Header banner
Revain logoHome Page

Reviews

Global ratings 172
  • 5
    75
  • 4
    55
  • 3
    22
  • 2
    7
  • 1
    13

Type of review

Revainrating 4 out of 5

Good product, not disappointed.

I don’t regret buying it, there should be a bright lens, I recommend it to beginners, what is called feel the difference (after KIT) and the choice of 1,8 or 1,4 is more a matter of money. the price-quality ratio of 1.8 will be better, so if you have financial problems, take 1.8. as I noted, shooting on a 1,4 hole is of little use, or rather specific . To add a comment, the change of the carcass (6D) prompted in this bunch no problems . 1.4 working back focus is easily adjusted . but because…

Pros
  • The advantages are described well and there is nothing to add, therefore, about the disadvantages .
Cons
  • do not take without checking! took on Amazon (new) saving 2t. more losses. scary back focus -> alignment. 1.4 aperture is of little use very small depth of field -> many misses, but starting from 1.8, another compote!

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I am delighted, the product is really worthy.

Who soaps or makes mistakes with autofocus at apertures greater than 2.8 - try choosing an autofocus point. And understand that when shooting handheld, even the slightest movement within a few (maybe tens) of millimeters will give the same “autofocus error” due to the extremely short depth of field. Different pros: Sharp (especially if less than or equal to 2.8), but the NATURAL color reproduction is especially pleasing, even in comparison with 24-105 4L and 70-200 4L IS. Cons below: Defective…

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I was surprised by the quality for this price.

Awesome portraiture, for the money - more than an adequate choice! For the same price, you can hardly get better image quality. Beautifully draws the background, with an aperture of 2.8 I did not notice any distortion. At 1.4 there is a slight distortion, but almost imperceptible. But 1.4 makes it possible to shoot in almost any room without a flash, or get a minimum depth of field. Not very well suited for reporting on the street - there are zooms for this.

Pros
  • Aperture, sharpness, bokeh, USM, weight and size.
Cons
  • Fix. But this is not a disadvantage, but a feature.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Best thing for the money, glad I did it.

Most of the shortcomings of the lens can be cured by slightly clamping the aperture. I think that this is almost an almost perfect portrait for a cropped martitsa. But on a full frame, the lens is almost useless: for a portrait - too strong distortion, for a landscape - too small a viewing angle. All that remains is a group portrait and, possibly, still lifes. Different pros: - A very large aperture gives a very small depth of field, and this can be used for some artistic purposes. - Good…

Revainrating 4 out of 5

No complaints, I recommend to buy.

In general, for studio shooting of any scale - a great option. For shooting dynamic scenes, it is not very suitable because of autofocus, and aperture, let's say so, is useless for the reasons I have indicated. To enjoy sharpness at 1.4 and a more interesting bokeh pattern, I recommend looking at a similar sigma (50 / 1.4 EX), since it costs almost the same. But only if you have a cropped camera! For full-frame, the best fifty dollars is this one.

Pros
  • This lens is one of the sharpest lenses Canon has ever produced. Simply unimaginable resolution even on a 22 megapixel brand. But here's the problem, this sharpness starts only from aperture ~ 4 and reaches a razor-sharp value at 8k. Well, USM and all that - it is important not even that it is silent, but that you can correct the aiming with the handles at any time.
Cons
  • F / 1.4 soft shamelessly (there is no sharpness and everything seems to glow). Suitable only for close-up portraits - this soft effect is appropriate there as it makes the skin smoother. F / 1.8 is also not a gift. F / 2.8 is still nothing. Because of this soft effect, autofocus also works extremely poorly, until you align the body-lens pair. It is necessary to align with Arsen, the built-in 5d mk II / 50D adjustment does not help much, and must be paired with a carcass. Bokeh, as a consequence of the high sharpness, is rather unpleasant only if the background is fairly uniform.

I have been using the lens recently on a 550d carcass, for about a month (before that I photographed on f1.8 II), in comparison with the super budget 1.8, the 1.4 glass is much better in many respects, the first is, of course, the build quality; convenient number of manual focus; excellent aperture, HA - at a minimum level. After buying 1.4 and the very first photo shoot, I regretted that I did not immediately buy 1.4, but bought 1.8. Also, we should not forget about the versatility of this…

Pros
  • Excellent build quality, quality materials, image sharpness, beautiful bokeh, aperture
Cons
  • In my opinion there are none

Revainrating 4 out of 5

Good product, more pros than cons.

