|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on February 07, 2018 Pros: Price, excellent resolution starting from f.2,8 but usable at TA, size / weight Cons: Blurry absolutely ugly, but fantastic for those who are used to zooming; huge flare and collapse of contrast to backlight or when light sources frame, all-plastic construction, lack of depth of field, prehistoric autofocus Opinion: Despite all the faults is a view that I use with pleasure and of which I do not regret the purchase (at the time analog), now there is no more reason to buy it and except if you find it at the price at best price is better orient the purchase towards the new STM version that has been improved in: boken, the AF and the flare for a price that remains super-économico.rnPS: I use it in FULL FRAMErn |
  | sent on September 17, 2017 Pros: 2.8 sharpness, pleasing blur, pre-historic but effective focus, incredible price quality Cons: Sharpness below 2.8, almost unusable at 1.8 due to poor sharpness and large vignetting, really slow focus. Opinion: My first serious lens and true guilty of my passion for photography. Compared to the 18-55 in kit it seems to have another camera. Great as everything to do but vote for portraiture. It does not excel at anything but is really a great lens at a price from a dinner at the restaurant. Purchased 4 or 5 years ago and never again sold back always useful. |
 | sent on July 15, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, Price Cons: Materials, Defocused Opinion: I have had this lens for years and used on entry-level body (1000d), semipro (40d) and FF (5d2), never disappointed. It certainly has its negative aspects, it's a plastic after all, and blur it's a little tough, but I'm challenging to find an optic that has yielded this little bit to the priceless price it's sold. Sharpness is devastating, af is slow and noisy, but it works and is accurate. It is mounted on any sensor. I'm not a 50mm lover on FF, so I sold it but I consider it a must-have for those who are developing passion for photography without spending capital and those on apsc are interested in portraiture.rnrnNote: despite plastic ( Honestly they could have built at least the metal attack), like all the objects, if it's a tough one. The use of manual fire is quite unmanageable for the unhappy focus ring position. RnrnConclusion: you can find many defects in the outside, atThe feeling of fragility that the materials give, the performance of the AF .. but also taken together, the defects are swept away by the incredible optical yield, compactness, weight and especially glass price of undoubted quality. |
 | sent on October 21, 2016 Pros: Price, weight, opening Cons: Sharpness under 2.2, autofocus, materials Opinion: Let's face it: the first two defects, we can also expect them spending less than 100 euro for a lente.rnE the third is clearly also the son of the price, but it is also the reason one of the strengths, the weight absolutely irrisorio.rnConclusione ? I have voted 10, because if we put it all together we want to bet that this affarino (we assemble well on FF) is one of the lenses that if you bought it will remain forever in the kit? |
 | sent on August 09, 2016 Pros: Price, weight and optical performance Cons: Construction, Selective Focus, sharpness below 2.8 Opinion: my first fixed lens. Thanks to him I have taken the first steps in the very formidable lens fotografia.rnUn, able to give you emotions from the first istante.rnUn must haves from the price actually irrisorio.rnE 'very plasticky and imprecise in focusing is true, but the pictures that gives are impressive when compared to those who churn out the economic objectives in circolazione.rnSullo blurry at f 1.8 is lost (as others have noted) sharpness but with this light he is perdona.rn |
 | sent on July 07, 2016 Pros: Weight, cost and sharpness above f2.8 Cons: A bit 'plasticky and sharpness under f2.8 Opinion: Great optics for quality / price was my first real canon optical and made us all. After having studied it in depth I can say that the "limit" of sharpness personally is f2.8.rnA this openness is impressive sharpness and blur remains very buono.rnNaturalmente if you want more blur you can always go down to f1.8 renouncing a bit 'of sharpness. For the rest, the other reviews. |
 | sent on July 07, 2016 Pros: Price, clarity, weight. Cons: Autofocus slow and noisy. Blurred. quality construction Opinion: The strengths and weaknesses are now quite popular and I think there is little to discuss what has already been expressed in other reviews. I just wanted to add that you can use more than you might think. We must get to know him because initially I also would have given a totally negative opinion as many users. The truth is that this goal does not forgive mistakes the photographer and then forces you to learn, especially for those coming from from kit lenses. A f4 already give the best of themselves. A Ta must be very careful with the focus. Definitely worth the price and it is good optics from portrait. |
 | sent on May 10, 2016 Pros: Price, brightness, made a good night sleep Cons: Making slow fire and sometimes a bit 'inaccurate, built only in plastic, loud Opinion: And 'ideal to approach the world of fixed, it costs little and let good use to experience the apertures. Used with satisfaction on APS-C (80mm equivalent) for portraits, became great on FF, I can not take it off. Sometimes some shots slightly out TA fire does not regret a focus faster, but just be careful as you do with all fixed diaphragms so open and everything is resolved. Focus a bit 'noisy but given the price you can not complain. good quality already f2.2, I do not mind even to 1.8 provided you do not look for the perfect clarity and the absence of defects. |
 | sent on April 24, 2016 Pros: Weight, price, brightness Cons: a bit 'plasticky .... Opinion: Bought at MediaWorld for less than 100 € I can not commend her for the quality / price !!! TA to play taste, from f2.8 you will be surprised and amazed by those who are able to return !! sharpness on the front, as all optical, 3 stops in future from its best !! It is an optical light (about 130g) very light indeed, is just fine for everyday use like everything to do !! some complain of hexagon bokeh, I do not mind; for those not satisfied touches spend 3 times the price for his sister from f1.4 !! Not using the AF (generally) on MF touches us a bit 'the exaggerated mano..nulla !! Only downside is plasticky but at this price you can not ask for more !! I offer my congratulations to Canon for scoring a perspective like that at a very low cost. straconsigliata !! |
 | sent on January 17, 2016 Pros: positive judgment on the optical component. Cons: Mechanics, electronics, auto focus and materials from pre-war absolutely. Opinion: I felt a feeling like this for about twenty years, with the very first Tamron and Sigma to focus that we had to think about a quarter of ora.Plasticaccia that deteriorates the sguardo.rnI glass instead are of good quality, and the price is interesting, but you can expect great satisfaction ........ rnMi would limit to a neutral judgment ... |
 | sent on January 06, 2016 Pros: Money, from f2 8 onwards is an amazing optical Cons: F 1.8 to 8 f2 and quite soft as detail Opinion: I bought 60 Euro used but you want more, even though it is a bit plasticone, and does a bit of noise at f, it seems to me that much detail from f2.8 on, is a target for those who want to pay less money to make ritrarri and beyond, is to avere.rnHo also tried to make the macro and it seems to me that if the cables discreetly with his relationship 1.5 |
 | sent on January 05, 2016 Pros: Clarity, cost, bokeh, weight, bright, great start Cons: plasticotto, crisp 2.8, af noisy and sometimes inaccurate Opinion: Great lens to start, one of the best home-canon in relation to the quality / price ratio. I recommend it as a first fixed for those who are beginners, I used the 10 months before moving to the big brother f1.4. L f is noisy and sometimes inaccurate, up to 2.8 is a little 'soft. In my opinion is the best drive to start |
 | sent on November 05, 2015 Pros: Clarity, openness, cost, fuzzy, and f. Cons: F noise, construction Opinion: I think it's the lens with the best value for money in circulation, very crisp, with excellent color rendition. Slightly long on APSC (80mm) but for portraits it is excellent, very nice even bokeh. Of course the construction is cheap, it's all plastic, but I can not see the problem, they are taking pictures, not touching the lens material .. The only negative note is the f which is noisy, sometimes a little uncertain but nothing tragic. The riacquisterei thousand times, with the price he has. It would take more lenses so. Among other things the attack ef then remains when upgrading to ff. I think anyone who complains about this lack of clarity has proved an exemplary defective, unless it has compared with lenses that cost 20 times as much, and the comparison can not remain. |
 | sent on September 11, 2015 Pros: Mah .... Cons: The list is too long Opinion: I can not unfortunately join the chorus of plausibles almost unanimously: I have never been able to use this goal, which I found to be attached to the first reflex in kindly (and less badly), getting decent shots; I have come to prefer an old Helios, which is, in my opinion, the most powerful thing that is all to say. My sample is clamorously lacking in clarity at least until af / 4; then use it to use it; while vignetting is even ridiculous. The blur is not the beauty everyone says and the hexagonal bokeh denies the poor design quality. The autofocus, in addition to making the noise of changing an old truck that "scratches", never puts it in the fire where I want; the manual ring ring is ridiculously small to the point of being unusable. Finally, perhaps because it is too light, there is no way to crawl firm stills, even with times far greater than the security level. rnInsomma, I'm probably not capable of either maybe it's mine which is%3B defective, but for me, even if it costs very little, it's a sham |
