You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Similar Products
| Fotodiox Dedicated Lens Hood, for Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens as Canon ES-62 |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $38.87 |
| Amazon Price: $7.95 |
| Tiffen 52mm UV Protection Filter |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $15.99 |
| Amazon Price: $9.95 |
| Canon UV-1 52mm Haze Filter |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $14.99 |
| Amazon Price: $12.08 |
| Canon ES-62 Lens Hood for EF 50mm f/1.8 II (w/ hood adapter 62) |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $29.00 |
| Amazon Price: $31.93 |
Product Accessories
| Corel Photo & Video Pro X3 Bundle |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $149.99 |
| Amazon Price: $97.40 |
| AmazonBasics Universal Camera Case for Digital Cameras HF (Black) |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: Varies based on product options |
| Amazon Price: $5.99 |
| AmazonBasics Camcorder Bag with Shoulder Strap (Black) |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: Varies based on product options |
| Amazon Price: $12.99 |
| Opteka OPT CPL 58mm 58mm High Definition II Multi-Coated Circular Polarizing Glass Filter |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $29.95 |
| Amazon Price: $24.95 |
| Opteka OPT3FK58mm 58mm 3 Piece Pro Filter Kit Includes UV,PL,FLD |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $49.95 |
| Amazon Price: $29.95 |
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens
Amazon.com Price: $99.95 (as of 2010-07-30 16:17:10 GMT) Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon.com at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
Product Description
Product Details
Video Reviews
Customer Reviews
Years of development have brought us a lens that has a fast aperture of 1.8 - far faster than any consumer zoom lens - and that is sharp as a filed tack. Be forewarned about the sharpness . . . if you are taking pictures of people, this lens is unyielding in its sharpness and may well surprise you and your subjects whose every blemish is captured. The lens has a fabulously shallow depth of field if you want to use the 1.8 aperture to blow out a background. This lens is also ridiculously inexpensive. It is not USM - so it is a little loud. It does not have a moving focus scale. For the money though - this is heaven.
As to the build quality - yes, it is plastic. No, it's not built like the Rock of Gibraltar. If you are going to give this lens extensive use as your everyday lens and you shoot a lot, it may not hold up all that well as one reviewer suggests. However, I've now had this lens and used it fairly regularly (although not as the primary lens) for about 8 years and it is still in great condition. In my mind, spend the $$ on this first before you go and drop $330 on the 50mm 1.4 USM lens and I think you'll find it gets the job done nicely and that the extra $250 on the 1.4 may not be worth the difference in build (major difference), speed (minor difference) and image quality (minor difference).
Like others, I bought the Rebel XT and the 28-135 IS lens. The 28-135 is heavy and priced like a gold brick. I guess it does OK, and I do keep it mounted most of the time.
And like others, I stumbled on this lens somehow, read the raving reviews, and for the price figured, "What the heck?"
This lens in tack sharp. It shows the fire in the colors you photograph. The wide aperture means candles can be excellent lights for portraits. Its narrow field is great.
There are pitfalls though. I snapped a pic of my face at arm's length using autofocus a while back and (1) the focus locked on the tip of my nose and my face was already blurring (2) the lens was so sharp that I saw blackheads clearly on my nose tip I can't really see in the mirror (doh!). I've read that dSLR images are slightly soft to aid in later editing. I can only imagine what it would do on a film camera.
Yesterday while camping I slapped this lens on. Unlike the 28-135, this one is light enough that I didnt notice I was carrying a camera everywhere. At night I put the lens on the top of the car pointed at the sky, set the shutter for 15 secs, and hit the button. Much to my amazement, the lens not only showed hundreds of stars that were invisible to my eyes, but it also found a galaxy. That pic is on the customer image section of this page. You can see what I saw, but the smaller size doesnt do the lens justice.
One quirk of Amazon is that this page keeps alternating pictures of lenses. This lens does not have the distance focus scales on the outside of it.
Zoom is nice for many things. But where zoom isnt necessary, performance is very, very nice. Performance at $70 is almost too good to be true.
Let me close by repeating what has been said elsewhere and will continue to be said here....IF YOU OWN A SLR, STOP NOW AND GET THIS LENS!
