I repeat that many are sincerely deceived, expecting from him the versatility corresponding to 50mm in full frame. Unfortunately, he is already more of a "portrait painter". But indoors you can take pictures without a flash, the portraits are simply gorgeous (I'm not a pro, and I give a philistine assessment, just like the "consumers" of these pictures, also ordinary people, without any extra requests). Due to the fact that it is far from wide-angle, you can buy a filter for it inexpensively

So, summing up, I can say that this lens is worth the money! Despite the general fragility, it can give an excellent picture with a competent approach to composition. A good lens for beginners and not only. Comparing this glass with 50 1.4, I can say that the second one solves some of the problems of the first one (nuts, autofocus problems, a metal fastening ring, very sharp already at 1.8) and adds its own - "gentle" focusing guide systems. Everything else is the same . You won't get a special

Surprisingly, it turned out to be blurry up to aperture 2.5 compared to the KIT 18-55 IS (although it was adjusted, I strongly advise the 550D KIT - before and after adjustment, they are just different devices). With a smaller hole, up to 8, of course, it is sharper than KIT. The color rendering is just different. In general, for an unpretentious public, photos from drinking parties, etc., where it is desirable to be brighter and more mobile. The bokeh is of course pronounced. Own money - 3.5…

After working with the 18-55 whale, which practically ruined a lot of good photos (in poorly lit places), I decided to buy this lens because of aperture ratio and price + good reviews, although many wrote about the fragile design, so I thought for a long time, but in the end I took I immediately tried to take a photo in low light at f / 1.8 aperture, the photo turned out to be very clear and without noise. And if you take pictures in daylight, you get just gorgeous pictures! So a good lens…

I chose from seven (!) Copies, not regretting half a day. The seventh in the fourth store was without front and back focus, all the others missed by a lot or not. The filter and hood (wind it carefully and do not remove it, otherwise you will damage the trunk) cost almost the same as itself. AF smears very often, in low light it will definitely miss, here is the question - why is it needed if it does not work accurately? I only got one frame right on target and 1.8! When illuminating the face…

I won't say much. As an amateur (for home, for family, on crop, of course) I can say that I am more pleased with the purchase of this lens than the camera itself. Photos come out great. Well, yes, it buzzes a little, plastic, at 1.8 it sometimes misses a little, but rarely, at 2.0 it’s generally excellent (we don’t forget about its cost))). at twilight at low ISO with low shutter speed does everything perfectly. To be honest, I now use Kitovsky 18-135 extremely rarely, only on the beach, so…

Thanks to the body, almost without metal, and a cheap motor - very cheap and light for such image quality. At the same time, the plastic is quite high-quality and strong, although it is poorly processed in places, there are a lot of unpleasant irregularities around the glass. I thought he was some kind of toy at all, but no. ) There would be an extra couple of hundred dollars, you could take 1.4, but the main word is "extra". The whole difference is that the body and glasses are wider, with the

For beginners, this is the most - I guarantee a month of enthusiastic experiments. For more advanced ones, it is convenient when traveling - it is light and it is not so a pity to break it. As for autofocus errors, please note that for 1000D and three-digit cameras up to 450D, autofocus works within flu at all aperture values, i. E. we aim at the nose and it can place the flu both from the tip of the nose to the eyes (hit) and from the nose to the camera (only the tip of the nose is sharp) in…

I got it when I bought my first camera along with the 18-55 kit in 2022(!) I parted with the carcass and whale without regrets, and the fifty kopecks was left. Excellent portraiture. I mainly use for photos of my small products and textures (weaving, embroidery, illustration, small plastic) - it does just fine! no complaints, I will not part with him until his death). You can find fault with the speed and accuracy of autofocus, but how old is mine. Of course, there are nuances of optimizing…

I played with it for a couple of weeks and sold it, I confess, like many others, I bought into the low cost of this device and a large number of rave reviews, after a couple of days there was a feeling of wasted money, perhaps after the whale it will seem like a godsend to you, but it’s worth holding it in your hands better optics, as you immediately feel the need to urgently get rid of this uncomfortable piece of rattling plastic, my review will probably be downvoted by super professionals who