 | sent on August 19, 2015 Pros: Cost and focus. Cons: Focus inaccurate. Opinion: I bought this lens driven by positive comments than beds around. rnBellissimo focus lens and a small price to be f1.8. I tried it on a Canon 50D and after I mastered with photography, I started to find flaws. rnrnMessa focus inaccurate to TA, I did several tests on a tripod, remote control, and inanimate object at the same distance. Each photo was changing the point of focus of a few millimeters. Can not then make a portrait f1.8 until after several attempts. rnrnL'ho I resold shortly after. A few months later I wanted to try another, to rule out any defects of my goal, but I found the same problem, even in shady conditions, the focus is very inaccurate. |
| sent on August 19, 2015 Pros: Cost is 1.8, sharpness and blur Cons: Focus noisy Opinion: The use of 7d which is equivalent to a 80 mm, which is perfect for portraits. The blur is fabulous and the sharpness equally, but the focus is very noisy. Personally plastic is not a problem, since the price / yield recommend it as a lens fixed to all who refuse to spend figures esagerate..preso on Amazon with hood to 116 €. Along with the Tamron 70-300 stabilized, it is the lens I use most. |
 | sent on May 26, 2015 Pros: Price, weight, focus, brightness Cons: Building Opinion: Nothing to reproach to this objective. The only drawback is the construction. The bayonet coupling could be done in metal. When you make the first photos in 1.8 you realize you are holding a nice lens. It is usually the first piece that you buy. Blur well is very bright. To those who say it is noisy if you want to answer that obbettivo silent nun must spend 370 Euros and not 90. Sometimes it does not hook the subject well, but only in low light conditions. They learn a lot of things and is the best way of discovering the world of fixed focal. |
 | sent on May 05, 2015 Pros: Price Cons: None Opinion: We start from a premise: who enters the world of photography for the first time has no need to spend € 2,000 for a lens professionale.rnChi this critical objective for its shortcomings (I'm about to list), is giving a wrong judgment and does not take into account the use to which it is intended this obiettivo.rnAllora, the build quality is poor, obviously this is plasticaccia, and the ring of focus is small so that I move with the focus not polpastrello.rnLa it is fast, I noticed a remarkable AC.rnParliamo the quality of the picture instead. It is not egregious, as you would expect from a fixed focus. However I did a comparison test with the Canon EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS STM (zoom mediocre value of 300 €) and with 18-55 and 55-200 Nikon (the ones that were provided in KIT with d5100) that are also slow mediocri.rnIl fifty quietly holds the comparison with these lenses and, indeed, it seems to me that in some cases gives file migliori.rnIo I bought it used to only 5€ 0 and I am very satisfied. It 'was my first fixed focal length and taught me to look for the right shot and concentrate on composition rather than just stand there in the ring beating the zoom.rnE' a lens that makes the school and must be purchased for educational purposes and believe me, it is one of the few cases in which the object value is greater than its prezzo.rnE 'minimal investment that will allow you to gain experience that will come in handy when you are ready to buy the lenses professionali.rnOvviamente as mentioned above is a lens for educational purposes, not professional, but if you manage to find the right elements in a photo (light, composition, subject) and if you can manage the depth of field and the focus with this 50mm, you can take home good shots that can stand comparison with any other beautiful pictures. |
 | sent on May 04, 2015 Pros: Sharpness - cost - weight - light - dimensions Cons: Build quality - noise and speed af - soft to TA Opinion: The first thing that comes to mind when thinking of this lens is the ability to provide excellent file that dwarfs the zoom L-series at a lower price to a hundred euro. And 'that's the reason why you buy. Low financial commitment and high yield. All this if you are willing to live with the noisy autofocus and a speed of focus good for portraits. Build quality and robustness are the worst Canon offers. The high optical performance as I said is from 2.8, excellent f4 f 5.6, while 1.8 to 2.5 is good. rnHo compared with 50 1.8 40 2.8, although aware that they are two different focal enough given that 40 is closer to 35, the winner being equal framing and diaphragm, is 40. |
 | sent on April 29, 2015 Pros: price - used on FF Cons: sharpness construction Opinion: Behaves decently / best of FF do not recommend it on aps-c. impossible to shoot with aps-c under 2.5 and 2.8 is sharp as the Tamron 17 50 Smooth 50mm that is a zoom. Instead of FF 1.8 also it can be used. At the price I can not say that I am recovers waste of money however I would take it just to FF. The move almost mandatory I saw: 50 1.8 - 2.8 40 - 50 1.4 so I can only recommend to immediately take the canon 50 1.4 used to 250eu so you avoid waste time. |
 | sent on February 16, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, brightness, value for the price only Cons: to 1.8 does not make it to the maximum ... but .... Opinion: I got used to 70 € (but almost like new) and I am absolutely satisfied, for clarity I would say it has few rivals, as well as in detail (in one click you can distinguish even the dust particles of the photographed! ). Go against on the construction because it is true that it is all plastic, but if you use it with care, which reserves any other lens that is all plastic is irrelevant (and in any case you can not just blame the canon construction would be ungrateful:-) |
 | sent on February 16, 2015 Pros: Brightness, Defocused, weight and price! Cons: Focus noisy and not always accurate, focus ring uncomfortable and especially too much plastic. Opinion: I recently purchased and all in all, the price is giusto.rnL'ho tried on 50D and I did tests that confirm what a little 'described by his tutti.rnIl "STRONG", if we can define it and its plastic ... rn ... too much plastic, the bayonet well ... rnL'ho tried in low light conditions and not 1.8 as the best. I noticed that at 2.8 on the maximum! rnHo noted that the focus is not always accurate, as well as noisy ... rn ... in fact, since it is not USM motor is notable, indeed sentire.rnNonostante these defects is a perspective that I recommend first of all for the price: € .100,00 new rncon less than what we find on the market? rnPoi low brightness goes to his advantage! |
 | sent on February 11, 2015 Pros: Price - Sharpness - Brightness - Blur / Bokeh - Weight Cons: Fire ring - Quality Constructive - Focus Noisy EA Times Imprecise Opinion: I own the fifty from almost 1 year, initially used on 1000D and currently on 60D I must say that I brought home many beautiful shots, most of the shots for use in "study" and "lightbox" is my favorite because small and lightweight compact, with the best from the diaphragms from f2.8 up, but I also pretty good shots at f1.8, the bokeh is something wonderful, especially TA, the focus ring is a bit too vague, sometimes I struggle a lot in liveview with zoom x10 to focuse, at the slightest movement happens that moves even only half a millimeter making you lose precisely the focus on the subject while in autofocus with liveview behaves very well, with the viewfinder sometimes errs, however, in Overall I can not complain since the price, for those who want to use it as an optical study or even novices in search of new inspiration recommend it with my eyes closed! |
 | sent on February 11, 2015 Pros: Price, weight, Opening Cons: Built entirely in plastic (including the attack), AF Very noisy (not USM), Fragility Opinion: Aquistai this lens about two months after my first camera. The first impression is of an optical created just to be created .. but leaving out the construction and materials proved formidable perspective (even though we are talking about a f1.8). The sharpness becomes good since f2.5 /f2.8 maintaining a very good bokeh. Well what about the use in many situations both low light and in portraiture. Definitely a perspective that must not fail in a kit also saw the very low price. Indispensable! : D |
 | sent on February 08, 2015 Pros: blur, brightness, price, weight Cons: plasticky materials, diaphragm closed the fuzzy shows pentagons of five blades, not sharp at TA, no hood Opinion: lens spectacular for the price, a must have, despite sopracitati.tra against the other things, has a low resistance to flare, but just buy a lens hood to solve the situazione.nulla inferior to his older brother, in my opinion;) although certainly a better building (at least a bayonet metal) would not hurt ... in each case has just come out on the market the clone youngnuo, which can compensate for many of the shortcomings of the original canon ... we shall see! rnih anyway lens fantastic and you always have on hand |
 | sent on December 10, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, brightness, aperture, blurry, price Cons: sharpens only to from 2.8 onwards, very slow focus that scrapes the eardrums, materials too plastic Opinion: I was just over 19 years old and wanted to try the 50mm for the first time on APS-C, at the time I dreamed of having a full frame and I was taking my first real steps in this wonderful path... from the beginning I fell in love with the great openings and this lens perhaps marked the history of the fixed canon cheap but quality, leaving out all the defects of slowness, noise, really kinder egg plastics and a sharpness of the lenses visible only from 2.8 onwards (but which could also vary according to the machine body) I began to take many photographs without ever stopping , so much so that I would have believed that I would never want to leave the 50 in the future... (so it wasn't) but I owe a lot to this little but great little gem now vintage... currently I have the STM version, better practically in everything but I will hardly forget the experiences lived with the first fifty, to date if you have a very limited budget and still want to experiment with a fixed optics they give it to you, do not miss it ! |
