| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
  | sent on 23 Febbraio 2021 Pros: Price, good bokeh Cons: Vignetting on Full Frame at TA Opinion: Good lens for price quality, it does not stay behind the Nikon equivalent. A bit soft at TA ( but maybe it's better to hide imperfections in portraits ) and sharp from f2.8 to f4 very sharp even at the edges, up to f11. Autofocus maybe not too precise on APS-C (Nikon D7500), but no problem on Nikon Z with adapter and on Full Frame (Nikon D750). Great quality price. |
 | sent on 30 Ottobre 2019 Pros: Price, wide opening, contrast Cons: Chromatic aberrations, MAF too often inaccurate (perhaps just for my specimen?), TA sharpness, plastic construction Opinion: It was my first lens. Beautiful contrast and opening that allows you to take home the shot even with little light or with old reflexes that can not stand the high iso. Unfortunately I gave it away after 5-6 months because the maf was too often inaccurate (especially back focus), unusable at TA because of its high softness. Generally I closed by a stop (thus reducing the advantage of having a bright optics). Construction too "cheap" (it's okay the price but a minimum of extra attention you could do). Being also too tight on an APS-C I replaced it with the Canon 24 mm f/2.8 STM. A whole other world. Sharpness to TA higher than that of the Yongnuo at f/2.8, very low color aberration, solid construction, but above all surgical MAF. Now I can trust more of the AF than my old 40D. Agree it costs more, but it's worth it. I will replace the "normal" focal with a Helios 44M-5 f/2.0. We'll see if he's better than Yongnuo. |
 | sent on 28 Luglio 2019 Pros: Price, lightness, great bokeh effect, perfect for full frame or aps-c only for portraits. Cons: Slow focus (even too much) during night sessions or with little light, automatic mode of automatic focus a little sensitive to the movement of the ring. Opinion: I took this lens because I love creating an ultra-blurred effect behind the subject, and it actually works. The problem is that to create a full-length photo with an aps-c camera, I have to move away a bit by giving up the blurry effect I so longed for (the blur is noticeable, but not too much). I consider this lens a best buy for those who love the cant. I have to add that the focus is a bit noisy and sensitive to the movement of the ring and is not completely blocked, but after all acceptable for the price it has (50 euros). I've seen a lot of videos that said that the 50 mm f1.8 was the best lens that existed, but I'm sure the people who recommended it had in their hand a full frame camera of 1000 and over euro, machine that I can not afford. To evade that video I would recommend a 35 mm f1.8, a little careless but perfect for whole figures. Recommended lens. |
user163569
 | sent on 07 Aprile 2019 Pros: Price, weight, brightness Cons: For the price no one Opinion: A sweet surprise! Very satisfied, considering also the price. The AF is not very fast but for fashion shots or portraits do not feel the need. The Lens recalls the original first version, weight and acceptable dimensions for those who like me prefer to travel light. I Was a little hesitant and scared after reading some reviews, instead if you understand how to Domesticarlo I think it's a decent lens. |
|
| sent on 08 Febbraio 2019 Pros: All in all a good lens. Small and light. Cons: Optical features not at the pace of the most current lenses. Plasticose Construction (even if the mount is metal). The autofocus is not exactly a splinter. Like a bit all third-party lenses that cannot be calibrated by the user, better to use it on a body equipped with MAF correction, because some specimens may suffer from front/back focus. Opinion: I'll start with the conclusions: a good lens that does not work miracles, suitable for those who want to take the hand with this focal or for those who (like me) do not particularly like this focal but do not want to give up having a fifty in the bag. Rather soft at the more open aperture (which is not necessarily bad, it becomes a good portrait lens on DX, where the softness is partly compensated by the absence of anti-aliasing filter), it becomes acceptably sharp from F4 up. The focus is never particularly quick, but thanks to God is at least reliable, I rarely miss the fire. At