UPDATE 12/06 I have owned this lens for about a year now. Over that time I have immersed myself in photography, workshops, books, tests, etc. I have since upgraded to the 30D and a couple of L lenses, and now have a portfolio strong enough that I am now getting dollar signs thrown at me that I didnt even see coming. I say all this to give you some perspective on what I will write afterward.
Now that Ive really learned the difference, I can agree with others that it is a tad soft wide open, but that is to be expected. I read a lens test recently that put the 1.8 against Canons heavweight L glass, and, not surprisingly, the L beat out the $70 plastic wonder in most categories. What might surprise you, however, is that when the lens was tested at F 8 it BEAT THE L GLASS in sharpness! As one that has felt the pain of trading large sums of money for L glass, that still amazes me.
My 28-135 has since joined my kit lens in the garage. The 1.8 is still in my case with my newer 30D.
With some experience under my belt I now would make the following recommendation. Right now, as you read this, you may have an idea if you've been bitten by the photog bug. You may know that this beast is going to morph into something more than a simple pasttime. If you look inside the depths of your aspirations and you know that you are going to be a serious amateur, bite the bullet and get the 50mm 1.4. Trust me on this one. Eventually you'll end up getting it anyway, so just apply the $70 to the 1.4 now.
If you're just exploring different areas of SLR photography, you cant go wrong with this lens. Case in point- as of this writing the baby in pink in the customer images section of this lens is one of the top-ten rated images of all pics uploaded on Amazon! This lens will allow you to dazzle friends and relatives used to snapshots from point & shoots. It will be the start of what you upgraded to a DSLR for in the first place. For you, the 1.8 is still, by far, the best value in photography!
Other reviewers, on Amazon and many other sites, have complained about the poor build quality... I can't deny that it's made cheaply compared to it's $300 cousin. But most of the people complaining have an unending list of L-glass lenses in their bag.
If you're an amatuer, this lens is more than good. The more expensive version gives you 1/3 stop... a $200 1/3 stop. I've had mine about a year. At f/1.8 I've handheld shots in streetlight and in dim torch-lit restaurants. I cannot imagine a better lens for the money.
And worst case, if the lens breaks, I can buy two more before I've come to the total that I would have put into the f/1.4 cousin.
I highly recommend this lens.
UPDATE 02/2010: After almost 5 years with this lens, it finally bit the big one... literally. First, my wife dropped it onto a wooden deck from chest-high. Other than a scuff on the plastic, no issues with the function of the lens. 2 weeks later, my dad dropped the lens out of my unzipped camera bag (DOH!). The drop didn't kill the lens, the night outside being used as a chew toy for 2 giant schnauzers did. Bottom line, I stand by my original fervor for this lens. I might personally upgrade to the f/1.4 because I do like to work in very low-light and I occaisionally wish I had just a little more lens speed. But I am certainly teetering because I know how good this lens is. Happy shooting!
Eventually, every photographer needs a fixed lens at somewhere around this focal range. I favor zooms for telephoto: it's hard to quickly shuffle on foot between a 70mm and 300mm focal range. I also like zooms for wide angle: you can grab a big landscape or group shot, then a person in close-up, all of which makes a wide-angle zoom a good "walkaround" lens, especially for travelers. The "middle range" between, say, 35mm and 100mm is portrait-range, and a great opportunity for the extra precision and handiness of a prime lens.
Prime lenses usually generate better images at every price point, and the EF 50mm f/1.8 II is no exception. In fact, on a ratio of image quality to price, this lens may be unmatched. Images are sharp and have nice contrast and color. At faster speed, indoor shots without flash are easily possible at reasonable lighting levels. This is crucial for those of us without high-end flashes and who rightly abhor built-in flashes, or flashes in general. The speed (and, again, the clarity) of this lens makes it an obscene bargain. See the peachfuzz on your baby's cheek? Get it; no flash. It's also disposable: you can take greater risks because replacement costs are relatively low.
Buy this, at least as a holdover, until you get L-series glass for your portrait range prime lens.
With the money of 1.4 version, I can have 4 of this, you only lost half stop of aperture. It is cheapest Canon lens yet produce probably the best result. 80mm focal length on Digital Rebel and 10D means it is the best solution for portrait lens.