 | sent on December 04, 2014 Pros: optical quality, price Cons: construction, boken Opinion: To be or to have? The appearance is not the most inviting: plastic even the bayonet, no window or distance ladder, ring focus almost nonexistent. Yet the numbers do not lie: Aperture more yield achieves peak MTF rivals the samples of the specialty. And without any inferiority complex - from 2.8 onwards - even with his older brother F1.4. Price to pay for so much exuberance is a boken a bit 'too nervous and structured. But just think about this: a few years ago the lens kit with the entry level SLR film was this, and in this regard I highlight a detail which I find enlightening: manuals Canon still show a picture of a chessboard with a ' only pawn in focus, to illustrate the possibility of reducing the depth of field in the aperture priority. Well, with the zoom kit today in this operation is simply impossible. This would be enough to induce a dotarsene, also saw the paltry sum compared to the great optical quality. |
 | sent on November 30, 2014 Pros: And a fixed Cons: and all of plastica..quindi and delicate Opinion: Purchased from a private person who does not understand there so if you unpack subito..fare photos evening with flash spedlite 420EX and good with its long flashes infrared focus for a moment .. obvious that to 1.8 after the beep of 5 10 are perfect but it may depend on me..non are propio stopped:-) I like it because it teaches you to move forward and to frame indietro..per portraits story .. there are those who say that compares to 18 55 has reason only on construction and materials ... for photos instead there so much more ... I recommend you take it again the plastic over time are deformed according to how and treated then if you like it then you can easily spend more money for 1.4 usm that and much more professional |
 | sent on November 03, 2014 Pros: Cost above all, value for money, great openness and brightness, sharpness even at high apertures, light Cons: Autofocus noisy and cumbersome (not USM), construction materials, Robustness Opinion: My first drive, bought for the past two years, only now I write the review on the lens at oggetto.rnIl "fifty", is a lens that teaches photograph: very easy to control the depth of field and give effect creativi.rnLa lens is very Autofocus and plasticky with a "prehistoric", but the yield of this little gem is indiscussa.rnUsato 600 d is a 80 mm interesting with a fabulous performance on full-frame (50mm) remains a focus with a nice yield, lower than the brother 1.4 (a stop in more and materials / f completely different) and certainly less than the big brother superluminoso 1.2.rnA this price I think there is nothing paragonabile.rnCredevo, going to FF, the lens would have highlighted all the flaws, but after 1 year I can still use to talk about it much more bene.rnLo use on APS-C than on FF, as they attract me more than the focal 24-28-35 mm compared to the 50, but every time I use it I have absolutely nothing to imputargli.rnLa first fixed lens a must have supplied, especially if sietand novice: recommended !!! |
 | sent on October 31, 2014 Pros: Light, cheap, bright Cons: Vignetting, focus Opinion: NOn e'tanto I took this view it alongside the Canon 5old, but if I was initially enthusiastic, now I would use it just to play tennis..Usandolo to compose a certain scene in diaphragms chiusoF4-5,6, ok..but in portraits or contexts focusing determinanti..si likely to focus on the nose and not the occhi..L'autofocus ago schifo..In manual save you a bit '.. The sharpness amazes you right now, but 1.8 hit the jackpot shooting arose as to lotto..In every way you can make beautiful pictures, and in all qualita'tutto is never in doubt, but not to use forever .. |
 | sent on October 30, 2014 Pros: price, quality and yield of the photo, "school ship" Cons: plasticotto, autofocus inaccurate and noisy Opinion: I think the 50mm 1.8 is the best quality / price ratio of the goals canon. It 'a plasticotto and the autofocus is noisy as hell, seems to go diesel. (On the other hand has been in production for more than 20 years). But besides these two flaws, absolutely surmountable, is a lens with emotions and that really changes the way you do photography. I think that is a must for those who are beginners. What little I learned I owe to 50ino. Bought in 2011 and sold six or seven months ago to almost the same purchase price. I regret that and I think it will take it back. |
 | sent on October 14, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, weight, cost Cons: construction, non-USM AF Opinion: Lens with a value for money ... stratospheric costs 100 euro and allows so many trials ... It will not be clear already at room temperature, but even at f 2.8 says its ... Used on 1DX in a situation of extreme darkness, during an evening wedding, I was allowed to go on until late at night, with only the light of candles, without flash.rnConsigliatissimo also for beginners and want to buy the first fixed lens. Equally recommended for those who want a jolly lens that weighs nothing and can be kept in your backpack practically zero.rnCerto weight, seems to touch a toy Fisher-Price, but you can not have everything for that amount! :-D |
 | sent on October 02, 2014 Pros: Economic, bright, light and crisp. Speed ??MAF more than acceptable, given the uses for which it is designed. Cons: TA soft, but not too much. MAF automatic noisy and plasticky to the touch, but for € 100 ... Opinion: Optics that I recommend to everyone for their versatility and quality of the shots that returns. Coupled with the Raynox DCR-250 is transformed into a super macro perspective, almost like the 50 f / 2.5, so with relative ratio of about 1: 2.rnSecondo me is a view that teaches you to photograph. Great for portraits ambientati and sometimes even a little more closely, given the absence of any distortion. He has awakened my senses to Sunday photographer. I recommend it highly. Quality / price ratio unmatched. |
  | sent on September 19, 2014 Pros: nidezza, lightness, price Cons: Focus a little 'slow and noisy, difficult in low light; MF manual a little 'uncomfortable for the dial a bit' too thin to ditoni like mine. Plasticky (but I only paid € 80 again). No lens hood. Opinion: Purchased a few weeks. Great for portraits, but I think I will use it more and more for other types of shooting that do not need telephoto or macro. Cartoon a bit ', it is true, and fuzzy is not the best, but as the first 50mm to learn (and I have so much need) I think it's more than decent. Too bad the ring really thin for the MF manual and shame about the noise and the slowness of the automatic one. However, learning to make the most, I think a good buy for beginners. |
 | sent on September 15, 2014 Pros: Price, convenience, small filters, weight, excellent value for money, f / 1.8. Cons: Construction plasticky, uncomfortable ring mf, difficulty in focus in low light (with canon 550d), bad hood (not supplied). Opinion: Lens to have in a basic kit for amateur photographers with aps-c.rnA f / 1.8 cartoon already a lot of aps-c let alone on ff. For a better contact 50 to 1.4 or even 1.2. Do not forget the sigma above the new Art series, but eye problems typical of sigma (try to buy) .rnNitidezza low f / 1.8, just use a 2.8. For best results you need to close at least f / 4. The best result at f / 7.rnI edges lose some .. especially diaphragms aperti.rnAberrazioni present (can be corrected with a bit of patience in pp) rnSe are equipped with 18-55 f / 3.5-5.6 subito.rnSe take it you have already bought a standard zoom higher (eg. sigma / tamron 17-50 f / 2.8) do not bother, because who does not will hardly ever use a wider apertures of 2.8 to avoid losing too much sharpness on fotogramma.rnRimane still a 'comfortable and sharp optics to appropriate aperture (what to ask for at this price). |
| sent on August 07, 2014 Pros: Cost!!!!!, Convenience, weight, 1.8,52 mm in diameter. Cons: Manual focus is often difficult, slow af and almost completely useless in low light conditions, edges Scarsini Opinion: I am a novice and is a must to always sè.non weighs nulla.salva life in light conditions ridotta.ci you can afford to go to dangerous places maybe in the mountains without fear of breaking it and having thrown 300 € of '1 .4. find it on ebay for 70 euro.cosa you want more x such a price? hoping that if one buys it has the characteristics of a lens of 300 euro has his mind on the moon as the orlando ariosto: 70 EURO!!!!!!!! BY UP TO F4 F10 is strong ON GOOD PORTION OF FOTOGRAMMA.sa anceh give a good fuzzy if you know how to use use it ;) , sappiatene limits, consocetelo well and will satisfy you ;) |
 | sent on May 22, 2014 Pros: Cost - luminiso - extremely light - small filters Cons: Materials plasticky - AF inaccurate and problematic in low light conditions - noise when trying to hook the MAF - lens horrible and uncomfortable, the manual focus becomes tricky Opinion: To be used properly there are more cons that pros, but given the price and using it knowing its limitations it reveals a beautiful ottica.rnA f1.8 is very soft and the focus becomes inaccurate. I think it's to be used up to f2.8, where he began to be very sharp. The blur is hard but enjoyable. The lens hood is uncomfortable, as well as really bad, if you want to use the MAF manual. Let's say you fall in front of her against the cost of this lens plasticky. To learn to appreciate the fixed lens is a great ship scuola.rnrnLo not recommend it if you try to use a lens with f2.8 under facali |
 | sent on May 21, 2014 Pros: Quality / Price incredible! (Maybe there were others), lightness, f / 1.8, bokeh, sharpness super f / 3 and up .. Cons: Materials, nut MF, AF slow. Opinion: I received this in gift from my girlfriend years ago (when I still had my first SLR, the 1000D). It was my first drive, a very welcome gift, through which I discovered targets bright. The specimen had received AF defective, the next day I went with my girlfriend to the store and they replaced me with another (I still) perfect! rnSento many complain of AF inaccurate. I can say that my AF has a slow (but I do not give anything because I use it for sport but for portraits), that the mode MF is uncomfortable (but who uses it in MF?), But absolutely can not be said that mistakes AF! rnMi really like the kind of focus that has hard and nervous, you can achieve great effects, especially on FF .. Where the lens is reborn than before on APSC. Stopping down a little you can get bokeh effects pentagonal (thanks to the diaphragm blades to 5), while opening it for portraits you get amazing results. If you need a lens super crisp stopping down to f / 3 up becomes a blade. rnih conclusionquality / price I think is even cheaper by 50 f / 1.4, as this it is around € 100 and € 300 on the other. To me what f / 1.4 does not return a quality 3 times higher to justify the price increase. |
