The best version of the first fast lens to understand what FIX is! A must have for every aspiring photographer. Portraits at home in low light, aperture is enough to take pictures without puff. On the street, in general, everything turns out nicely without any mental strain on photography. Nothing rattles, it doesn’t hang out, it’s like a glove on the camera, it buzzes when focusing without straining.

I put it on my Mark 2 for evening shooting in the interior of Zeiss Planar T * 1.4 / 50 ZE. And . the test is not in favor of Zeiss. It is sharp and conveys, in my case, everything human skin defects and interior wall textures. Although when photographing landscapes, shortcomings would turn into advantages. And vice versa. If you do not have L optics for 50-100- Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II - Your first great lens.

when the lens falls into your hands (after the whale), you start squealing like a girl from the photos you took, the difference with the whale is just earth and sky. it becomes a regular one and it’s not a hunt to remove it from the camera, but time passes and you start to see many disadvantages in it: dust inside, completely inaccurate autofocus, and even slow and refusing to work at dusk. But the quality of the picture is not bad, exactly for its price. and bokeh eventually ceases to be…

I have been working with this lens for a year now. At first, I could not get used to the 50mm fix, I always wanted wider angles, but then I got used to it and enjoyed it. Of the huge pluses, I highlight the following: the lens is very sharp at all distances (from 70 cm, but even better - from 1 m.). I was especially pleased with the sharpness to infinity - it turns out very clearly, albeit far away. The lens is very bright: you can shoot while your eyes see, the F / 1.8 aperture allows you to…

In general, the lens is good for 3k, for beginner photographers or just amateurs. After a couple of months of use, I bought a Helios 44m-7, after delighting with its picture and sharpness, I put Canon 1.8 on the shelf and have not been using it for several months, and in general I don’t even see the point anymore. I'm not going to sell it yet, let me have at least one autofocus lens =) And then I'll buy a better one. Here is my personal opinion. Maybe someone will come in handy.

good for the money, works honestly, decent pictures, if you don’t have money for a more expensive option, you should buy it, if the camera was purchased with an 18-55 whale lens, you will feel the difference for this price I don’t write about autofocus misses, if you set a goal, then a good shot is no, no, yes it will work, but it’s hard for them to shoot a dynamic scene, for some reason it’s not a pity to take it where you can’t drag a 1,4 lens the second year has begun, so far it is…

The lens left a double impression. I bought it as a budget staffer for ff. Very convenient focal length at full frame, universal. Used exclusively for people photography - weddings, studio, portraits. Far from immediately realized that at 1.8 it is completely useless, up to 2.8. The wildest autofocus misses, no intra-camera adjustment could save, at different ISOs, under different shooting conditions, the glass behaved as it pleased, there was a clear focus shift on the face. The effect…

An excellent portrait lens for those who are just learning to photograph and do not want to immediately throw away 10-15 thousand. I got the 1000D with the carcass, and I have never regretted this choice. You can practice on it, and if you want, buy yourself something more versatile and expensive. I changed to 18-135, but for portraits I will still continue to use 50f/1.8 too.

I took it as the first fix after the whale 18-55. At first, the shock from the diaphragm, then the "charms" come out: fragility in the hands, lack of fixation of the focus ring during AF - you can break the motor. The main feature (I note, NOT a problem) of this fix is ​​that crops (in particular, my 650d) in principle never guarantee accurate focus aiming with a fixed aperture <2.5 - I tested it myself + read it on the forums. The fragility of the lens adds inaccuracy, which can be reduced by

Before buying, I used a whale 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6 IS II. I didn’t understand why the staff members were scolding. After the acquisition, I convinced myself of everything. On the EF 50, the picture is really juicier and more voluminous, but the constant focus, the viewing angle is limited. I got used to the constant focus, although sometimes the viewing angle was not enough. Sometimes you want versatility, to capture more in the frame. Because of this, I decided to take the old 18-55 on a…

Bought for studio shooting (just starting out, no money). I checked the front back focus in the store - everything is normal. I ran tests: whatever one may say, on a large hole from 1.8 to 2.0 it still blurs and not only the background)) . On waist portnets on the street, it’s not critical, in the studio it’s better to work with 2.2 for close-ups on small ISO. By the way, I bought it after reading this forum. That. if you need sharpness, work on a slightly covered aperture, shoot several people

Good value for money. When autofocus hits, the picture is just great, but the need for constant focus control after the shot gradually begins to strain. I took an ef 40 f / 2.8 stm to replace it, now fifty dollars is gathering dust on the shelf. Who cares - for my purposes, aperture 1.8 is practically not needed. Who needs it, and there is no money for f / 1.4 - feel free to take it, I recommend it. And the last thing: after a half-hour "shamanism" with this lens, a specialist from an…

comparing with the Kitovskiy 18-55, it feels like looking through the lowered and raised glass of the door of a used car. Moreover, when you shoot, it is not noticeable, but when you look at the result, it is impressive, especially on a high-quality monitor. With this lens, they do not disdain to work on Canon 5D mixed with elks, and this is not out of special redneck, a really high-quality thing in the optical sense.