| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
  | sent on 11 Dicembre 2021 Pros: Robust, well made with metal bayonet Cons: Nothing Opinion: I bought this used 'thirty-year-old' for 70 euros as new. I'm a Nikon man and I started using Canon because my friends were talking about it. Starting a new kit I did not want to exaggerate immediately and I bought the 24 EF S and this 50. Mounted on the EOS 1 mark2 I started taking pictures of my son with burst shutter. The focus is not lightning....... here you can feel the 30 years of age. Sometimes some shots come out of focus. But the object is worth its money and churns out excellent results between f4 and f11 with excellent sharpness and a very particular blurred and very different from the nikon parity that I own. The behavior is however in full line with this type of objectives. I would like to share a reflection with you: I thought a lot about whether to buy this or the new 50 STM and then after various thoughts I opted for this, believe me not to save 30 euros ....... But because I wanted to savor again those objects of the past that maybe were not super performing but were qualitatively excellent. I tried again that feeling of when the kit was made by the 28, the 50 and the 135 remember you remember???? So if you want to go back give yourself this 50 a few pennies if you find it and you will return children or young people ............ Speaks one class 1973. Happy 50 to all |
 | sent on 05 Gennaio 2021 Pros: Ghera for focus, distance scale, sharpness, small size Cons: Noisy autofocus, nervous blurry Opinion: Very simple lens, with distance scale, focus ghera and front lens that does not rotate. Up to f/4 has a fairly pronounced vignette and poor sharpness at the corners, but does not present significant chromatic aberrations. The focus is thanks to an AFD engine that, although it makes it faster than the Mark II to hook (it is comparable to the micro-Usm of the f/1.4), emits a deadly sound. Another defect can be found in the diaphragm, which has only 5 slats that make the blurry nervous. As various objectives of the past it has different characteristics between one specimen and another, and if you are lucky you find something really good. I found a specimen with excellent clarity and micro-contrast, with which remarkable results are already achieved at full opening, while I have tried others that have turned out to be good but not at the same level. Ps. One thing to check is that it doesn't suffer from front/back focus |
  | sent on 29 Novembre 2018 Pros: Cost, general yield, distance scale Cons: Noisy Autofocus Opinion: Metal attack, distance scale and less plastic of its successors. Optical pattern unchanged from plastic fantastic (50mm 1.8 mkii). Bought years ago at 80 euros. It's my only 50mm, focal that I use occasionally. The detachment of the floors is and is pleasant but the sharpness at 1.8 is not the best, close to 2.8 and will be a nice companion of adventures and will give you satisfaction. You will learn to shoot with a fixed optics. Possibility of good portraits for the figure to which you find it bought it as well. As long as you can find... Extremely noisy and slow Autofocus (it's still a 31-year-old lens). But you pass it on. |
 | sent on 25 Febbraio 2018 Pros: Sharpness, brightness, blurred, weight, price Cons: Autofocus a bit slow and noisy without drama Opinion: Bought used to ny, the clerk suggested this version and as far as I read was a correct suggestion. I bought it and gave it a second so I liked it. Usable with little light, it manages to give back a pleasant blur even if sometimes it "betrays". People, animals, plants emerge naturally from the background. My favorite. |
user23385
 | sent on 11 Dicembre 2017 Pros: Optical output without infamy and without praise Cons: all Opinion: First series of Canon lenses for autofocus on analog Eos absolutely disappointing from the constructive point of view. Best certainly the Minolta.Ricordo that just took it back after a few days. Accustomed to the objectives for contax / zeiss I was literally shocked by the material with which it was built. It looked like it was not even plastic, but even pressed cardboard. Assembly with scary games. I had the impression of using a toy lens. |
 | sent on 11 Dicembre 2017 Pros: Sharpness, construction materials, lightness, size and price Cons: Nobody Opinion: This lens is part of my 1987 kit, absolutely zero problems, the autofocus is a bit slow and noisy, but since it was designed thirty years ago I would say that it does its job just fine. What to say has really left me speechless the quality of the photos taken with this lens so I did not think it was possible to get a lens for an analog camera, creates an absolutely fabulous vintage effect especially thanks to F1.8, I made other shots at f4 / 5.6 and the result was an incredible sharpness and uniformity that does not leave you at all to be desired, on the contrary. I'm starting to use a digital camera and I will certainly use this lens, proud of being its owner, excellent general performance and even straight from 1987 does not disappoint. |