the very least, after correcting the focus on the camera body, because my specimen was born with a slight front/back focus (do not remember if front or back). I do not see significant chromatic aberrations, but a bit suffers from backlight (although never at the levels of old AF-D lenses). Acceptable vignetting and distortion almost absent. The construction is economical and does not try to hide it: Plasticaccia. But the mount is in metal, and all in all the economic construction is reflected on the weight, extremely contained. Some might say that it pays to buy a 50 AF-D used. True. For those who have a machine body with built-in motor. This lens, however, has its autofocus motor and works on all camera bodies. |
 | sent on 07 Dicembre 2018 Pros: Price, brightness, weight, size Cons: For what it costs, no one! Opinion: Excellent lens! Excellent bokeh at F/1.8! An excellent lens if we consider it costs only €50! What more do we want? Obvious, the autofocus will not be of the fastest, the sharpness is not top, the materials are scadenti...ma to be a lens from €50 is great! Perfect for those who would like to try the fixed focal lenses without spending too much or to have a bright optics after the 18-55 |
 | sent on 12 Ottobre 2018 Pros: price, brightness, Weight Cons: materials, slightly slow fire Opinion: Overall for its price this lens is really outstanding. Taken at less than €50 new on Amazon. Tested and compared with the official Canon 50mm f 1.8, Well what about I prefer this lens. Mainly used for portraits, you can get very nice photos with beautiful blurry. Really recommended as a lens |
 | sent on 25 Settembre 2018 Pros: Price, brightness Cons: The part that shifts the lens to focus a little ballerina Opinion: Just arrived. I ordered it to start forming a small kit, having only an old 35-80 that proves all 27 of its years. The quality seems good to me, both for what it costs and for the term of comparison to which I am accustomed. I realize that having no experience with more expensive lenses my impression could be distorted, but personally I am very pleased with the purchase. For those who are in the beginning, can not or do not want to spend exorbitant figures and looking for a decent low-cost blurred I guess you can not expect more. Mechanically, taking into account the price, I see no big flaws, except perhaps for the cylinder that moves the last lens that if touched tends to move (eg mounting a filter) about half a millimeter putting off axis the last lens with the lens, but it goes From if that for €48 more you can not really expect. |
 | sent on 03 Luglio 2018 Pros: Price, brightness, weight Cons: Slightly noisy Opinion: I find this objective a valid lens. At a price less than 100 euros it is impossible to ask for more. Used is located between 60 and 80 euros, better to find one with Italian guarantee. I have handled different lenses and as materials can not be compared to alternatives that exceed 300/400 euros... Overall the metal attack (Nikon) and plastics in general do not They look worse than a Nikon equivalent (50 1.8 g tested for a month). The AF is very fast and precise (also depends on the machine..) It also has the great advantage of being able to match both a-PSC and Full Frame, not bad! At the level of distortion and vignetting I have not found anything so criticizable or not fixable easily with starting settings or PP. For those looking for the blurry is valuable, good for street and when the light starts to fall. I recommend it |
|
| sent on 07 Maggio 2018 Pros: Cost, sharpness, weight and brightness Cons: Building materials and sturdiness Opinion: Bought on the advice of my teacher of photography, and I must say excellent purchase logically compared to the cost, however great for portraits and blurred. For someone like me who comes from film photography where the lens of kit was the 50lo I find ideal for approach to the click of every day... glad I bought it |