Because photographers frequently have to choose between this lens and the subject, this model is frequently pitted against the EF 50 mm F/1.8. Both were enjoyable. Initially, I purchased 1.8 and was quite pleased with it; however, he ordered to live a long time and was unable to withstand the impact of falling on the asphalt along with the carcass. I had to return it. Thank Goodness, the carcass was not damaged in any way. After that, I invested in version 1.4. The distinction may be seen very…

Pros
  • I believe that the luminosity is the most significant benefit that comes with using this model. It is two stages higher than the very low-cost option of fifty dollars, which is the 1.8. She is the one who makes it possible for you to capture images without the assistance of a tripod practically as late in the day as it gets. She is responsible for the lens functioning flawlessly despite not having a stabilizer attached to it. In addition, if there is a little bit more light than there was at nightfall, you will be able to reduce the ISO level, which will prevent grain from appearing in the photographs. Autofocus that uses ultrasonic drive is not only very accurate but also completely silent. This makes it a very convenient feature. Another advantage is a gorgeous bokeh pattern, which is achieved by using a shallow depth of field in conjunction with the correct shooting parameters. The option to manually alter the focus without having to exit the autofocus mode altogether will be another wonderful little thing that will make the challenging life of an amateur photographer a little bit more bearable. Sharpness. Although it can also be linked to the qualities, sharpness is more commonly thought of as a property of the lens itself.
Cons
  • The model has a limited number of flaws, but those that are there are substantial. The cost should always come first and foremost. I paid sixteen dollars for my copy. Chromatic aberration is the second problem that can occur. It's some kind of a nightmare, that's all. Any region of the frame that contrasts with the others lights purple. The use of this lens should therefore be avoided when photographing landscapes, particularly on bright days. Unless you reduce the size of the aperture, that is. Despite the fact that the contrast was not particularly strong, even a full-length photograph that was taken outside during sunny weather was affected by a purple glow. On the other hand, straightforward photos that feature seamless color transitions look just fantastic.

Revainrating 1 out of 5

Terrible product, not worth your money absolutely!

I have 50mm 1.8. I came to the conclusion that by the time my son was born, I needed to purchase a sabzhe glass. This is due to the fact that I anticipated more speed from him (children are active; you have to keep up!), sharpness, and that the aperture ratio will not be superfluous. I tried it out on several targets in the store, and since everything appears to be in working order, I purchased it. It focuses quite rapidly, but the shot is rarely successful; you need an object with a lot of…

Pros
  • A satisfying fullness in the palms of one's hands When compared to 50 1.8, the picture's brightness is increased when using the same settings.
Cons
  • Design - utterly collapsed and perished! This glass comes with an excessively high price tag. Autofocus has far too many lapses. As much as 2.2 lathers Up to 2.8 chromatitis is intense (after it also chromatitis, but much less) (after it also chromatitis, but much less)

Revainrating 4 out of 5

Good product at a good price, I recommend to try it.

Used this lens for several months. Of the pluses, it’s certainly aperture, although for beginners it’s worth telling that not everyone will be able to shoot well at 1.4: Firstly, the sharpness at 1.4 leaves much to be desired (which is not always bad for a portrait). Secondly, the depth of field is too small. In fact, most shots will start at f/2.0 which is also very good. Many people have problems with light impacts of this lens, especially when the proboscis is extended. In general, the…

Pros
  • Aperture Autofocus with ultrasonic drive Nice drawing
Cons
  • Chromatic aberration Gentle constructive Price

Revainrating 1 out of 5

I want my money back! Disgusting product and poor quality.

There is no operating experience, since it failed at the first photo shoot (mechanical damage to the focus ring (made of foil)). Someone will say: - My hands do not grow from there, but I have been exploiting the Sigma AF 70-300mm f / 4-5.6 DG Macro, similar in design and more bulky, for 5 thousand for more than a year. I did not expect such a turn from Canon products. Refused to repair under warranty. Stands on a shelf - collects dust.

Pros
  • failed to identify
Cons
  • flimsy design. Expensive repairs

Revainrating 3 out of 5

Normal quality, you can use it.

