The Canon Ef 50mm

By Author: Filiberto Allison
Total Articles: 53
Comment this article

The Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II is the least costly lens presently offered for the EOS system, and has been in the schedule since late 1990. It's a streamlined model of the original EF 50mm F1.8 of 1987 (frequently referred to as the 'Mark I') which was supplied as basic with a couple of Canon's earliest 35mm EOS SLRs; nevertheless it can trace its lineage back a ton further than that, as the business has been making 50mm F1.8 basic lenses since 1959. Like its predecessor, it utilizes easy symmetric Gaussian optics with 6 elements in 5 groups, in a well-proven formula which is understood to provide excellent correction of aberrations.

Although created as a 'basic' lens for 35mm film, nowadays the 50mm F1.8 is far more likely to be seen doing service on APS-C format DSLRs, on which it behaves like a short telephoto portraiture lens (80mm equivalent). With its extremely reduced (sub - $ 100) cost, it often tends to entice the interest of Canon SLR individuals wanting to begin experimenting with rapid lenses for reduced light and shallow depth of area work, or just hoping to get sharper results than those which can be provided ...
... by the set lens bundled with the video camera body. It's even a possible possibility for those looking for a near-disposable lens to utilize in negative conditions.

Of course this isn't really the only lens of its focal length in Canon's schedule, and possible buyers will frequently even be lured by the EF 50mm F1.4 USM which we assessed just recently, in spite of its considerably higher cost. So the question we'll be asking in this assessment is whether the slower lens offers such compelling value for cash that it's an unmissable deal, or if instead the inevitable concessions involved in hitting such a low price point are too much to tolerate.
Headline functions

50mm focal length
Fast F1.8 maximum aperture
The EF 50mm F1.8 II is the most cost effective lens Canon makes, and the build quality is commensurate with the cost. From the mount at one end to the filter thread at the additional, the whole entire external framework is made of smooth black plastic, and generally this lens gives the impression of being built to a (incredibly restricted) finances. Attributes and controls are kept to an absolute minimum; you get a focus mode switch and a near-vestigial focusing ring, but that's about it. The front element is recessed by about 12mm from the filter thread, in effect providing a built-in hood for decrease of flare, and the barrel is rather broad and stubby to accommodate the focus and aperture motors plus the connected electronics.

Of course one benefit of the minimalist design technique is remarkably light weight, and this lens strategies the scales at a featherweight 130g, so won't exactly add unwelcome heft to your video camera bag. But as the body is unusually huge with respect to the optical unit itself, this has the result of lessening the 'density' of the lens (undoubtedly if it were a sealed cyndrical tube, it might float in water); the overall impression is of anything but solidity.

Right here we see the 50mm F1.8 II along with the EF 50mm F1.4 USM, which costs greater than 3 times as much. The slower lens is significantly smaller and less than half the weight than its faster sibling, but that distinctly basic design technique is incredibly obvious here. In comparison, the F1.4 lens gains USM focusing with full-time hand-operated handbook focus, a focus distance scale, improved building featuring a steel mount, and a bayonet fitting for the hood (not to mention that it gathers 67 % even more light).

Mount the light in weight, insubstantial 50mm F1.8 on a higher-end EOS bodies such as the 5D and you might practically be forgiven for forgetting that it was even there; this is one lens which won't be a duty to carry around all day. It's perhaps greatest matched to the little entry-level EOS designs such as the 450D, on which it forms a particularly light in weight and unobtrusive mix ideal for low-light shooting.

The lens's handling is greatest described as functional; the hand-operated focus ring works OK, but it has a rather loose, imprecise feel and you undoubtedly would not desire to use it all the time. It is even combined to the focusing electric motor when the lens is set to AF; this means that it rotates throughout focusing, so care needs to be taken to avoid holding it when making use of autofocus. Canon even alerts against turning the focus ring physically in this mode to avoid harming the electric motor or gear train, which means that full-time hand-operated focus is not offered.
Autofocus

This lens utilizes an extremely basic micromotor to drive the autofocus, which isn't really the most effective system Canon has ever made. AF performance is overall rather like the 18-55mm set lenses, i.e. a little sluggish and slightly noisy (although a ton better in this regard than some comparable systems we have actually made use of, such as the Olympus 50mm F2 macro), nevertheless the huge maximum aperture does imply that it continues to work gladly in much lower light levels prior to beginning to struggle and hunt for focus.

In use, the AF generally works effectively in great light, but as illumination levels fall it becomes gradually more hesitant and less dependable. It has a disconcerting tendency to misfocus slightly in reduced light (most noticeable when shooting with huge apertures) and whilst the video camera body's AF system need to share a couple of the blame for this, the EF 50mm F1.4 USM does appear to be more dependable in these situations. As always, it needs to even be mentioned that focus speed and accuracy is dependent upon a number of variables, featuring the video camera body made use of, subject contrast, and light levels.