  | sent on 17 Marzo 2018 Pros: Reasonably bright, always acceptable sharpness, price, blurry, accurate AF Cons: Materials, construction, noisy AF Opinion: Taken at less than 50 euros new on Amazon I am very satisfied in relation to the price. I use it for portraits (the blur is very very good) and occasionally for street on APS-C Canon and his work does it more than decently. Probably if you are not interested in the excellent blur it is worth the original Canon that even if it costs 2 to 3 times more it still remains an economic goal. Recommended if you absolutely want to save without sacrificing the quality of your photos. Mechanically it is ridiculous but for 50 euros you can not expect more. Reading the negative reviews I am led to think that I happened to have a particularly successful specimen or that even someone has not removed the protective film present on the sensor side lens. UPDATE February 2020 - almost a year later, I can only confirm the excellent performance. Also used on Canon 6D proves very useful in portraits, with a blurry even better than the 200D. I still think Canon 1.8 is good, but I keep this as long as it lasts. |
 | sent on 05 Marzo 2018 Pros: weight, size, cost Cons: quality, materials Opinion: Given the cost, he is forgiven a lot, costs one-tenth of another comparable goal, or 1/3 of the equivalent canon. I also have a review on the youtube channel, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcB4TP4jX7Q&t=3srnsembra in all respects the old canon 50mm 1.8 plasticotto !!! what to say, try it has made me turn up his nose several times, but then immediately after I always said "but for 45 euro sti cazzi", okay and I recommend it !!! better than atresia super 2-money zoom |
  | sent on 05 Marzo 2018 Pros: Nobody Cons: Everything, even the resale Opinion: From the series: "wedding with dried figs can not be done". Or rather, they can be done, but they remain weddings with dried figs. Now the site warns me that the comment must have at least 350 characters, who knows why, so I will have to pleonistically argue. Chinese does not mean bad quality: this lens is poor in every respect because it costs 47 euros, and maybe less, and not because it is Chinese. They are money thrown: with little more you take a 50mm 1.8, maybe used, but of good brand and yield. Why should you buy a 50mm 1.8 when there are cheap standard zooms that cover this focal length? generally the answer is: "for better quality" and talking about cheap standard zoom could be true, and for the brightness that always in the cheap standard zoom drops dramatically to 4.5 or so. But this 50mm flat aperture is practically unusable, so ... then, if it certainly happens, you repentIn the case of the unavoidable purchase, it will be difficult to sell it for more than 10 euros. Did I argue enough? |
 | sent on 05 Marzo 2018 Pros: Low cost Cons: Plastic attack (Canon version), slow and noisy autofocus, sharpness, distortion and vignetting Opinion: Noisy autofocus and construction so so-many had talked about in many of this 50mm Yongnuo and I decided to buy it to test it with the Canon 50mm f / 1.8 STM.rnIf you want to see the full proof you can find it on my Youtube channel.rnWe see in summary some general aspects of this lens.rnrnCONSTRUZIONErnThe lens is entirely plastic, even the attack, just like the old Canon of which is the clone and unlike the version for Nikon that at least has the metal attack.rnThe plastics to the touch return a feeling not so good, they seem really cheap.rnrnMESSA A FUOCOrnA noise level, the Yongnuo is definitely noisier than the Canon and also has a sound very similar to that of a robot.rnUsing my trusted 5D Mark III that has a great system autofocus, both are quick enough to hook the subject but I noticed that the Yongnuo, if the conditions are not exactly perfect, tends to search the fire going back and forth.rnrnIf you have to take portraits or landscapesAlready this is not a big problem but if your lens is not to lose the moment, the Canon is definitely better.rnrnNITIDEZZArnA full opening the Yongnuo is sufficiently clear in the center but very soft at the edges.rnClosing to f / 2.8 the situation improves decisively with a good sharpness throughout the frame.rnrnABERRAZIONE CROMATICArnLong Yongnuo suffers from a slight chromatic aberration and under this aspect is substantially on par with the Canon f / 1.8 STM.rnNulla that can not be corrected with a click of Lightroom.rnrnDISTORSIONE AND VIGNETTATURArnThe distortion barrel is quite pronounced, but also here easily correctable in post production.rnWith regards to the vignetting, it is quite evident at full aperture and disappears almost entirely from f / 2.8 onwards.rnrnCONCLUSIONrnIn conclusion, after all the tests, not me the I would recommend this Yongnuo 50mm f / 1.8.rnrnIf your budget is very low or you just want to start having fun rvi with a wide aperture fixed optics, take the 50mm of the Yongnuo but the bestior build quality, the silent and precise autofocus, the sharpness ... are all very important aspects on which the Yongnuo does slightly more effort and that justify the price difference widely compared to the Canon.rnrnOK the Canon costs in proportion more than double but staying on the new we are then talking about 70 euros more ... in short, not an exaggerated figure! |
