Mark I 50mm f1.8 found ?!

[maxlam]

What a find ?!!! I found an old EF Canon 50mm f1.8 Mark I ?!!!
It's as heavy as my 50mm f1.4 ?!!! Such a SOLID built ?
No wonder this fella says that older lenses are more impressive ...

"This lens categorization sometimes gets very confusing. For example, Canon release newer versions of lenses all the time, numbering them with Roman numerals. Sometimes the new lens is an improvement. Other times it’s not.

For example, the EF 28-80 3.5-5.6 USM isn’t a bad lens. It has a metal lens mount, similar build quality to the EF 28-105 and fits into the second of the six tiers listed above. However, the EF 28-80 3.5-5.6 II USM is an all-plastic cheapie which fits into the first of the six tiers above. (all 28-80 3.5-5.6 lenses from marks II through V are plastic cheapies, in fact) The EF 50mm 1.8, as noted below, is generally considered to be a better lens than the EF 50mm 1.8 II."

Really true man !!

[kcuf2]

actually not only that, the manual focus lens in the manual focus era are very very well built. Not just canon, nikon ones too...

looks like the era now is to give u just sufficient and with decent performance. then the buyer will hope they wont hit it/ drop it harder than expected..

[calebk]

'Plastic Cheapies'. Love that word. Haha.

[maxlam]

Just realised that the solid built also takes a little longer time than the "plastic cheapies" to focus

[wanzw]

so want to go for speed or build or both?

lol. 50 1.4 comes in mind

[oeyvind]

Originally Posted by wanzw so want to go for speed or build or both? lol. 50 1.4 comes in mind

Is the 50/1.4 fast in AF? I don't think so...

[Rashkae]

It's like the old Minolta lenses too... They were metal and glass and felt like it! They still feel like you could quite comfortably use them to beat someone up and afterwards they wouldn't have a scratch on them.

[spartacus.ret]

Originally Posted by oeyvind Is the 50/1.4 fast in AF? I don't think so...

context is all. when you're talking about the f/1.4, mk I and mk II, then yes.

[calebk]

Originally Posted by spartacus.ret context is all. when you're talking about the f/1.4, mk I and mk II, then yes.

IIRC f/1.4 only has one variant, whereas f/1.8 has two.

f/1.4 has micro-USM, so technically it should be faster and quieter than the f/1.8 brothers.

[Russ]

I have one which I bought brand new from TK for $90 14 years ago.

[spartacus.ret]

Originally Posted by Russ I have one which I bought brand new from TK for $90 14 years ago.

how much would that be in present times due to inflation?

[maxlam]

Originally Posted by Russ I have one which I bought brand new from TK for $90 14 years ago.

IF ... I emphasize "IF" .... someone were to make you an obscene offer ... what would be willing to part for it for ?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by maxlam IF ... I emphasize "IF" .... someone were to make you an obscene offer ... what would be willing to part for it for ?

I paid only $90 because I think TK were trying to get rid of it as it was a superseded model.
$90 in todays dollars will probably be about $200. Canon replaced it with the 1.4 USM and the 1.8 II. The 1.4 is much more profitable and the 1.8II is cheaper to make anyway, so overall, they make more money with the new strategy

In recent years, the 1.8 Mk I has held its resale vaue very well and I think the market price is in the S$250 region, which some may say is obscene as it is more than double my purchase price. Personally I would not pay more than that !! (comparison - the 24 2.8 cost about S$400 in the mid 1990s and now sells for about 250-280)

Will I let go?? Good question - I definitely will not replace it with a 1.8 II so I have to fork out S$480-520 for a 1.4 (good used one or a new one from HK) to get better bokeh and quiet AF (the 1.8 is v noisy) and of course, the 1.4. The 1.4 is also heavier. There is the sentimenal value - it is the oldest lens I have and still gives very very nice images, second only to my 85 1.8 and better than my 10-22 and 17-40L.

So for the time being, I think I will hold on to it.

[Russ]

One more point - I also had the 28-80 3.5-5.6 Mark I which I got with my EOS 100 kit. That 28-80 was the very first USM lens and is supposedly much better than the Mk II III IV V, but I sold it for $150 after getting my 300D because it just didn't perform particularly well IMO. Replaced it with a used 24-85 (much better), which I also sold after I got my 85mm.

[Denosha]

I've tried my cousin's 50mm f1.8 mkI before. AF is really super slow and noisy. Bokeh is rather ugly as well. But the build quality i think is really quite a bit better. That said however, I've never used the mkII before so I can't really compare. Hur hur.

[Static]

Originally Posted by Denosha I've tried my cousin's 50mm f1.8 mkI before. AF is really super slow and noisy. Bokeh is rather ugly as well. But the build quality i think is really quite a bit better. That said however, I've never used the mkII before so I can't really compare. Hur hur.

Oh, I heard from another Cser commenting that the Mark I 's AF is slower than Mark II.

I saw one in action b4, I find its focusing rather noisy....

But can someone enlighten me is there any difference between in a "Made in Japan" 50 F1.8 MarkII and one that is made elsewhere ?

Beside better QC, what's the diff ?

[calebk]

Originally Posted by Static Oh, I heard from another Cser commenting that the Mark I 's AF is slower than Mark II. I saw one in action b4, I find its focusing rather noisy.... But can someone enlighten me is there any difference between in a "Made in Japan" 50 F1.8 MarkII and one that is made elsewhere ? Beside better QC, what's the diff ?

I don't think there's any noticable differences. I don't even bother where my 50mm f/1.8 II was made. It delivers good sharp pics that are way above it's price point. If you know it's a plastic cheapie, then don't rough it up. I don't, and it hasn't disappointed.

[spartacus.ret]

Originally Posted by calebk I don't think there's any noticable differences. I don't even bother where my 50mm f/1.8 II was made. It delivers good sharp pics that are way above it's price point. If you know it's a plastic cheapie, then don't rough it up. I don't, and it hasn't disappointed.

if you see the front of the lens writing "made in japan", then its japan. if not, then its made in malaysia.

[spartacus.ret]

how noisy is the mk I? comparable to the ef 35mm f/2?

[maxlam]

Originally Posted by Denosha I've tried my cousin's 50mm f1.8 mkI before. AF is really super slow and noisy. Bokeh is rather ugly as well. But the build quality i think is really quite a bit better. That said however, I've never used the mkII before so I can't really compare. Hur hur.

The one that I am having has comparable bokeh with my f1.4 @ f1.8 lay ? All things equal, I dunnoe why but my 30D seems to like to underexpose my f1.4, so the f1.8 actually seems brighter ?