In the photo school, this lens was advised to everyone, respectively, almost every one of the 17 students had it, I also had it and I sinned that I didn’t have the best copy, I shot this lens for exactly a year, which I can say, the picture is not very bad, the blur is also very pleasant and beautiful, but the minus covers everything, there is no sharpness even at f / 4, maybe for those who like everything soft and not sharp, it will do, all modern lenses that have been produced for the last 10

Pros
  • Fairly well assembled for its price range, very nice drawing
Cons
  • No sharpness down to f/2.8 and beyond, it doesn't hurt the eyes, very low contrast, buzzing autofocus and not far from the fastest, not far from the 50 f/1.8 II that everyone scolds so much

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Reliable purchase, guaranteed to be a good one.

First of all, go outside to test, the house is not a studio . and it’s crowded if you have a crop. Personally, my first impressions were not very good. I was upset, because I shot at home. Either it doesn’t get into autofocus, then it’s solid soap . But when I went out into the street, I was delighted! Having opened the aperture completely, I shot in Av mode (on the advice of a professional photographer with great experience), the pictures turned out to be sharp in the focus area, bright (I…

Pros
  • Price, weight, picture quality.
Cons
  • On the crop it is cramped in the room

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Excellent product, the best quality.

Has pros: I liked the sharpness of the lens, beautiful bokeh, high-quality assembly. Different cons: There is no STI motor, it rustles, but after an hour I got used to it

Revainrating 5 out of 5

A good quality product, I rate this purchase perfectly.

Around the spring of 2022, the property was purchased. I make use of, and have an understanding of - a real "portrait" with its inherent "fixing" features, such as the fact that it lathers wonderfully and autofocus is set to the appropriate level. The ultrasonic motor emits a pleasant buzzing sound. It is portable, so you can take it with you everywhere you go just like a conventional one. Even after the sun has set, you may capture high-quality images with an aperture of f/1.4 (especially if…

Pros
  • Aperture\sConstructive\scompactness\sPrice
Cons
  • Didn't find

What can I say - this is a lens for photo shoots. And for shooting any "beauties", still lifes there. Attempts to use it to capture any dynamics are doomed to failure. I, relying on its aperture ratio, tried to shoot a fire show with this lens. It makes no sense. It’s better to lose in aperture ratio, but take glass with normal focusing. And for photo shoots - not bad. However, 85 / 1.8 costs the same money, but it is better for photo shoots

Pros
  • Aperture. Sharpness from 1.6, in principle, and 1.4 is not bad. Bokeh is pretty. Lightweight and durable
Cons
  • Very, very stupid autofocus. Works tolerably only in conditions of excellent illumination and complete immobility of the object being shot

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I am amazed! It was definitely worth the money!

I have been using this lens for over 4 years. Before that it was 50 1.8. Compared to it, 1.4 lies more pleasant in the hand, focuses easier and faster, and, accordingly, is more aperture. However, in the 2nd year of his life, he still had to be taken for repairs due to frequent defocusing. At the slightest lack of light, it does not fall on the fixed focus points, or does not focus at all. Nevertheless, this is the most worthy model in its class.

Pros
  • great picture for the price
Cons
  • Not the most reliable design

Revainrating 4 out of 5

What you need, a cool purchase, I advise you.

The question that torments the minds of many . is there any point in buying when there is 1.8? I answer . Of course there is a difference, but an amateur will not notice it for sure. Also, with a covered aperture greater than 2.0, there is no difference with reflected light. With point light sources, the situation is different. The bokeh shape is better. These pentagonal "quality marks" no longer exist. On an open hole, the lens also outperforms its younger brother. 1.4 - working, but really…

Pros
  • Aperture, weight, compact dimensions, ultrasonic motor, Japanese assembly, thread diameter 58 mm, which means cheap filters, relatively affordable original lens hood
Cons
  • A flimsy construct, a moving trunk with a front lens, not a tenant without a lens hood .

Revainrating 3 out of 5

In general, its pretty good, an equal number of pros and cons.

In general, it looks a little better on the crop than on the FF. Dirty and soapy corners are not so noticeable. For a lens for every day norms. He is not particularly sorry, but he will not please the picture either. Very dependent on shooting conditions. Solid middle man. The price tag is clearly too high. Some pros: The price in the secondary market is not bad. The construction is pretty good. Nothing is chattering. Metal bayonet. Got cons: Bokeh is disgusting. The lens is essentially working