Normal fix. Good aperture, but I don’t recommend shooting in the open (it chromates, and sometimes smears, put 2, or 2.2). Quite sharp, rarely smears, but in poor lighting it does not always focus accurately and quickly. The case is simple, but not killed. I dropped it on the rocks, shattered into two halves, I thought the fifty dollars were over, but no, I collected it and everything works as before for a year and a half. I fell into the river with him (Tamron 70-300 was completely flooded…

Not a bad budget fix, given its price, made with dignity. The FF is a good fixed lens for long-range portraits (although I see no reason to use such cheap glass on the FF, because its MTF is rather weak for a fix). On the crop it is an excellent portrait lens, the equivalent is 80 mm, which gives the correct proportions when shooting a portrait close-up. It washes not badly, and with a hole of 1.8 it also does not weakly wash the depth of field zone. A hard test in the studio showed that the…

1. price / quality ratio - perfect: for that kind of money - here you go, get what you asked for. Yesterday I was at an important shooting, I got ready to click three times more than necessary (due to constant autofocus misses), I pull it out of the wardrobe trunk - and something glitters inside - either a piece of glass, or something else. Today I took it to the warranty service - it turned out that a piece of glue fell off and got stuck between the lenses ! And on Sunday there is a new…

I went to the store to buy an elka. I tried a bunch of lenses, including inexpensive Elks (17-40, 24-105) (25-35tr) and took THIS one. I was shocked. For a long time I dreamed of an elka, saved up money for six months. But there was not enough money for a fixed-elk, and this lens easily outweighs inexpensive el-zooms. Yes, the drawing is not electric, yes, it holds back worse, yes, it is blurry on an open hole, yes, it will break from the first push, and you will have to zoom with your feet,

1.8 aperture is working. For those who do not sharply at 1.8, the adjustment is junk. Like mine. When shooting from 5 meters, you have to deviate back by 30-50 cm. Then the sharpness is ideal. I recently bought a Helios 44m-4 for 700 (through an adapter ). Bypasses the Helios Canon EF 50mm f / 1.8 both in detail and in the richness of the picture. And most importantly, the Helios 44m-4 has the volume of photography. In general, the bourgeois are fooling us.

I took it as a beginner in the world of "DSLRs", instead of a "whale" lens. At first I wanted to take a cheap "telephoto", but I tried this lens in this price range (up to 5 thousand). The quality seemed amazing. It is clear that it is best suited for portrait photography, now I understand what "bokeh" is, and what it is when the lens "paints". Photography is a creative work, and as an artist, the quality of brushes and paints is important here. So, this brush (this is a lens) is very good for

I use with 550D. The lens exceeded all my expectations. If you shoot portraits, then you need to buy without hesitation (unless, of course, you have 50 1.4) I note the difficulty of focusing on budget cameras (1000d and 1100d). You should not consider the lens as a replacement for the whale, it is only suitable for portraits, but this is a feature, not a minus. I also don’t see anything wrong with the buzzing of the motor, especially since it focuses in one turn, and not jerking back and forth.

I have been using the EOS 400D for about six months. The difference in the picture with the zoom lenses I had before is amazing! In addition, the lens is very small and light - I almost always take it with me. Good for portraits. Sometimes they are interested in filming in the city. I did not put a protective filter on it - the front lens is small and slightly recessed into the housing. They wrote here more than once, and I will only support - given the price, every Canonist should have this…

The lens has been in use for about 2 months, I still can’t get enough of it! You can get used to the noise, because the picture is bright, the background blur is generally excellent. The minimum aperture of 1.8 is generally super, now I shoot only on it (plus, you can practically refuse to use a flash, which again lightens the weight in your hands!) For those who doubt, I can say with confidence: take it and do not think!

This is my first lens after the whale lens. Of course it was a complete delight! Such aperture, the ability to reduce shutter speed in difficult conditions. And this is for such ridiculous money! However, now with frequent use, autofocus is very blurry. lands after the target, or does not reach it. You have to shoot in series. Very annoying. However, for beginners, as the first lens for such money, it is ideal!