Yeah, plastic lens is not as good as metal one. But I really doubt if it will break any time.
for 75 bucks, every EOS owner should have one.
Pros:
f/1.8 Aperature:
This lens is "fast" in that it has a very wide maximum aperature (f/1.8), meaning it lets through more light and can thus take photos with a faster shutter speed than a "slower" lens. A wide aperature also allows for very shallow depth-of-field (and thus a lot of background blur).
Because of the wide aperature, the lens is useful both for lower-light conditions--allowing you to still shoot at fast enough shutter speeds to permit handholding and often without having to add a flash--and for portraiture in well-lighted conditions, in which the background will be blurred.
Cost:
How many lenses of reasonable quality can you find for under $100?
Cons:
Focal Length on Digital SLRs:
For the digital SLR user, unless you're using a full-frame camera, the crop factor of the APS-C sized sensor will make this lens more in the range of 80mm and thus a medium telephoto rather than the "normal view" 50mm that many film shooters are expecting--so keep that in mind.
Autofocus:
The autofocus is not Canon's USM system and is thus a bit slow and noisy, and it requires the use of a small switch to change over to manual focus (no full-time manual focus). Sometimes, the lens seems to "stick" in manual focus after being switched there and then back to auto, requiring a dismounting and remounting of the lens to get it working right again.
Minimum Focusing Length:
This is not a macro lens and thus cannot focus at extremely close range, although I've successfully used it as such with the "poor man's macro" screw-on magnifying lenses. The loss of quality in doing so has not been a problem for me, anyway.
Build Quality:
Make no mistake--the lens' cheap price is reflected somewhat in its build quality, although the optics themselves seem to be fairly good. The lens may feel "cheap," and probably would break if dropped, but at the price, one could easily afford to replace it.
Summary:
Overall, I'm quite pleased with this lens and am glad to have purchased it. I tend to use it for pet and human portraiture and have also used it in a pinch for macro photography of flowers and in low-light conditions indoors.
So armed with this lens and an indoor performance, I took a bunch of pictures, one-handed, on my Digital Rebel XT, and I ended up with some of the nicest pictures (indoor or out) that I have ever taken:
http://payne-family.org/ISTP%20CNY%20Performance%202006/
Most of the pictures are very sharp, none of the pictures were taken with a flash.
The only problem is 50mm is really 80mm if you use a digital SLR with the typical 1.6 multiplication factor. So it's no good for some situations. I think I will have to get another more wide-angle lens that's also nice and quick to cover all the bases.
Remember - a fixed focal length lens will tend to be very sharp and much quicker because it's a simpler lens. Boy was I blown away by this one.
Colors are great, the 1.8 for indoor photography is awesome and the higher you set the aperture the better it gets. I love this lens. If you spent your $1000+ on a Canon Digital SLR you'd be nuts to not spend another $70 and pick this up. Going out and shooting pictures is a blast, but the icing on the cake is when you get home and they turned out how you imagined. This lens will do that for you. I shoot with a 20D.
This is an optically excellent lens at a truly bargain price. Particularly if you are going to this straight from the kit lens, you will be amazed and even shocked at the quality of the images this lens can produce compared to the kit lens.
Low-light performance is excellent, with the large aperture (still incredibly sharp wide open) allowing wonderful low light flash-free photography which will greatly impress you, your friends, and your family after you photograph people candidly at your next gathering.
This brings me to the focal length limitation. For what I just described, candid low-light photography at a party or other gathering, as well as candid shots of children and pets, this lens excels because on a 1.6 crop camera (such as the Digital Rebel series, which I imagine most people who buy this lens have) this equals approximately an 85mm lens in 35mm film camera terms. This is a classic portrait focal length, and so naturally it is perfect for candid portraits (as well as posed ones, of course) because it lets you get pretty close to people without sticking the camera in their face, as well as providing pleasing out of focus backgrounds with very sharp subjects. Canon also makes an 85mm f/1.8 lens which people who own the more expensive full-frame cameras love for the same reasons those of us with the 1.6 cameras love this one, because the focal length and large aperture are perfect for the sort of photography I've just described.