 | sent on May 10, 2014 Pros: Lightness, sharpness, quality / price ratio Cons: Poor construction and plasticky, focus, slow, noisy and uncomfortable in MF Opinion: I own this lens for years and I've used it many times, always on APS-C.rnSono was pleasantly surprised by the overall image quality when compared to the nominal price of the lens: closing slightly (even one third stop increments), the sharpness becomes good and makes the lens THE choice for the neophyte who does not want to spend a fortune for a standard portrait lens but do not want to give up qualità.rnPer regarding the shades, especially the passages and the blurred, cinquantino not excel of course, but if you know how to photograph can also give satisfaction: in particular, the bokeh is rather "hard", certainly less pleasant than that of his brothers maggiori.rnrnCredo is clear, however, that the construction is really poor (although I've seen worse) and I should not wonder if it were composed of 100% plastic (except the leads / contacts), also of poor quality. In addition, the autofocus is very noisy, slow and imprecise; also focus manually is not that great, youI'm the collar is small and appears to be floating in the vuoto.rnA my humble opinion, however, that the building may not necessarily be a counter, because if I was at an event in which a small body in most emergency would not hurt, surely would take me with the 450D with the grafted cinquantino: all plastic without much concern for the value of the equipment, but good results insured in case of bisogno.rnQuesto is exactly what happened to me during an event did not even seem to have him on the shoulder, but with the big lens mounted on the body, when I was presented a portrait as possible, that's the plasticky saved my photography, which was ottima.rnInfine, I think any photographer with a little experience you dissociate from some " reviews "of this lens, written by ignorant people who not only centrate as the cabbage with photography, but they do not know at all what it should be to review. |
 | sent on May 07, 2014 Pros: Price / quality Cons: Unclear ATA and Af noisy (* after testing more) Opinion: I align to the previous reviews, for what it costs is fine but it is not always leave a lens attached to the SLR. For me, however, the value for money is good unless you think to exploit only at RT. Closing one two stops in fact, the overall quality increases, you can get excellent portraits, the focus is good in my opinion and keeping higher speeds (less time) increases detail and nitidezza.rn * With the 70d I noticed, which I had not seen instead with the 600d, which in 1.8 you can get great pictures while keeping times of less than 1/250. |
 | sent on May 02, 2014 Pros: Price Cons: Sharpness non-existent until af/2.5, focus ring uncomfortable, noisy and often inaccurate AF Opinion: Well below my expectations ... I have not found the 50mm to be praised all ... it's almost unusable at room temperature and also closing of 1 or 2 stop it does not improve much .. rnSe buy a lens that has the ability to shoot in 1.8 I have to be able to do otherwise has not senso.rnIn synthesis .... forget it if you need to use a 1.8 / 2 .... much better to spend a little more and take the older brother |
 | sent on May 02, 2014 Pros: Price, focus, brightness Cons: Plasticky, AF loupe, noisy and not always accurate Opinion: What can I say, for the price it costs is really super! It 's like a race against the Veyron at the edge of a GT-R, as crazy at a cost by extremely small compared to the prices of the more famous. The blurred to 1.8 can be really impressive and you can untangle better in low light situations. The biggest flaws are that the AF is not always fast and then it is quite noisy, it seems a train during a video shoot! Then the fixed 50mm is not always an optimal length, and therefore perfect for portraits but not a whole do. In any case, I consider it very affordable and unbeatable given the price. Preferable by far to the 1.4 for the price at which you can find it used. So if you like portraits, fuzzy crisp, economy and experimentation, buy it! If you want to make the grand canyon or photographing lions during a hunt, maybe you Discovery Channel! ;) |
 | sent on April 28, 2014 Pros: Price, sharpness, brightness Cons: MAF ring small and uncomfortable, noisy and slow AF, TA unusable Opinion: With this lens I had from the first moment a love-hate relationship. The price is attractive; compared to 18-55 with regard to the sharpness Us on another world. Blurred mediocre, unpretentious. Against the most important for me is the ring of MAF very thin, with which it is virtually impossible to focus on as you would like and this pushes you to use autofocus which unfortunately is not the plasticky construction migliori.rnSulla you can pass, on the other hand at this price what can you expect? Just be a bit 'careful use. I recommend it to those who can not afford very expensive goals and want a jump of clarity, however, be combined with a standard zoom. The satisfaction albeit in moderation, by the! |
 | sent on April 27, 2014 Pros: Value for money, money per se, opening 1.8 Cons: Plasticotto, MF difficult to use (ring too small), AF slow Opinion: Well what to say? And 'no doubt that the lens can not be missing in the kit of the neophyte of the photo, you must have .. The price is accessible at all since the price range that varies between 85 and 110 Euros. It 'a lens that allows you to have a good depth of field by opening up to 1.8 (especially on aps-c, it becomes almost like a 85 1.8). Unfortunately, the MF is ungovernable, the ring is too small and very very uncomfortable, the AF is slow due to the lack USM to $ 100 ... but what do we want more? In its small way is an objective TOP, after purchasing it, I put aside 18-55. For new photographers buy it. For the experts: Buy the 50 1.4! |
 | sent on March 17, 2014 Pros: Brightness, price, lightness, sharpness. Cons: Plasticky, small-diameter, slow and noisy AF, lens hood (optional) impractical. Opinion: I own it for a few years and I have always used on the 350D. Compared to the 18-55 kit results were always the best in terms of quality of the images! Let's say that negative criticism, considering the price, did not make much sense ... I mean, who buys it knows that it has made a purchase of just over € 100 and all the cons, which I also expressed in the judgment, it is inevitable that we are! Not long ago I made the jump to FF with the 5D Mark III and although at first I "ashamed" to mount it on the new camera body, I must say that the photos do not disappoint me at all! At full aperture are pretty sharp, perhaps the blurriness is not beautiful to look at, but overall there is a certain quality! It 'very light, almost not perceived to be mounted on the machine, but often the autofocus does tantrums (especially in low light) and is also noisy! Also possess the original lens hood which I find impractical as it has been conceived in practice is screwed ring and the latter engages the lens hood remainsfree to rotate as you want! Oh, I also noticed that decreasing the exposure time starts vignettare a bit ', which in APS-C does not happen to me! For the rest, I think that anyone who already owns it does well to keep it, but I do not recommend buying ... if you have the chance to spend a little 'more is perhaps the best f / 1.4! |
| sent on March 09, 2014 Pros: Brightness, leggerezza.nitidezza f 2.2 is a blade, great for people like me who wanted something to complement the usual 18-55 Cons: Plasticosità, af ring of small and uncomfortable, gently Opinion: Monto bought this lens used at Christmas to € 80 on mia1100d I think it's a good lens to get closer to the focal length lenses without spending a botto.almeno from the photos that I have taken has a very homogeneous blurry but not to the level of its big brothers with f less expensive . then if you're at the beginning of your photographic experience or 17 years of age and like me you can not afford much of opting for this lens will not disappoint ... |
| sent on March 02, 2014 Pros: HAUhauhaHAUAHUhauha - Getting started is great XD - How the 18-55mm lens bundle! After 5 shots throw it out the window. Cons: The autofocus us do not like, with this view is a must, as the focus ring is pretty finger of a child ... This is a classic product of the series: "Daddy look! F/1.8 a 100 €! "But please ... NOTHING prefer this taken for a ride by my beloved Canon. Opinion: Cut short: if you work in the APS-C and have the bundled 18-55mm, 50mm This is the direct cousin ... Nothing chatter between different schools of thought. A good 85mm F/1.8, Canon always, and the fear passes Portrait of ... rnrnPurple? YES - rnFlare? YES - rnVigna? YES - rnMa that I do with a F/1.8 if the quality of the glass in question, remember the bottle bottoms of those Peroni.rnTanto worth ... RNE not begin to say, "WHAT THE DEMAND FOR THAT PRICE?" RnPerché with these statements do not avanti.rnPer goes a lens like this, NEW, I would give you no more than 30 € rnrnSTATENE AWAY. Hello. |
 | sent on March 01, 2014 Pros: price, brightness, focal length (then it is subjective) Cons: purple fringing Opinion: There are many things you could say about this goal. I pissed on APSC and I am fine. Up to F2.2 I think it is a little soft, then starts to improve a lot to give its maximum around f8, but I think it is already at 2.8 and 4 utilizzabilissimo great. The AF motor is not a lightning, but for a non-professional use I consider acceptable, is not very precise, particularly TA tends to have some indecision. The bezel for the focus instead is inconvenient to use because very thin. Chromatic aberrations are not lacking and has an annoying PF. But for that you have to pay € 80 to get one used I consider it a must-have that is always handy. It is true that I do not have optical high-level, but rather than remove the 50cc from my 600d do 200 steps forward or backward! |
