The Canon Ef 50mm
The Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II is the least costly lens presently available for the EOS system
, and has actually been in the lineup since late 1990. It's a streamlined variation of the original EF 50mm F1.8 of 1987 (commonly described as the 'Mark I') which was provided as standard with a couple of Canon's earliest 35mm EOS SLRs; nevertheless it can trace its lineage back a great deal further than that, as the business has actually been making 50mm F1.8 standard lenses since 1959. Like its ancestor, it seconds hand straightforward symmetric Gaussian optics with 6 elements in 5 groups, in a well-proven formula which is recognized to deliver outstanding correction of aberrations.
Although made as a 'standard' lens for 35mm film, nowadays the 50mm F1.8 is far more most likely to be seen doing service on APS-C format DSLRs, on which it behaves like a short telephoto portraiture lens (80mm equivalent). With its incredibly reduced (sub - $ 100) rate, it has a tendency to entice the interest of Canon SLR users aiming to begin experimenting with fast lenses for reduced light and shallow depth of area work, or simply intending to get sharper results than those which can be provided by the set lens bundled with the video camera body. It's even a prospective possibility for those looking for a near-disposable lens to make use of in unfavorable conditions.
Of course this isn't really the only lens of its focal length in Canon's lineup, and possible buyers will commonly even be tempted by the EF 50mm F1.4 USM which we examined just recently, in spite of its significantly greater cost. So the question we'll be asking in this review is whether the slower lens offers such persuasive value for money that it's an unmissable deal, or if instead the unavoidable compromises involved in hitting such a low price point are excessive to put up with.
Headline characteristics
50mm focal length
Fast F1.8 max aperture
The EF 50mm F1.8 II is the most affordable lens Canon makes, and the construct quality is commensurate with the rate. From the mount at one end to the filter thread at the other, the whole entire external framework is made from smooth black plastic, and overall this lens provides the impression of being developed to a (very limited) spending plan. Features and controls are kept to an outright minimum; you get a focus method switch and a near-vestigial focusing ring, but that's about it. The front element is recessed by about 12mm from the filter thread, in effect providing a built-in hood for reduction of flare, and the barrel is rather broad and stubby to accommodate the focus and aperture electric motors plus the connected electronics.
Of course one advantage of the minimalist design technique is incredibly light weight, and this lens techniques the scales at a featherweight 130g, so will not exactly include unwelcome heft to your video camera bag. But as the body is unusually sizable with respect to the optical unit itself, this has the result of lowering the 'density' of the lens (definitely if it were a sealed cyndrical tube, it would float in water); the general impression is of anything but solidity.
Right here we see the 50mm F1.8 II alongside the EF 50mm F1.4 USM, which costs more than 3 times as a lot. The slower lens is visibly smaller sized and less than half the weight than its faster brother or sister, but that distinctly fundamental design technique is very evident here. In comparison, the F1.4 lens gains USM focusing with full-time hand-operated manual focus, a focus distance scale, enhanced construction consisting of a steel mount, and a bayonet fitting for the hood (not to mention that it gathers 67 % more light).
Mount the light in weight, insubstantial 50mm F1.8 on a higher-end EOS bodies such as the 5D and you can practically be forgiven for forgetting that it was even there; this is one lens which will not be a duty to carry around all day. It's possibly finest matched to the small entry-level EOS designs such as the 450D, on which it forms an especially light in weight and unobtrusive combo ideal for low-light shooting.
The lens's handling is finest described as functional; the hand-operated focus ring works OK, but it has a rather loose, imprecise feel and you probably wouldn't want to use it all the time. It is even paired to the focusing electric motor when the lens is set to AF; this indicates that it rotates during focusing, so care should be taken to avoid holding it when utilizing autofocus. Canon even warns against turning the focus ring manually in this method to avoid damaging the electric motor or gear train, which indicates that full-time hand-operated focus is not available.
Autofocus
This lens seconds hand an extremely fundamental micromotor to drive the autofocus, which isn't really the best system Canon has actually ever before made. AF performance is general rather similar to the 18-55mm set lenses, i.e. a little sluggish and somewhat noisy (although a great deal better in this regard than some comparable systems we have actually seconded hand, such as the Olympus 50mm F2 macro), nevertheless the sizable max aperture does suggest that it continues to work happily in a lot reduced light levels before beginning to struggle and hunt for focus.
In use, the AF normally works effectively in really good light, but as illumination levels fall it becomes progressively more afraid and less reliable. It has a disconcerting tendency to misfocus somewhat in reduced light (most visible when shooting with sizable apertures) and whilst the video camera body's AF system have to share a couple of the blame for this, the EF 50mm F1.4 USM does seem more reliable in these scenarios. As constantly, it should even be indicated that focus speed and accuracy is dependent upon a number of variables, consisting of the video camera body seconded hand, subject comparison, and light levels.
Specific picture quality problems
As constantly, our studio examinations are backed up by taking hundreds of pictures with the lens throughout a range of subjects, and reviewing them in detail. This allows us to verify our studio observations, and identify any other problems which do not turn up in the examinations.