It's not that it has no use besides that, though; I've taken many landscape and cityscape photos with this lens that are wonderful. But usually, I feel very closed in by the long focal length. If you're a long distance away from your subject, this lens can often be great for landscape and nature photography, but eventually you'll be longing for a wider field of view and will at least be tempted to go back to the kit lens for many shots, and for some you will absolutely need it.
And this is its biggest problem, which is the flip side of this being a great lens for low-light social gatherings - even if you only use this lens for low light situations, you will feel like you need a wider field of view at least half of the time. To get a group shot of four or five people with this lens in a small house, I literally had to shoot from across the next room through the door, and that still wasn't quite wide enough. My only other option was to use the kit lens, which with its f/3.5 maximum at the widest focal length is just not usable for most low-light situations without a tripod or flash, so I had no choice.
To reiterate, it is very likely that if you aren't already spending a lot of money on your camera and lens collection, you will really feel the limitation of not having a wide enough field of view for a lot of your photography. Depending on your style and what you mainly shoot, you could easily get very frustrated with this lens despite its strengths.
The other thing that is likely if you're upgrading to this from the kit lens is that you will get addicted to the insane increase in picture quality and low-light usability and will not ever want to use the kit lens again, which means you'll need another higher quality lens that gives you a wider field of view. I used this lens more or less exclusively for about three months, became frustrated at not having a wider field of view, and ended up buying the $350 Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for its "normal" ~50mm equivalent on my 1.6 crop camera, and for its large aperture. That lens is great, by the way, and I wholly recommend it instead of this 50mm lens if you've got the money. You do lose the advantages of the 50mm's long reach for portrait situations, but in general you can make up for this by getting closer to the subject, which admittedly is not always possible. Solution? Get both ;)
Ultimate advice? If you've only got the kit lens and maybe a cheap telephoto zoom and you really don't want to or simply can't spend money on more expensive lenses in the near future, don't get this lens yet. Save your money up for a more versatile (and still optically excellent) lens in the $300-400 range, namely the "standard digital zooms" offered by Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina in that price range. I am currently saving up for one of these (probably the Sigma 17-70, the least expensive of them, since the advantages of the others are covered by the 30mm and 50mm lenses).
If you crave the low-light performance (which was what attracted me), and you really don't feel like you can spend $300 or more for something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, then go for it, but don't say I didn't warn you. You'll be craving more expensive lenses in no time.
Another disadvantage that you won't notice too much unless/until you have more expensive lenses is the build quality. In terms of durability I'd say this lens is great and it will hold up to normal abuse, but it definitely feels like a plastic toy, the manual focus ring is only marginally better than the one on the kit lens (which is a joke), and if you care about this sort of thing, it looks a little awkward on the camera (I have the Rebel XT). It is the same size as the 50mm lens for my 1978 Canon A1, but since the body styling on these new cameras is so different from the classic camera body style this size and shape looks a little silly. It's purely a cosmetic concern, but don't be surprised if you feel a little self-conscious about using it in public (this won't stop you from using it, of course, because you'll know that the silly look of the lens has no bearing on the outstanding results you get).
Finally, the autofocus motor is a little noisy, but if you're used to the kit lens you won't mind it because it's only slightly louder than that (just wait until you're spoiled by the silent and super fast ultrasonic motors on the more expensive lenses, though...) The focus accuracy is excellent, even in low light, but there's no avoiding that it will occasionally have to hunt for focus in very low light and while this is extremely annoying, there's really not much you can do about it even with the more expensive lenses and cameras.
Overall - it is hard not to recommend this lens, but only if you get it knowing its limitations ahead of time and you are ok with it, and accept that it will probably make you want more expensive lenses to go along with it.
Again - for the things it is best for (portraits and candids, kids, etc., though of course you can do a lot of creative things with it), you can't do better than this lens, especially on a budget (but, this lens compares extremely well with the much more expensive similar lenses!) What it absolutely is not, though, is a "walk-around", general all-purpose lens that you can leave on your camera most of the time like in the film days when most people just had the 50mm f/1.8 lens that came with their camera and never took it off. The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 I mentioned fits that bill perfectly, if that's what you're looking for.