 | sent on February 24, 2014 Pros: Brightness, sharpness in the center, price Cons: Quality construction, af inaccurate in low light, Opinion: For the price it's a great goal, but it has many obvious limitations ... On FF has many flaws and little sharpness at the edges, on aps-c is a 8Omm and then becomes a specific use. I was undecided whether to take the 40mm f/2.8 for APS-C was more handyman, 140 € (double this). Personally I was looking for a bright lens that would generate bokeh in quantity while the 40mm had a nicer bokeh (having more blades), but in less quantity. |
 | sent on January 06, 2014 Pros: Quality / price ratio, sharpness, lightness and ease of use. Cons: Economic construction, but saw the price .... Opinion: Taken as a temporary replacement for the Tammy 24/70 2.8, and is intended to be an objective "secondary", used on 6D, I was immediately amazed at the compact size and weight down. So the camera and 'always with me. And 'fixed perspective, I have done so far few shots, and some movie. Give a beautifully blurred to 5.6, sharpness and colors are superb. If we add that I bought in a physical store at 95 Euros, I think that we can not expect more. |
 | sent on December 21, 2013 Pros: price, sharpness, brightness Cons: materials, noise, slow AF Opinion: For a very low price, it is a good way to start to familiarize yourself with the fixed lenses. Sure, the building is really bad, completely made of plastic (including base), but if you want a super bright without wanting to spend a lot, is a price to pagare.rnL 'autofocus is very slow, and in low light conditions often struggles to connect the soggetto.rnOffre good sharpness, especially in the center, and a good bokeh effect, which makes it great for ritratti.rnPersonalmente, even for its lightness and compactness, always bring him back (I use it on aps-c). rn |
| sent on December 16, 2013 Pros: Price, Sharpness, Brightness', Weight, Price. Cons: only exist if you're used to "good" and are rumorosia 'AF, AF accuracy and sometimes little plasticky build lowcost. Opinion: Are you a novice novice? optics as you have the classic 18-55mm F3.5-5.6? well, 'the case to try this 50mm! and 'another world! rnUn my friend asked me to make him the photos at her wedding just to have something the more' than just a photo fairy friends. From this saved me almost the whole service! This is used for 60/70 € and worth them all! It 'clear that if you're not used to "work" with a fixed you are blown away, but if you have chance' of movement you take home the remarkable results! I recommend it as a starting point for those who want to start looking for pictures and photos from the classic "beach holidays". |
 | sent on November 06, 2013 Pros: Sharp, bright, if you bought used price of a dinner for 2 at the restaurant. Cons: Slow AF, noisy untold levels, plastic construction, attack, plastic hood to buy separately, Vignette in TA. Opinion: Used several times, but for the immediate needs I had to buy usato.rnQuesta opinion I think it does not serve even (given the many review), but I wanted to share my opinione.rnUsandolo on a 5D I have noticed that the TA is not blurred is bad, not very creamy but do we claim for the price for which it is offered? RNAF slow, and very inaccurate, engages in optimal light "fast," indoors cane rarely, but the dark is wrong sempre.rnLa building is an embarrassment pure, even a 18-55 is better *. rnVignetta to TA, but with embedded profiles of CR corrects tranquillamente.rnTascabile, lightweight and minute, does its job and not delude.rn |
 | sent on October 29, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, cost, footprint. Cons: Vignetting TA, AF noisy, plasticky Opinion: Bought after plasticotto that came with my first SLR, is an inexpensive set and despite not being abreast of the most renowned lenses of the same focal length, offers discreet satisfaction in the field, suffers in FA in critical light, not really a most precise TA, just close a couple of stops. I always carry in your bag, fits into any space left. I consider it an almost obligatory first step in the world of fixed lenses. |
 | sent on October 26, 2013 Pros: Price, brightness, sharpness Cons: Af slow and noisy, it is made entirely of plastic Opinion: Lens that for the price it costs is really good, I got to photograph portraits and close-ups and I must say that I was blown away by the quality of the photos that can churn out, of course you can not expect to have a professional lens in hand , considering the price, the bokeh is sufficient but a little hard, the focus slowly, Ta is blurry, 3.5 becomes very clear and it is a knife, I replaced it with the Sigma 50 1.4 which is another world, but also costs 4 times as much, the advice to those traveling on a budget but needs a fixed lens and bright, but also very very light. |
 | sent on September 24, 2013 Pros: cost, brightness Cons: ring focus Opinion: I bought this lens to start playing with extension tubes but I have to say that although the price is defended very well especially in low light, a bit soft at 1.8 but just close a bit and goes off smoothly ... the focus is particular to like it. I think it is a lens that everyone should have in their kit. |
| sent on September 15, 2013 Pros: Brightness, cost, Sharpness 3.5, lightness, size, sharpness Cons: Quality construction, Af noisy and sometimes inaccurate, Sharpness to TA, ring af impractical, booke Opinion: was my second lens after the 18-55 kit. I think that is a good lens in relation to the part. I found it a bit 'soft TA, but nevertheless equally usable from f5.6 up is a blade, especially when compared with the 18-55 (IS II). RnL'Af is fast enough (obviously not to levels is a USM), but purtorppo rumorosornDate its very small size, you can pretty much take with sè.rnIl booke generated from this perspective is slightly hard (because the only 5 aperture blades), but equally interesting, especially if one is a beginner and does not have a fortune to spend on obbiettivi.rn |
 | sent on August 11, 2013 Pros: / Cons: I do not know which is worse the burp of 18-55 or 50mm Opinion: BAD LENS, bought and venduto.rnleggero and compact, aesthetically squanfido and LOUD! is not Ultrasonic. you might think you do not need in terms of photography, if you are thinking it definitely still go around with shoulder pads in the jacket, with high-waisted pants that fit above the ankles, with open sandals and white socks on display. presentation is everything! noise focus is embarrassing, AF slow and very inaccurate, when looking for the fire seems to go in Berserker, nervous, codizioni in low light does not hook anything. attack in plastic and poor quality of the materials, if you handle in your hand, what there is inside moves (absurd). good opening but we take into account that if you want to bring home good pictures do not exceed the threshold of 2.8, aberrations color, not particularly sharp. if it costs that price there is a reason, it's only good for stingy or for beginners only able to raise the built-in flash and zoom, so at least move a little bit the legs! ring of theMF uncomfortable because they are too small => not recommended for those who like to use the manual focus. not damage the lens hood it a case series, unlike other brands. in return lens is very good to throw at passers-by, if they pass you in front until shots! you know those stones into the river, that when you think afferate "hell with this I do a good toss"! bokeh uninspiring and, having so few blades no wonder. if you are interested in this lens you keep the money aside for the 50mm f1.4 (of difference), or take a pair of shoes and throw those sandals! |
 | sent on August 04, 2013 Pros: Price. Opening. Lightness. Held against the light. Absence of flare. Value / price unbeatable and undefeated so far. Cons: At this price, practically NOTHING! Opinion: To realize this goal, you must have tried or own, most popular and expensive optics: just so you can understand that to have excellent performance no need to spend astronomical sums. I have owned in the past, this' optical and I did not understand ..... After using most prestigious lenses, I wanted to take the plunge to re-buy it, and I realize that this toy has its work cut because ....! RnHa its flaws, but that's okay ..... very well .... Better than many zooms, even L. GNI '1.2 useful to those who know how to use it to 1.2 and it is not simple, not so much the technique (which can be learned), but for the necessary creativity ..... rnL'1 .4 lens is the more anonymous I've tried: I did pass the desire to scattare.rnL '1 .8 you put it on, open up everything and start shooting: the bokeh will be filled with lights and asymmetrical raw, that will horrify the purists, but that will give the air vintage you want. You put it against the light, and photos veleranno a magical aura (which will horrify the purists of the sharpzza) .... rnPerò this is what I want from a 50: character, personality and immediacy. For the sharpness etc.. there are 24-70 I and II, 50 1.2 (obviously closed ...). A 50, imho should do what it does questo.rnPoi coast from 75 to 100 euro ..... but what more could you want ... ? ;-) |
 | sent on July 19, 2013 Pros: High brightness, very low cost, blurred pleasant and acceptable sharpness Cons: a bit noisy and plasticky Opinion: was my first fixed lens and chose it for the money that offered not expecting who knows what ... but trying it I was pleasantly impressed! it is lightweight and does his "dirty duty" to wonder! has a pretty good sharpness and blur personally I really like ... then said as being very portable you can bring it with them to try ... |
 | sent on July 19, 2013 Pros: Price, brightness, AC Cons: unusable in TA Opinion: 7 85 1.8 which is another planet for both sharpness to TA for bokeh, construction, accuracy MAF.In conclusion, if you want a lens at a nominal price take it, with all the pros and cons that regard. As I said before, there is also the 40mm stm which I think is much better, especially for TA and MAF. |
 | sent on June 13, 2013 Pros: weight, opening, price and quality / price ratio Cons: af slow and noisy, 1 bit soft at room temperature, 1 bit of AC in areas of high contrast Opinion: A great lens for portraits and start playing with depth of field .. defects should be understood as absolute and not based on the price because with about 100 € you should not expect to have professional-quality AF precise and fast .. and for that amount you take home anyway .. Besides bright perspective is extremely portable ... in short, highly recommended |