 | sent on 06 Novembre 2016 Pros: It is cheap Cons: Sharpness at TA, af uncertain Opinion: It is taken just because somebody talked about it as if it were the old 50cc canon but ultimately worth what it costs, insufficient sharpness at ta have to close to 5.6 to be discreet, af engine seems a coffee grinder 'in addition to being slow and uncertain in many situations, only serves x experience the fixed focal length and aperture of 1.8. Spend more x the canon .stm and certainly will not be buttati.rnPs money. 18 from 55 kit is more crisp |
user86352
| sent on 25 Settembre 2016 Pros: Price, lightness Cons: Poor plastics, sharpness Opinion: Taken because I wanted to try the aperture F1/8 and I did not want to spend 120 euros for the Canon, I recommend the sharpness is not maximum but for 50 euros is fine. Recommended to the amateurs, the plastics are poor slow focus but all in all it's fine. Maybe the Canon is better but it also takes 70 euros more. |
|
| sent on 24 Agosto 2016 Pros: Price, bokeh Cons: AF, Focus ring, flare Opinion: We start with the assumption that a lens of € 46 applies to, plastics obviously not top of the line but who have given me a very solid feel, lens group does not phenomenal, autofocus that sometimes does not understand what to focus on, noisy (reminds me a toy robot, but even so i do not mind the sound), bokeh that does not scream to the miracle but still satisfies and i like, perhaps suffering a bit 'too much with regard to flare. A 50mm in my opinion if the play with canon, and the price low monstrously, invites all'acquisto.rnRapporto quality hallucinating price, if you do not know who first optical buy this should be taken into consideration. |
 | sent on 18 Agosto 2016 Pros: Price, bright Cons: Sharpness, plastics, AF Opinion: That say a lens that is worth what it costs, no doubt a fifty that you can take on a whim and it is also fun to use for the game, but finished la.rnUna nitidezzaa embarrassing f1.8, a focus and a blurred even worse in I think not much piacevole.rnSe you want to take into account the value for money a 7 deserves it, but if we look at the lens in itself, hardly you can give as a 6 rating. |
 | sent on 02 Aprile 2016 Pros: Cost, brightness, price quality, sharpness Cons: Plastics not on top, small ring (same equivalent problem canon being a copy) Opinion: Quality of surprising slow when compared to the price. Bought it new on Amazon for just € 60, I could not be happier. Certainly the plastic quality is not great, but for the price range is more than normal. Carefully remove the protective plastic before you start shooting. I found numerous reviews suspiciously too negative of this objective, and searching well I found that many hasty reviewers have forgotten to levarle getting unpresentable images. Great that produces the blurred, well softer equivalent Canon having the aperture 7-blade and not 5 (obviously at TA are equal). Good sharpness, although not perfect in TA, but above the 2.8 returns very well-defined images. The AF is perhaps a bit 'louder than the Canon, but I do not see it as a problem, at least for the use you do with it. Probably this is a case where the copy than the original! Highly recommended. |
 | sent on 03 Febbraio 2016 Pros: the cost, sharpness, brightness, excellent bokeh Cons: quite noisy in focus Opinion: I bought this goal and after trying the Canon f1.8 stm my friend I think it is better that. I use xi portraits and street and I really like the bokeh. For what it costs even if it is not Canon is a great goal that I recommend to anyone who does not want to spend too much but still want to have a good 50mm f 1.8. |
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