If you look past the build quality (and you should) this little lens packs a punch. I got this since I don't like to use flash and like to shoot in low-light - decided to try a prime and this was an obvious pick.
I've got a good copy - sharp even wide open at 1.8, providing you get the focus correct, since DOF is very shallow and the lens does have some focus field curvature.
Users who mention softness wide open probably use the "focus-recompose" technique , which is not a good idea with such a large aperture since your focal plane will shift. You should always frame the shot with the correct AF point.
Wide open it has less contrast, but that tends to work well for portraits. At f/8, it's remarkable.
All in all, I'm happy with it.
And yes, I've spent the big money for lenses; I don't like doing it, but sometimes, it seems like to get the features you want, you just have to.
This lens taught me something. Maybe you *don't* have to. I'll tell you why.
I bought a new camera. An EOS 40D. A great camera for me, does the things I like, and does them well. My first Canon, though, I had no lenses. So I thought long and hard about what lens to get first. I ended up buying a macro lens, about $500 out of pocket by the time it was shipped to me. A great lens, and you bet I got some great macro shots. But it was a *macro* lens, and you know it was only a few days before I was pining to shoot some "regular" images. I looked at all manner of lenses, and the choices were just too much. I ended up unable to decide on anything.
So... then I saw this. $73? What the heck, let me get this and I'll have something to play with until I can decide among the many others that were seriously vying for my attention.
And THEN... then I received the lens. Now I don't feel what it was that attracted me to the more expensive lenses. That's how good this baby is. It's true, it doesn't have as many blades as a higher end lens and so your background blur - bokeh - is a little bit polygonal instead of nice round blurs; but frankly, I consider that to be nit picking in the extreme. Look at the beautiful samples people have uploaded here, actual results, and you can see that it will do a great job of isolating foreground objects. The bokeh is fine unless you're in some kind of pro competition or you are so finicky about your photos you sit in front of your prints all night, twisting your hands like someone who's had too much coffee.
Plus, this thing is really, really sharp. Give it the best chance - lots of light, tripod mount, fast shutter speed - and you'll be rewarded with pixel level detail, or at least as much as the optical low pass filter in your camera lets through to your sensor if you're shooting digital. I was *astonished* at the clarity, the EOS 40D's 10 mp sensor would surely find any glass problems, but... nothing. It makes perfect pictures. The AF works precisely, so that using center point only on my 40D, I was able to resolve exact details on many subjects using nothing but the AF. This is *not* typical behavior for an inexpensive lens.
Speed: It's pretty quick, all right, especially if you're willing to sacrifice some depth of field. Canon's got an f/1.2 in the L series for about 20 times the price if this really isn't quick enough. Though I suspect that most of you, like me, look at lenses priced well above $1000 and quickly find other things we want to buy instead. Like a whole new camera! With this lens, you can literally shoot decent space photos on a high-megapixel camera just by setting the lens to wide open aperture, laying your camera on its back, and using a good fast ISO setting. There's a good example of this in the gallery. I tried it for myself, and it worked great (by the way, see if you can find a moment to rate that photo up... it's a terrific example of what the lens can do!) Frankly, that's something only a really fast lens can pull off, at least, in my experience - because if you keep the shutter open too long, you'll have star trails instead of points.
Features: It's a basic lens. It just works. Which is just what we want, of course. But that's not to say it doesn't bring some features to the table.
It's good from about one and a half feet out to infinity; it's autofocus, but you can't touch the focus ring while it is driving it - it isn't a full time manual focus design. There's a switch for manual / AF mode in the usual place. One thing I appreciated was the red alignment dot being a physical nub instead of just being silk-screened on (or inside!) the lens - I change lenses around often, and I really eyeball those dots a lot to save wear and tear on the camera. You get both the lens covers you need, one for the business end and one for the camera end (for when it isn't mounted on the camera.) It uses 52 mm filters, and the threading is well machined, I had no trouble at all attaching and removing filters. It takes the ES-62 hood, which is not included. The lens system itself is five groups of six elements for f/1.8 - they didn't just throw it together.
Now, as to build. Yes, the barrel is plastic. Plastic is not a dirty word, though, really - it can be quite durable, with the right plastic in the right application.