 | sent on June 01, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, Brightness, Price. Cons: Focus manual uncomfortable, noisy autofocus when used to make videos, perhaps a tad too plasticky. Opinion: It 'was my first fixed target and I often used to experiment and gain experience, even in the macro thanks to a invertitore.rnne ring are really pleased both for the great clarity that for optimal luminosità.rnRegala decent pictures already TA, and the best of closed since F / 2.8rnLa building is perhaps a little too plastic, personally I would have preferred to spend a little more and have greater strength and especially a focus ring decente.rnper regarding the blurred is a hard little perhaps because of sun 5 aperture blades but it's a good sfocato.rnL'autofocus did not give me problems ever but if you turn the video is very noisy and can be a real problema.rn |
 | sent on May 05, 2013 Pros: Price Cons: Autofocus vignetting sharpness colors etc. ... Opinion: In short, who spends little .... it is normal that we can not expect anything that is a plastic lens that can not return results from leave you speechless, but as I gave it a pass because evaluation is however compared to the price and then can give the opportunity to those who have never prpvato a fixed lens light at least have an idea of ??what it is but with the understanding that then the real fixed lens is a different pasta. |
 | sent on April 08, 2013 Pros: Cost almost irrisoriornPeso trascurabilernGrande nitidezzarnCostruito with a symmetric cipher, such as Planar, allows a good transfer Cons: Construction spartan plastic ... Do not mistreat Opinion: Built according to the optical system symmetric Gauss, is a great lens to do all that, with good brightness can photograph almost anything. The sharpness is good, but having the attention of a couple of shots close to the diaphragm. Find top to 5.6. Does not suffer from specific aberrations and nelrapporto quality / price is unbeatable. Recommended to those who started taking photographs and wants to have fun. |
 | sent on February 18, 2013 Pros: Brightness, Light, Price, Sharpness Cons: Autofocus that define noisy is an understatement. Opinion: Can not miss. It is a fantastic lens by calculating the ratio quality / price. Being a fixed lens, for those who are beginners (like me), it teaches you to take pictures, pay much more attention to focus, think more into the scene. It allows you to make stunning close-ups even in low light conditions. rnCosta less than 1/3 of his brother 1.4, however, in my humble opinion, does not pale in comparison. The fact that it is plastic there is no doubt, but the abuser for two years and I have never had problems except when using the af in a quiet place :) rnLo highly recommend it. |
 | sent on February 14, 2013 Pros: Cost, Brightness, is a fixed Cons: at that price nothing Opinion: The first lens is perfect, but most of all is a fixed light. Being a fixed forces us to think a little more to the composition instead of going back and forth with zoom, in addition to this important factor costs very little and is therefore accessible to all. Overall it is a good goal, I cel'avevo on the 60d until I moved to the big brother ... highly recommended |
 | sent on February 13, 2013 Pros: Open, light weight, and cost nitidizza Cons: All plastic also in the attack. Focus ring unreliable AF painful. Opinion: Purchased after those first lens of the kit. It has a terrific value for money and I find it wonderful for sharpness. The real flaw of this lens is the autofocus seems a razor. Furthermore, as already said the ring of focus leaves much to be desired both for building both for position (too outside). As already mentioned by other reviewers, however, recommend this lens for those who are beginners as it is worth every euro spent to buy it. Sharpest truly deserves because I find wonderful "play" with the blur that can give an aperture of 1.8. |
| sent on February 07, 2013 Pros: Light, crisp, economical, bright Cons: Bokeh horrible Opinion: I use it with the 1100D mainly for portraits and other pictures indoors. The quality is very good, apart from the ugly blur of lights that become pentagons given that only has 5 blades and not rounded. It helped me a lot to understand the world of photography also, so I would highly recommend to those who have never tried a focal fissa.rnInoltre if possible advice to close at least up to 2.8 for better quality, while the maximum sharpness is between 4 and 5.6. |
 | sent on December 06, 2012 Pros: Price - Brightness - Lightweight Cons: Focus Opinion: I've had it a year, and it was my first drive. The construction is what it is, is a bunch of plastic, if it falls probably crumble, but thanks to this canon is one of the lightest, so it is not a defect. Globally has good sharpness, lose a little 'more to Diaf closed (if you compare it to the 18-55 lens kit type etc. there cmq history, another category). A 1.8 is a bit 'soft, I prefer a little close to having one less fuzzy "knead everything." Closing again, it becomes a good blade for street and reportage. The little light does not make him afraid, and shooting handheld with low iso 100-400.Non has ever given me problems flare, cmq a rubber lens hood costs € 7.'s Af is its Achilles' heel : it is slow, low light and / or moving subject takes a lifetime to engage, and not always focus where you want voi.Cmq, even when fast, this does not imply that it was also preciso.La ring for manual is dimenticare.rnCONCLUSIONI: 100 EUR, either, then buy it, the quality of the lenses is very good, and take the darkness taking and making portraits is a piacere.farete then the brother up to 1.4, which is better in everything, but it costs 3 times tanto.Personalmente, gave me lots of good shots ;) |
 | sent on October 23, 2012 Pros: sharpness, brightness, cost, size Cons: plastic construction, noisy and slow AF, MF thin ring and impractical Opinion: I took it because I needed a lens very bright but did not know if I would be fine with a PC, so I picked this light that the lens is cheaper than Canon home. The wedding was an immediate success, the lens does well, is sharp and lumisosa. The small size allowed me to instascarmelo several times a checkin at the airport. Unfortunately, not everything that glitters is gold, and considering the price it is obvious to expect that the construction is excellent and it is really plasticky, almost looks like a toy. The auto focus is not mechanical but ultrasound is so slow and noisy and with moving subjects proved to be quite inaccurate. Given the value for money would highly recommend it, but I personally if I could go back would take his older brother, the f / 1.4 usm .. just for af |
 | sent on October 12, 2012 Pros: Sharpness, brightness, weight, cost Cons: Materials, slow and noisy AF, AF ring uncomfortable Opinion: It looks like a toy all plastic (and glass), shaking maracas seems a but limits the weight to just over a pound. The lens hood can be mounted on an adapter not only look good but a little bit slow but ingombranternL'autofocus and especially noisy, but thanks to the opening generous manages to hook better than other lenses in low light, its ideal environment. Unfortunately the ring is ridiculous thin, without tires and so soft that almost runs itself. The filter holder does not rotate on the contrary of the lens from kit.rnIl blurred is a bit 'nervous (best tamron 70-300 VC as softness) and the bokeh has the typical pentagonal shape of the diaphragm to 5 lamelle.rnFinora seems full of defects but sharpness , detail, color and overall image quality (CA, distortion) make you forget everything! At f1.8 is not bad, closed f4.0 is excellent. No lens € 100 has this image quality, even with these defects. With extension tubes can become a good macro lens a little prezzo.rn |
 | sent on September 16, 2012 Pros: Bright, cheap, clear, light Cons: Plastic, looks like a Lego toy ... made in small apertures, accurate autofocus (its in the manual), ring focus small and uncomfortable Opinion: The objective cheaper than Canon but very respectable, and an f/1.8 aperture intermediate exceptional clarity in bright ... as I said, perfect beautiful portraits, cheap (just over 100 €) and light, seems to have no objective but only feel the weight of the body ... but ... it's plastic, cursed by plastic 4 money, autofocus of 10 shots 3/4 will focus perfectly, the other not ... I use it in manual (since I am almost as accurate as the AF module) but the ring is small and awkward to use ... patience ... all in all a must have lens in the kit before jumping to 50mm f/1.4. |
 | sent on August 02, 2012 Pros: bright, light and disgustingly cheap. Cons: construction comparable to that of a kinder egg, is easily disallineano lenses. Opinion: I have to apologize to mom Canon, I bought this light used .. and who I sold it apparently has not treated very carefully ... I was negatively impressed by the lack of clarity .. (due to a misalignment of the lens ..) brought into care and placed with "little" ... said this: I love photographing at RT for the blurriness ... it works perfectly well already, but turning a bit 'the diaphragm significantly improves .. . for what it costs is an optical that it must not have an impression of great reliability precisely because of the materials of construction, but you should not, and can not be, from the look, is an optical "with balls "that often pulls off the hook ... |
 | sent on July 29, 2012 Pros: Lightweight, cost, portability, value for money. Cons: Focus is not USM, is all plasticky! Opinion: I got it long ago for the very low cost and the desire to have a fixed light. Of Aps-c I never liked; became a 80mm equivalent of 450D and I did not like very much as focal ..... Every now and then plus the focus was a little ballerina and often resorted to manual focus, the focus instead was good as well as the sharpness but, as I have said, does not thrill me. Things have changed with the move to FF, the blur that is able to offer the entire opening is wonderful and great sharpness! The focal length of 50mm effective then told me all his potential, conquistandomi right now ..... even the MAF has improved, becoming perfect. Result: I wanted to sell it and now I keep it tight ...... it costs very little and FF makes it to the fullest! Remains a lens to try to realize what it means to have a fixed light in his hands. Good ..... and if you'll use it on FF does not tear off more, it is light and unobtrusive, perfect for portraits ambientati without being too obvious. |
