with norbs for about an hour) and I still learnt something. Even if its just the self confidence you get shooting in a group, you will learn heaps.

Don't sound so surpised Nige.

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Thu Jan 25, 2007 9:57 am

wasn't suprise at all. More that even a hour of group shoot has benifits.

A.R.S.E.

Lenses: 50m Prime f/1.8

Lenses: 50m Prime f/1.8

Re: Lenses: 50m Prime f/1.8