EF 50mm f/1.8 II Best Shot

[jhga22]

I thought since pretty much everyone owns or has owned this very small, very cheap, and yet surprisingly fun lens thatit would be fun to see some of the work it has produced.

[Oren]

I like them both, I wouldn't expect such a good quality from this lens - can you post larger versions for our review?

[jhga22]

/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.58/DPC1.jpg


40D w/ EF 50mm f/1.8 II at 50mm,f/2, 1/50,ISO 400








/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.58/DPP2.jpg


40D w/ EF 50mm f/1.8 II at 50mm,f/2.5, 1/80,ISO 400

[atticusdsf]

those are both very good.. good enough that now i'm considering getting one of these just for the hell of it.. but then again, i have the f/1.4 so there probably isn't a point other than novelty.


do you have any others? do share!

[jhga22]

<div>Yeah, this lens is very cheap. I sometimes get the feeling that it is going to break when it's trying to focus and I have read reports that the autofocus will burn out on it with excessive use...but for the price ($90) it'sprobably the bestbargain Canon offers. </div>
<div></div>
<div>I've heard the f/1.4 is much better (certainly for build quality, if not for <span style="cursor: hand; border-bottom: #0066cc 1px dashed;" id="lw_1234784181_0" class="yshortcuts"]image quality) so if you already have that I don't see any reason why you would get this lens. I just know a lot of people get it, especially beginners, because of the price, so I wanted to see what was out there. </div>
<div></div>
<div>I'll post a couple more when I get the chance.</div>

[jhga22]

Atticus, here are two more. I have added a few more on my profile if you would like to see them...there's just no way to post the EXIF data on there. If you would like to know it for any of them...just let me know.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.58/Poly.jpg


My cat Poly; 40D w/ 50mm f/1.8 II at 50mm, f/2.2, 1/60, ISO 400








/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.58/Wine-Rack.jpg


A wine rack in my house; 40D w/ 50mm f/1.8 II at 50mm, f/1.8, 1/25, ISO 800

[dmckinny]

This isn't my best shot but it is one I had handy at work. Taken in Leu Gardens in Orlando just before Christmas. Shot with a 30D, 50mm 1.8 II, Av 2.8, Tv 1/800, Evaluative metering, ISO 100, processed in DPP, and basically just resized for the web. I was intentionally playing with narrow DOF that day, but I learned alot [;)]


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3375/3285746040_e4b5d0a9d7.jpg?v=0

[I chase light]

/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.42/Blue-Chevy-Pickup700Wide.jpg


XSi, 1/100Sec., F1.8, Exposure Compensation -2/3, ISO 800. Available light in a parking lot at night.

[I chase light]

/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.42/ActorPortrait800wide.jpg


Just one more - XSi, 1/100Sec., F2.8, Exposure Compensation-1/3, ISO 800. Quick shot of an actor just before performance...again available light. Tweaked saturation down in DPP.

[dmckinny]

OK, here is a newbie posting question. This picture is supposed to be 800x1200, but it is obviously smaller. Is this something Flicker is doing to my photos? I just have a basic free account, so I think this is the problem.


Assuming this is the problem, are there any other services that won't change my pictures, and do it for free? Or are there some settings in Flicker that I need to change?

[peety3]

Here's two samples. No post-processing other than basics in Picasa; WB was set to something pretty high manually, perhaps 9000K.


http://photos.templin.org/albums/tgiving2008B/426C0007.sized.jpg


http://photos.templin.org/albums/tgiving2008B/426C0038.sized.jpg

[mattsartin]

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_txxcOCWRgac/SW5J5tCY7yI/AAAAAAAAGjs/BcS_xv02Jd0/s512/IMG_8643.jpg

[prideandfight]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3451/3935666020_2e99976a21.jpg


Taken on a Rebel XTi at f/2.5

[Maleko]

the nifty 50 is a must have, just because its so cheap :P

[btaylor]

I'm a big fan of the nifty 50. I get it out quite a bit. Here's a self portrait I did last night using it - very different from my usual stuff. Some slight photoshopping involved. [:P] I'd like to revisit something like this again but put a bit more work/ timeinto it.


Still, shows how sharp this lens can be.





40D, 50mm, f/8.0, 1/250, on camera flash bounced off white wall camera left.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.34/Zombie-Me.jpg

[Sean Setters]

I feel left out...I've never owned the Canon 50mm f/1.8. I was shooting with a friend once and he let me borrow it. I was so disgusted by the build quality, slow focusing, and displeasing bokeh (his copy created oval OOF highlights near the edges of the frame) that I skipped the nifty fifty entirely and went straight for the 50mm f/1.4. I've really enjoyed it.

[Matthew Gilley]

Sean - why so harsh? Rather than putting down this thread contribute to it! Lets keep this forum positive - even for those of us with lesser gear.


Here is a shot from the lens you mentioned - the original 50mm f/1.8 Date UB0700 - it's still holding it together after all these years.