 | sent on 28 Giugno 2017 Pros: Sharpness, construction, is small and light Cons: blurred, nervous, loud noises Opinion: I used it a lifetime ago, almost by chance and for a few tens of euros. Only then did I realize I had to be a proud owner! It is far more difficult to find the successor (version II), and much better constructed: metal bayonet, distance windows, true manual MAF ring, in short, there is no comparison in the level of visual and tactile satisfaction. But it is in the optical rendering that this mini-lens amazes: I find it incredible that a project designed thirty years ago for the film can give today, on digital, similar results. And not only with no reverential fears towards more recent and high-end goals, but often even beating them! The rendering to TA is truly modest, and is accompanied by a vignetting, as is common to the optics with this maximum aperture: the use at f1 .8 is, in fact, limited to cases where deliberately a vintage effect is sought, accentuated by the detachment of planes very marked by the minimum depth offield, and blurry, which is so soft and pleasant in that case, because the lens uses the perfect circularity of the hole left free from the diaphragm. But just close to f2.5-2.8 to make the vignetting disappear almost and, above all, see the solution already on very good levels at the center and good at the margins. f4 The sharpness and the center-edge uniformity leaves you speechless, and f5.6 reaches a simply incredible peak across the entire frame. The yield remains gorgeous at f8 to decrease, but not drastically, only minute, such as eyelash, hair, wrinkles, grass bands etc., are returned to the native raw with an engraving which seems to have already been processed with sharpening in PP.rnThe distortion is completely absent.rnOnly you can not have everything from life, and in fact the limit of this goal is the rather nervous blur, and the only 5 lamella diaphragm, which in certain situations generate pentagons enoughbent at reflections or light spots out of focus. The AF is lense and noisy, but for me it is not a problem (I am not a professional) and in fact it makes me a bit sympathetic. With my Eos 5D old showing a certain back-focusing, which has tarnished some use and results, a problem solved with the fine adjustment of 5D MkII. With this body the lens also has a better performance than the 5D old, especially at full aperture, where the 21mpx allows you to recover a great detail by carefully treating the sharpening. In fact, I use it mostly at TA, in search of the very small PDC and of the particular blurring effect of the out of focus. RnIn conclusion: if you find one in order, take it! It's in a pocket mounted on the car seems to miss the lens, or there's only a 1.4x multiplier (thank you neck and / or shoulder), and when you look at photos on your pc you will never be disappointed. |
 | sent on 08 Aprile 2017 Pros: Sharpness, solid construction, the price ... Cons: AF a bit slow and noisy ... Opinion: Bought a few months ago the modest sum of 50 euros !! (Shipping Included) ... so I took it on a whim with no claim but from the first moment has definitely left me open-mouthed for the build quality and yield. No speck of dust or anything else inside after almost 30 years of "business." rnLe pictures are already very sharp closing of 1 or 2 stop but not also disappoints at RT. optical dynamic range and yield equal to if not greater than the new model ... For everything else there's MasterCard ... |
 | sent on 27 Marzo 2017 Pros: Sharpness and yield in general, construction, light weight, price Cons: Shortly usable TA, maf noisy, hard to find Opinion: Taken used 100 EUR years ago, is still my favorite lens on FF (especially for street); I also had on APSC, which is much less versatile, yet convenient for notturni.rnCostruzione shots even comparable to fifty plasticky who succeeded him, for both bayonet metal for quality plastic still visibly migliore.rnA TA it is very soft (for me difficult to use), but closed a couple of stops becomes crystal clear shots and returns certainly of superb quality; having tried it, I feel I can say how I prefer it made 50 f / 1.4.rnLa maf is a bit 'noisy, but it's still a lens of 1987 ... and for this reason is not certain with facilità.rn |
 | sent on 24 Aprile 2016 Pros: optical performance, in all aspects. much better construction of the fifty mark II Cons: autofocus a bit 'noisy Opinion: This small lens was a surprise. I had read in some American forum of optical performance superior to all other 50mm canon. I never tried the 50 L series, but using other professional lenses can say that the optical performance of this lens is astonishing. beautiful colors, much more beautiful moltoo 40mm STM which also possess. The blurry at full aperture is mellow, not nervous, I would say nicer than the fifty II who also owned. On nitidizza then it is great already wide open but closing a hair leaves you speechless. In short, after a few shots went off the love with this little lens. Something that does not happen often, and you then really knows what I mean. |
 | sent on 17 Febbraio 2015 Pros: Optical performance - size - construction Cons: AF noisy Opinion: There is little to say about this lens, since the optical yield is equal to the current 50ino 1.8, then ottima.rnPer else is better in everything, aesthetics, construction, practicality. rnEssendo a lens old you can run into some problems with the calibration of the MAF but you can act with a bit of trade on the contact area of ??the PCB that allows a certain range of microtaratura (an operation is within the reach of anyone who is accustomed to using a soldering iron , and completely reversible as well as specified on the service manual) .rnSicuramente a purchase that will last over time to a lens of APSC intramontabile.rnPS personally do not like the 50mm focal ... you know, is neither fish nor fowl. |
 | sent on 08 Marzo 2013 Pros: Value for money, building compared to Mark II Cons: Blurred a bit 'harsh, not af USM, the lens hood is hard to find and expensive Opinion: A lens that I have always held, you can do everything from macro (tube) to the portrait to landscape, good construction with metal bayonet ring and focus well positioned and not as ridiculous as the Mark II. The price of a copy in good condition up to 150 euro, for me it's worth it all, there were lenses with this quality / price ratio! My vote is nine also by virtue of the latter consideration, ever seen could also be an 8. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