Soft corners at comprehensive apertures
Not unusually for a full-frame optic seconded hand on the resolution-hungry APS-C format, this lens isn't really at its finest at comprehensive apertures, and although central sharpness is OKAY the corners look distinctly soft. In this regard it's worth indicating that depth of area is very shallow at F1.8, and real-world results are mainly dependant upon focus accuracy, with the tiniest relative motion between photographer and subject resulting in a misfocused picture. Of course depth of area problems even suggest that the corners of the frame are commonly out of focus at F1.8 anyhow.
Nonetheless, to emphasize this problem here's the most recent in our set of enlightening brick wall images. At F1.8 the center looks a little soft and lacking in detail, but the corners are very soft definitely. Stopping down to F4 enhances things greatly - the center now looks incredibly sharp with well-resolved fine detail, and the corners have actually even enhanced significantly (stopping down a little more to F5.6 extracts the best possible performance).
Full-frame compared to APS-C
Eagle-eyed customers will no doubt have actually seen that the MTF50 sharpness information at any certain focal length/aperture combo is distinctly greater on full-frame when compared to APS-C. This could at first sight appear unanticipated, but in fact is an inevitable consequence of our demonstration of the sharpness information in regards to line pairs per image height (and thus independent of format size).
Rather simply, at any given focal length and aperture, the lens will have a corrected MTF50 profile when shown in regards to line pairs per millimeter. In order to transform to lp/ph, we need to multiply by the sensing unit height (in mm); as the full-frame sensing unit is 1.6 x larger, MTF50 should for that reason be 1.6 x greater.
In practice this is an oversimplification; our examinations measure system MTF rather than simply lens MTF, and at greater regularities the video camera's anti-aliasing filter will have a substantial result in attenuating the determined MTF50. In addition, our testing procedure includes shooting a chart of corrected size, which for that reason needs a closer shooting distance on full frame, and this will even have some influence on the MTF50 information.
Specific picture quality problems
As constantly, our studio examinations are backed up by taking hundreds of pictures with the lens throughout a range of subjects, and reviewing them in detail. This allows us to verify our studio observations, and identify any other problems which do not turn up in the examinations. We seconded hand the lens on both APS-C and full-frame bodies, such as the EOS 450D and the EOS 5D.
Flare
As we have actually concerned expect from sizable max aperture lenses, flare can in some cases be an issue with the 50mm F1.8 II. With it's profoundly recessed front element, the lens successfully has actually a permanently affixed hood, and so is normally resistant to veiling flare from light impinging the front element at a position. Nevertheless the second you aim the video camera towards the sunshine things can begin to go wrong, although on the whole the lens normally seems to shift a bit better than its F1.4 big brother in this regard.
With the sunshine in the corner of the frame, the lens is showing sizable, bright red flare patterns in the opposite corner when shot at comprehensive apertures. Stopping down progressively lowers these in size, but halation patterns around the sunshine rise instead; general the best results are attained at intermediate apertures around F5.6-F8. Nevertheless to be fair the lens regains its poise very rapidly as the light source is moved further off-axis, and is normally resistant to flare complications in normal shooting scenarios.
Background Blur (' bokeh'): lots of little pentagons
One really preferable, but difficult to determine aspect of a lens's performance is the capability to deliver efficiently beclouded out-of-focus regions when attempting to isolate a subject from the background, normally when utilizing a long focal length and sizable aperture. The 50mm F1.8 can produce significantly beclouded backgrounds at comprehensive apertures, a massive advantage for portraiture shooting specifically on APS-C.
Regrettably however, the character of the background blur is not significantly appealing. This is significantly due to the lens's diaphragm construction, which seconds hand merely 5 blades with totally straight edges (most contemporary designs make use of curved blades). This indicates that the second the lens is stopped down, point highlights are rendered as pentagons, commonly resulting in an incredibly distracting rendition of backgrounds that appears like nothing more than a primary-school effort at tessellation. And things aren't just so much far better at F1.8; while the apertures is at least round, highlights are rendered bright-edged and severe. General it's a pity Canon didn't carry out a somewhat more complex diaphragm construction with 7 or eight blades, as this behavior rather spoils the performance of an otherwise incredibly fine lens.
by: Eugenio Moss
The Practicality Of Motorcycle Transport Libor Rates By Remortgage Quote News Straightforward Advice On Fundamental Aspects Of Skin Care Diagnosing A Transient Ischaemic Attack The Cost Of Ceiling Fans Vs. Air Conditioning: Whats The Difference? What To Look For In A Personal Injury Lawyer For Your Claim Spying On A Cell Phone? Is It Possible? New Handmade Shoes For Men: What To Look In The Handmade Sneakers Earlier Than Buy Add Character To Any Space With The Perfect Lamp The Four Options For 2012 Ovdp You Must Know Now Is It Possible To Get A Six Pack? How To Create A Better Resume In 20 Minutes Yacht Charters Worldwide With Cv Yachting