Canon 50.. F1.8 Question

jeffreaux2

I have the MarkII version which is all plastic. The MarkI has a metal mount and focus scale and seems to be a much better build quality. For those of you who know....which gives the best results. The MKII can be finicky and will now and then miss focus entirely. What is there to know about the older brother?.....I have a chance to get one!

sirsloop

You're gonna get the same performance out of the MK1, but the build is almost identical to the 35/2... metal mount, etc etc. IMHO, save up a couple hundred dollars and get a 50/1.4. Its worth it...

ziggy53

sirsloop wrote:

... IMHO, save up a couple hundred dollars and get a 50/1.4. Its worth it...

claudermilk

Agreed. From everything I've read, the optics are the same, they just made the build cheaper on the Mk II. If you are going to change jump to the 1.4 version. The Mk I has the same issues with focus--it's just an much older design & not up to the current USM AF design. I get frustrated with my Mk I, as many times it's on the camera due to extreme low light, but the darn thing ends up missing shots because of hunting. So the f1.8 advantage is blown due to slow reactions from the lens. This is why I keep toying with the idea of changing it out for the 1.4 lens. Here's a good review & why I'm thinking about switching myself: http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

sirsloop

I mean maybe you want to get a 50/1.8 mk2 first and see if its a lens that you are going to want. I personally found it way too long for walk around stuff on a 1.6x sensor. Its great for portrait shots, if thats what you need. At like 75 bucks, its not a huge investment and you can always resell it and only be out a few bucks. Maybe get a used one and see if you like it.