The lens feels fine, not "cheap" at all. I mean this in the sense that the lens fits the camera well, and there are no funny noises or other warning signs of less than sufficient design.
It *is* plastic, and one thing about that is that the lens is very light weight for what it does, and that makes longer shooting sessions more pleasant. I can tell you that my physically much larger macro lens tires me out in just a few minutes; this lens doesn't do that, it's almost like it weighs nothing - it's only 4.6 ounces, all of it physically close to the camera so it doesn't exert much leverage on your wrists.
Here's an issue you can, and should, sink your teeth into: When focusing, the lens physically extends, and that is a difference between a more expensive lens and this one that can really matter. This is because it affects how you can use the lens. It is something you should, no, you *must*, keep in mind when using this lens. I'll explain.
Actually, I would speculate that of the people who managed to destroy this lens in short order, I bet at least some of them physically had the business end of the lens resting on something, or were holding onto the focusing ring when the AF system tried to drive the lens to a new physical configuration, and poof - the gear train, or the motor, or both, went nipples north.
You just can't do that - not with *any* lens that extends physically. Don't touch, or rest, the focus ring on this lens in AF mode, EVER! If you watch out for that one issue when you use it, just keep the lens free in the air and your fingers off the ring, I bet the lens will last years.
Why so confident? Simple: Based on the incredible track record Canon has for its camera and lens product lines, I think we can very safely say that Canon knows precisely what they are doing, generally speaking. They're not fools, I think we can all agree.
With that in mind, simply consider that Canon has placed a full one year warranty on the lens. Frankly, I don't believe they would do that if it was truly going to fall apart in a few months when used properly, as some of the less positive reviews here have said. Treat it right, it'll almost certainly treat you right. This is *Canon*, people, not the Wang Chung Junque Manufacturing Co. operating out of a cave somewhere.
In the end, even if mine did break, I'd replace it in a heartbeat. It is a truly great lens for the money. Highly recommended.
*** I've added an image to the image gallery that is a CLIP of a small portion of an image shot of the night sky. In it, you can clearly see the great nebula in Andromeda. I've identified the individual stars for you, and you can see the entire image by checking my flickr account (fyngyrz). When I saw what I had captured with this modestly priced lens, my jaw nearly hit the floor. Is this lens sharp? Unbelievably so, and here's stone proof of it.
Anyways, just return it until you get a good one. Once you do get a good one this lens is never coming off your camera. Is has perfect sharpness, even at 1.8. Its a tad slow to focus and is noisy. It feels like a plastic toy from a snack box but dang, it has awesome glass and thats what matters.
You're not going to find a lens under $400 that can perform nearly as well as this one does. Its extremely sharp that your eyes will bleed, it has perfect contrast and color. No true canon fan would be without this lens.
Due to its awesome 1.8 fstop its great for low light. It can keep your shutter speeds nice and fast to stop motion in very low light. I don't know what I'd do without this lens.
I personally just started into the DSLR game with my Rebel XT (body only) and purchased two lenses, the Canon 28-135mm IS USM and the 50mm f/1.8 II.
While the 28-135 is decent, that's a completely different story.
As for the 50mm f/1.8, it's a terrific lense in all aspects. Where else can you get a VERY inexpensive, sharp, and relatively fast lense that you can shoot in low light conditions. I mean there simply are no other lenses that touch it in it's price point. Being that I had already dumped quite a bit of money to start this hobby. What is another $70 bucks compared to all those other high dollar lenses.
While it can be soft wide open, this lense really shines at around f/8.0 rivaling lenses costing 10x the price. And the bokeh (background blur) that it produces is quite nice. It's great for portraits and candids but just make sure that you keep it relatively bright or else you'll find yourself switching to manual focus. While it can't zoom, that is a good thing as primes (single focal length) lenses always yield sharper images and it's a cheap experiment into the world of primes (trust me I've considerd going straight primes after viewing images from this lense compared to my 28-135mm)
Overall it's a great lense for the money especially for beginners such as myself. Yes it may not have the greatest body or mount but this a great learning tool and stepping stone into more advanced and expensive (if you even need to go that way) lenses.
Give it a try as it is definitely an inexpensive diamond in the rough.
Tags: 50mm • camera • canon • f1.8 • lens