40d 50mm 1.8 1/400 ISO 1600 - Buckwheat Festival - Kingwood WV


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.30/IMG_5F00_5740.JPG

[btaylor]

I feel left out...I've never owned the Canon 50mm f/1.8. I was shooting with a friend once and he let me borrow it. I was so disgusted by the build quality, slow focusing, and displeasing bokeh (his copy created oval OOF highlights near the edges of the frame) that I skipped the nifty fifty entirely and went straight for the 50mm f/1.4. I've really enjoyed it.


Agreed - the built quality is mediocre at best andthe focusing is slower than a wet week. BUT it costsa mere$100! At the end of the day you do get what you pay for and the f/1.4 is certainly a better lens... but it certainly doesn't cost $100.


I've not had any major issues with the bokeh as you saw Sean but either way I've had a lot of fun with the little piece of plasticy goodness.

[Sean Setters]

Sean - why so harsh? Rather than putting down this thread contribute to it! Lets keep this forum positive - even for those of us with lesser gear.


I apologize if I pulled down the thread. I certainly didn't mean to. I merely pointed out why I passed on the lens after trying it out. It's possible that his copy exhibited traits that are atypical (like the oval OOF highlights). I feel left out because I do see some great looking shots taken with the lens--and maybe that's more of a testament to the person behind the camera rather than the lens in front of it.

[Daniel Browning]

displeasing bokeh (his copy created oval OOF highlights near the edges of the frame)


Oval OOF highlights, or "cat's eye bokeh", is normal for this lens at f/1.8. Many other lenses have it too; it's caused by vignetting. See the excellent info from Paul van Walree:


http://toothwalker.org/optics/vignetting.html ("http://toothwalker.org/optics/vignetting.html)

[Maleko]

I feel left out...I've never owned the Canon 50mm f/1.8. I was shooting with a friend once and he let me borrow it. I was so disgusted by the build quality, slow focusing, and displeasing bokeh (his copy created oval OOF highlights near the edges of the frame) that I skipped the nifty fifty entirely and went straight for the 50mm f/1.4. I've really enjoyed it.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



Can totally see your point, but I paid &pound;60 for mine, for that I have no complaints!

[Vlad Xp]

Here's my contribution to the Nifty Fifty gallery [:)]
50mm f/1.8 II, ISO 100, f/8, 10-second exposure. Camera was placed on a tripod. Mirror lockup enabled. Shot in RAW, and processed in PS.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.24.39/Tulsa-Skyline-III.jpg

[Mark Elberson]

<p class="MsoNormal"]<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"]



Here's my contribution
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

<p class="MsoNormal"]<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"]Gorgeous!<o:p></o:p>

[emag remrofni]

Not my best shot, but I find it interesting.





http://lh4.ggpht.com/_ns_Z4kKAqi8/SsAtm74Q0_I/AAAAAAAAA9Q/9kIgIf8HNPw/s912/keepouttake2.jpg

[emag remrofni]

Here's another. Definitely not a to testament to the abilities of the plastic fantastic, but something to drool over. A friend playing with my gear.





http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2443/3969859001_687f1e4294.jpg

[Garrett-Grimsley]

The Nifty-Fifty and the 85 f1.8 are the two lenses I use the most. Absolutely love them.


Here's a couple of mine.


http://sleekupload.com/uploads/5/img_3992edit.png


http://sleekupload.com/uploads/5/img_3993edit.png


http://sleekupload.com/uploads/5/img_0844.png

[Ghosthex]

/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.12/miller-2.jpg

[Fouad]

Seems we have a great many talented people here. Goes to show what a sense of light and an eye for composition can create with an inexpensive lens.


I am glad that Canon produces this lens.

[Rodger]

Great shots Garret!! I'm interested in the EXIF data for the hands and the portrait shot if you don't mind. Some shots with my 50 1.8 from a portrait session on Tuesday leave quite a bit to be desired in the realms of sharpness. (shooting at f/4.5 or smaller).


Thanks!


-Rodger

[Ghosthex]

/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.12/8443_2D00_2.jpg

[Maleko]

Just a quick one from a a gig:


http://portfolio.maleko.co.uk/images/portfolio/gigs/gigs_13.JPG

[DBD_Photo]

One from an actor's portfolio shot with Canon 50mm 1.8. Works for me and he's working!


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.38.58/cam.jpg

[Jordan]

This photo was taken forElements Spa ("http://www.elementshawaii.com/)&amp; ("http://www.elementshawaii.com/)Salon ("http://www.elementshawaii.com/)here in Hawaii and was feature in Pacific Edge Magazine's summer of 2009 wedding issue.


Canon REBEL T1i,EF 50mm f/1.8 II @<span class="nowrap"]f/1.8,<span class="nowrap"]1/200,<span class="nowrap"]ISO 100,430 EXII Speedlite attached and reflected using a white sheet.