Certain picture quality problems
As always, our studio examinations are backed up by taking hundreds of photos with the lens around an array of subjects, and reviewing them in detail. This permits us to confirm our studio observations, and determine any other problems which don't appear in the examinations.
Soft corners at wide apertures

Not unusually for a full-frame optic made use of on the resolution-hungry APS-C format, this lens isn't really at its greatest at wide apertures, and although central sharpness is ALRIGHT the corners look distinctly soft. In this regard it's worth mentioning that depth of area is incredibly shallow at F1.8, and real-world results are generally dependant upon focus accuracy, with the tiniest relative movement between photographer and subject resulting in a misfocused picture. Of course depth of area problems even imply that the corners of the frame are frequently out of focus at F1.8 anyhow.

Nonetheless, to emphasize this problem here's most up to date in our set of instructional brick wall images. At F1.8 the center looks a little soft and being without in detail, but the corners are incredibly soft undoubtedly. Stopping down to F4 enhances things drastically - the center now looks remarkably sharp with well-resolved fine detail, and the corners have actually even improved considerably (stopping down a little additional to F5.6 extractions the most effective possible performance).

Full-frame compared to APS-C

Eagle-eyed viewers will no doubt have actually noticed that the MTF50 sharpness data at any type of specific focal length/aperture mix is distinctly higher on full-frame when compared to APS-C. This might at first sight appear unforeseen, but in fact is an inevitable repercussion of our presentation of the sharpness data in terms of line pairs per photo height (and hence independent of format dimension).

Rather just, at any type of given focal length and aperture, the lens will have a fixed MTF50 profile when expressed in terms of line pairs per millimeter. In order to transform to lp/ph, we need to increase by the sensing unit height (in mm); as the full-frame sensing unit is 1.6 x bigger, MTF50 should for that reason be 1.6 x higher.

In practice this is an oversimplification; our examinations measure system MTF instead of simply lens MTF, and at higher frequencies the video camera's anti-aliasing filter will have a significant result in attenuating the measured MTF50. In addition, our testing procedure involves shooting a chart of fixed dimension, which for that reason needs a closer shooting distance on full frame, and this will even have some influence on the MTF50 data.

Certain picture quality problems

As always, our studio examinations are backed up by taking hundreds of photos with the lens around an array of subjects, and reviewing them in detail. This permits us to confirm our studio observations, and determine any other problems which don't appear in the examinations. We made use of the lens on both APS-C and full-frame bodies, particularly the EOS 450D and the EOS 5D.
Flare

As we have actually pertained to expect from huge maximum aperture lenses, flare can often be a concern with the 50mm F1.8 II. With it's profoundly recessed front element, the lens efficiently has a permanently affixed hood, and so is generally resistant to veiling flare from light impinging the front element at a position. However the minute you point the video camera towards the sun things can begin to go wrong, although on the whole the lens generally appears to shift a bit better than its F1.4 big brother in this regard.

With the sun in the corner of the frame, the lens is showing huge, bright red flare patterns in the contrary corner when shot at wide apertures. Stopping down gradually decreases these in dimension, but halation patterns around the sun increase instead; overall the most effective results are achieved at intermediate apertures around F5.6-F8. However to be fair the lens regains its poise incredibly rapidly as the light is moved further off-axis, and is generally resistant to flare problems in usual shooting situations.

Background Blur (' bokeh'): lots of little pentagons

One genuinely desirable, but tough to measure area of a lens's performance is the ability to deliver efficiently beclouded out-of-focus regions when trying to isolate a topic from the background, generally when making use of a long focal length and huge aperture. The 50mm F1.8 can produce significantly beclouded backgrounds at wide apertures, a massive benefit for portraiture shooting specifically on APS-C.

Unfortunately however, the character of the background blur is not tremendously appealing. This is significantly due to the lens's diaphragm building, which utilizes just 5 blades with absolutely straight edges (most modern designs utilize curved blades). This means that the minute the lens is stopped down, point highlights are rendered as pentagons, frequently resulting in a remarkably sidetracking performance of backgrounds that resembles absolutely nothing greater than a primary-school attempt at tessellation. And things aren't so much better at F1.8; while the apertures is at least round, highlights are rendered bright-edged and harsh. General it's a pity Canon didn't carry out a slightly more complex diaphragm building with 7 or eight blades, as this behavior rather spoils the performance of an otherwise remarkably fine lens.

Will you be in search of even more on canon ef 50mm? Pay a visit to Joe G. Mathis's blog now for even more information and facts on canon ef 50mm right away.