 | sent on July 15, 2012 Pros: Brightness - f/1.8 - price Cons: AF slow and inaccurate - Unclear - shoddy construction - manual focus ring small and uncomfortable Opinion: I read many reviews before buying this lens and I was not sure I could meet a fixed focal length, a few decent shot I took him home but nothing extraordinary, very often 'slow and noisy AF trap me from the moment right and more often I saw myself forced to make a manual focus ring with a small and uncomfortable to use. I do not know if mine was particularly bad but except for the brightness and sharpness of focus was really minima.Ora I sold it and I went back I'd wait for something better |
 | sent on June 15, 2012 Pros: Quality / price ratio, brightness, sharpness and lightness f/2.5 Cons: Slow autofocus Opinion: Due to the price, the lens offers a lot. Sharp from f/2.5 onwards. Lightweight and very practical despite the ring of focus is really minimal. Great for pictures in low light and for portraits. A large number of equal length exceeding zoom with high price. Consigiatissimo to have in your backpack as a standard lens. |
| sent on June 14, 2012 Pros: Price, sharpness, brightness', lightness Cons: Very slow AF in low light Opinion: I used the 18-55 kit and then coming 'he, his majesty' the fifty. What, in times of crisis with 100 euros you take home a prof. of ritrattisca and begin to discover um world of bokeh, night, street, Aperture Priority AE, depth 'of field, composition .... All beginners like me the photograph should start here and only after deciding which professional optic buy, however, because it is an optical amateur expresses its potential 'to f 2.8 onwards. I can only recommend it. |
 | sent on June 07, 2012 Pros: Bright, small, good value for money Cons: Af noisy construction unsound even if fit for purpose Opinion: is a must for all photographers of any kind! I did some tests comparing other lenses 50 mm and that the waste to be a plasticotto that is so small that you lose it in the bag, has a brightness and superb picture quality! wide open is great, and the half-length portraits and photos in general is fine, with a nice blurred. is a lens that never lets you down ... unfortunately the AF is a tractor, but for what it costs, who did not have to buy it?? |
 | sent on May 28, 2012 Pros: price - size / weight - sharpness if just a little closed - brightness Cons: construction - AF - a little blurry .... pentagonal! - Manual focus diffcilissimo Opinion: Inevitable in any kit lens low budget (and not only). For € 100 you bring home a toy that will unmount if you do not hand in the first breath (very rough construction) will give you great satisfaction. Reaches 1.8 with decent results, and if a little closed to may pay a more expensive lenses and emblazoned in terms of color and sharpness. The noisy and slow AF (money's worth) The focus is not nice but not so unwatchable .... well also blurred the money's worth! |
 | sent on May 04, 2012 Pros: Price, sharpness, brightness Cons: Soft to 1.8, plastic, etc.. etc.. Opinion: Honestly, that is 50ino plastic, I do not I could care less. Costa yes and no 100 euros and gives a sharpness much higher than the 18-55 kit (I mean the non-IS version ... the only one I tried). For those who are going to buy only one camera and is bled after the disbursement, the 50ino is a lifeline that allows for very little money, to go into the street and shoot! It 's true that suffers from all the flaws described by many before me, but if you go to look at the value (optical) / price is a lens recommended. |
 | sent on April 13, 2012 Pros: Small and light, excellent sharpness (from f2, 8), very low cost, brightness Cons: plasticosissimo, feeling anything but robust in hand, 1.8 is very soft, almost non-existent MF ring is so small and uncomfortable. Opinion: was my first fixed lens, perhaps initially taken from the news I thought it was a great lens and then using it I saw that the defects were increasingly felt. Also shooting with a fixed I realized 50mm on aps-c are not a focal length that suits me, short for portraits and long for general photos such street or landscapes. The focus is slow, but I can understand not being usm, sometimes especially in low light conditions is also inaccurate and diaframmai so open even a bit of imprecision affect the result of the photo. In these cases prefeririei focheggiae in manual but the micro-ring makes it quite difficult. To sum up, it is a focal length that I would recommend to those who have a FF, while a aps-c in my humble opinion a 35 or a 28 I find them much spot on. |
| sent on April 12, 2012 Pros: Optical quality, price, brightness Cons: Imprecision MAF (at least mine often) Opinion: I just purchased fifty, I got x certainly an excellent quality / price ratio but also because seeing the evidence on the internet to open the average damage better than other older brothers. I find it clear already to 1.8 f / 4 ISO test is comparing it to the best of the 24-70L at 50mm. The focus is noisy and I find sometimes indecisive in focus (it will be normal since it is not USM God forbid), but my problem is something else and I would not be the same as many who consider it too soft at room temperature : I just bought tests focus on the focus chart and I noticed a slight front focus. After several tests on different subjects 8 times out of 10 the wrong mf. Do not know if this is normal considering the price of optics, in any case, I will take him to be checked. On the other hand the problems of front / back focus is around the corner with objectives so bright. |
 | sent on April 12, 2012 Pros: All, considering the price Cons: None, considering the price Opinion: The fact that costs € 90 again turns any flaw into an advantage, I mean. It 's all plastic, but also weighs very little. The 5 lamellae are few to a great bokeh, but is not the "pannosità" of a bokeh to make a beautiful picture. The focus is not comparable to a USM, but my copy is always accurate and fast enough for a view portraits. The focus ring is not at all practical to use .... and this is just a defect. The 50mm could be too many on APS-C ... it depends on the photographer. In addition, the photo quality is very good, it is quite clear already at f1.8 (or at least it is my copy) and is bright enough to resolve difficult situations. I mean, did others fixed with the same quality and the same price 50ino'd take them all. |
 | sent on April 03, 2012 Pros: Bright, light, crisp, economical. Cons: at that price ... no Opinion: The fifty is a fantastic lens, there is' no reason not to own it. New costs 100 euro, which is used much less. The quality of construction can also leave something to be desired, it's all plastic, including the mount, but the lenses are good. The focal length is great for learning how to compose shots, leaving the immobility is that damage the zoom, you have to zoom in on their own feet, move, think. The quality of the images is more than I think any other entry level zoom that comes with the kit usually xxxxD, xxxD and xxD. You set the machine on Av, set to F1.8 and go around to see the world in a different perspective at any time of the day or night, the bokeh is magical. Obviously the best optical invoice still have more sharpness, bokeh most soft, and many other qualities, but all pay. The economics of zoom kit will hold the image stabilizer, but if your subjects are moving in low light, you need to CEH is a bright lens, and go up to F1.8 is, for me, a joy. In my opinion, unless you already have one of the older brothers, not there is `no reason why a photography enthusiast should not have this in mind in the kit. |
 | sent on March 31, 2012 Pros: Value for money, sharpness from 2.8 up Cons: materials, soft wide open Opinion: Fantastic. I took a little bit for fun, because I needed a lens for some bright blur. Incredible sharpness from f2.8. It 'actually soft to 1.8. AF I find accurate though perhaps not very fast. It 's all in plastic and maybe it will not last a lifetime, but this means that it is also very light. On APS-C does not suffer from vignetting. Now all evaluated in the light of the price (100 euro new) and you'll realize it's worth buying, anyway. |
 | sent on January 29, 2012 Pros: Sharpness - Weight - Price. Cons: AF inaccurate, slow and noisy - Economic Construction - Bokeh unpleasant. Opinion: A great lens for its price, but pull out the maximum is often time-consuming. Good at room temperature, it becomes a blade from f/2.5 ... provided that the focus is correct. The AF is completely unreliable in low light, and in any condition is always good to check after shooting the MAF is in the right place. Unfortunately this defect severely limits the range of applications. If you want to focus a safe and relatively quick, consiglo to use contrast detection in live view, holding the camera straight in front of him with the strap tension on the neck for stability. The focus ring has a bad feeling, but still manage to get good results with a little patience. Buy recommended for those without a lens in kit superluminosa and / or very clear and wants to experiment with the benefits of spending a little (very selective focus, photography at night, looking videos film, etc ...). |
 | sent on January 14, 2012 Pros: Brightness, sharpness, price Cons: Bokeh, build quality (in part), noise Opinion: I do not know if I could interject, in the sense that I have the first version, which from the point of view of construction is much better than the second. I find it an excellent lens in relation to the price, even if the used version of the Mark I, can in some cases exceed the price of the Mar II again. I think that if used well can give excellent results, many who decry in favor of the version f 1.4 sometimes just do it for snobbery, is a feature common to have more than knowing how to actually use, pardon controversy. Juza remove me if I was inappropriate. |
 | sent on January 14, 2012 Pros: Cost (especially if used), Lightness, f1, 8 to Enjoy Cons: AF slow and not always accurate, Manual Focus Ring, not beautiful bokeh Opinion: I got this lens used for 50 Euro (one for each mm ...) and I'm really happy of this expenditure. For me as a beginner is a great gym with fixed focal lengths: a bit of difficulty, but a lot of satisfaction. For the price you pay you can not expect superior construction quality that it offers, but if they had kept the ring of MF as in version MKI would certainly be easier to maneuver. The AF is Valentino and unfortunately often 'slamming' it stops when it can not immediately lock the focus, just a bad feeling. The bokeh actually as many say is a little too textured especially if there are lights in the field, more than 2.8 the only 5 aperture blades can be counted perfectly ... Ultimately I think it's a lens unassuming must-have in the kit beginner. |
 | sent on December 22, 2011 Pros: It has a great value for money Cons: Focus slow, attack plastic and non-metallic Opinion: This lens is now in my possession for some time. was my second goal, after plasticotto. Has positive effect for its cost, because diaframmando some really sharp images are obtained. A f 1.8 is a little more "soft", but in any event, in extreme cases it is always better to have a diaphragm that allows you to shoot in low light. another flaw, is the fact of having the attack plastic. In addition to its focus leaves something to be desired, because of its slowness and its imprecision, especially when the light is not much. I highly recommend it for its image quality and brightness. |
 | sent on December 20, 2011 Pros: Accompany as silent, and price relationship between the two Cons: Construction quality, but it is a physiological saw the price ... Opinion: It is from this perspective that I have so much I have to say that I'm fond of it now .. I read some comments that surprised me a bit 'but the only thing I want to say is: well is a lens with such a low price due to savings in terms of build quality but not quality ... There were no other with these characteristics, would remove the satisfactions to those who can not invest big bucks for his hobby. I recommend it. Greetings |
 | sent on December 19, 2011 Pros: Value for money, brightness, sharpness, weight. Cons: Construction, manual focus ring almost non-existent, blurred hard, MAF difficult to TA Opinion: It 'an objective surprising because beyond appearances-is lightweight and plasticky, looks like a toy with complimentary detergent! - The center is clear already at room temperature and just diaphragmed becomes a real blade across the frame. Considering that costs as much as or less than a polarizing filter, is a lens-school that a neo-canonist can not fail to consider. Of course there are also drawbacks: the AF TA is not accurate (especially on 7D) and sometimes it is useful to use the LV, the ring of MAF is almost non-existent and focheggiatura in manual becomes difficult, it is not soft or fuzzy very progressive, the AF is fast and noisy. But we are talking about a lens that costs 100 € (70-80 on the used market) that allows really good shots as the tunnel itself demonstrates unequivocally. Considering the low price (and not the quality itself), deserves at least an 8. |
 | sent on December 15, 2011 Pros: Price, sharpness, brightness, compact and lightweight Cons: Construction, manual focus ring, auto focus speed Opinion: I own it for a few months, bought used, and I consider myself satisfied, the value for money is great, despite many shortcomings: made entirely of plastic (including barrel and bayonet), ring for maf small and uncomfortable, very slow autofocus. For the rest it's a great goal: good sharpness, excellent the f1, 8 and blurred, in my opinion, acceptable. The compact and lightweight (it is the lightest EF lens ever) make it a lens easily transportable. Do an 8 for value for money. |
 | sent on November 11, 2011 Pros: Light, cheap, bright Cons: focus ring on the little handy, autofocus, construction material Opinion: I chose to buy a lens that first of all for the cheap price compared to the optimal brightness. Can also be used freehand in situations where light is scarce. The autofocus is not always accurate but especially in certain situations it takes a while to find the fire. Good sharpness and like most of Canon lenses colors too. In my opinion degrades the image using Aperture more than 16. Good for portraits even though I'm not crazy about the bokeh. It 's perfect to be worn in your pocket! That said, price / quality ratio very excellent! |
 | sent on October 14, 2011 Pros: price, sharpness, size Cons: autofocus, blurred a bit 'hard materials Opinion: a lens is very cheap, and as such should be considered. has an autofocus which is a tractor, on the other hand offers a great sharpness. despite the focus is a bit 'hard, value for money is exceptional, but mostly because the price is ridiculously low. is made entirely of plastic. I think this focus on useless aps-c, much better than a 85mm (or 100mm) for portraits and busts a 30mm and events. full frame of a lens from 100 € to 2000 € machine is quite a paradox, much better than the various f/1.4. tried to borrow five days, and returned thinking to myself "never again". |
 | sent on October 11, 2011 Pros: Brightness, value for money Cons: All plastic, un-ergonomic the focus ring to focus Opinion: Great lens of excellent brightness and with good optical quality, also in relation to the price and a (around 100 euro). To always carry in your bag also saw the limited weight. From its best in low light, allowing you to make good shots with iso values ??not too high. Only flaws the focus ring to focus the lens at the top and very narrow, so little ergomica and difficult to maneuver and alas and did all the plastic that many jokingly call him the lens of the bean. I conclude by saying that with this value the so-called "fifty" is a lens you have in own camera bag |
user5222  | sent on October 01, 2011 Pros: Cost, brightness Cons: Nell'autofocus noisy, the focus ring on the manual is too thin to be well operated. Opinion: The 50ino! It 'was my first lens fixed lens. What satisfaction! I carry with me always seen its footprint entirely absent. In low light always manages to get along very well. I find great especially as regards the quality / price ratio. When mounted on cameras with APS-C is very suitable for portraits as the conversion ratio led him to be a 80-85mm focal length for portraits prince. Gives the best of itself (in terms of sharpness) diaphragms a little 'closed as 2.8 - 4 - 5.6 - 8 - 11. |
| sent on September 30, 2011 Pros: cost / brightness unbeatable, disposable Cons: made of plastic, not precise focus Opinion: I have taken for the brightness, sharpness as to 50mm zoom beats many low-cost carriers. Certainly it is not to be used frequently but in low light conditions like in church. The video gives you great satisfaction for the PDC, the regular rooms is impossible. If you feel passionate about photography and want to evolve, I think the first step that you can do without spending too much. |
 | sent on September 27, 2011 Pros: Brightness, cheap, lightweight Cons: little sharpness at large apertures, poor quality materials, focusing slow. Opinion: I used this lens, but I was very disappointed, of course with a price so low you can not expect anything. The sold as soon as I could. The construction material is very poor, focus ridiculous, sharpness non-existent in large openings. Optics to avoid, I suggest you save a little and buy the 50 mm 1.4. A whole other story. |
 | sent on September 26, 2011 Pros: An adorable play at a price balance (Creativity to throttle ...) Cons: Bokeh in a bit hard, MF ring small and uncomfortable, Quality construction of a toy, noisy AF. Considering the price: no Opinion: 21rnrn |
 | sent on September 24, 2011 Pros: value for money bright Cons: construction and focus is not always accurate Opinion: at that price it's almost impossible to find an optical ....... if we add the sharpness of the lens I would say that is the lens that everyone should have in your backpack. objective standard, taking a bit of convenience with fixed optics ... it is difficult to handle the car ;-) great for indoor photography and portraits. a must try |
 | sent on September 24, 2011 Pros: Sharpness, lightness, brightness, cost. Cons: Manual focus ring impractical, "plasticotto." Opinion: It 'was my first goal, "serious" I purchased and since then it has always mounted on my 450D. The lens has surprised me asap for clarity: it is a little soft at F1.8 F2.5 but it is good to be up. The opening of F1.8 brings a very good brightness of the lens in low light conditions but would still need a stabilizer, for the shallow depth of field (and therefore the difficulty to focus and recompose) the manual focus ring is a little 'narrow and really impractical to use, the lens is therefore more practical to use from F2.5 up for at least the ability to focus and automatic redial, and the bokeh suffers a bit' of only 5 aperture blades and in my opinion, is a little soft, but often it is more than acceptable. The lens is a true "plasticotto" but it is light and does its job for sure. I would say that is a lens a must try for those who want to approach with a view to fixing the light and shallow depth of field, even given the cost very reasonable. Mounted on an APS-C camera becomes a 80mm, especially ideal for portraits. |
user181 | sent on September 24, 2011 Pros: Brightness, excellent sharpness, cost Cons: It 'almost all plastic Opinion: After making several searches on targets suitable for the portrait, and after seeing a small amount of dindini available in the portfolio, I opted for the so-called "fifty". And I must say that I was really impressed! Ll talk about it on the forum as a plasticotto extremely bright and sharp ... and so it is! Clearly, the older brother f/1.2 L will be much better quality (especially in construction) but is very close to his brother intermediate f/1.4 (I had to try it) and in any case for what it costs (I have used paid 65 euro, new costs around 90-100 ...) is still going strong! A wealth of detail really impressive, very good even in low light ... a lens affordable and of great quality! And by the way, even in the unlikely event that it were to break, to buy another figure who knows what we should not pay exorbitant ... recommended |
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
