"Sweet Spot" for EF 50mm f1.8 II ?

[electron]

I find that the max aperture f1.8 yields less than sharp images which is not surprising. Just wondering what fellow users find is the best aperture range for the sharpest images?

[calebk]

I have found satisfactory performance from f/2.5. YMMV.

[Headshotzx]

I agree. Stopping down at least 1 stop seems to be a good guideline for exceptional sharpness in most lenses.

[chalib]

Originally Posted by electron I find that the max aperture f1.8 yields less than sharp images which is not surprising. Just wondering what fellow users find is the best aperture range for the sharpest images?

sharpest center to corner f8-f11

[Snoweagle]

I find its sweet spot at f/5.6.

[nikkie]

by logic i think 50mm as a prime should be sharp and quite 'easily achievable' at f2.8 on wards. if it has to be f5.6 to be sharp, then it loses its appeal as prime. f5.6 is normally the domain of zooms already.

[bernstein1234]

Originally Posted by nikkie by logic i think 50mm as a prime should be sharp and quite 'easily achievable' at f2.8 on wards. if it has to be f5.6 to be sharp, then it loses its appeal as prime. f5.6 is normally the domain of zooms already.

Did you have a 50mm f1.8 II to test? I agree with Snoweagle that from 5.6 onwards the lens is the sharpest from centre to corner. At f2.8 the corner still looks very 'messy' especially when you shoot a newspaper then you'll see the result.

[calebk]

Everyone has different definitions of acceptable, since everyone is using the lens for different purpose. If it's subject pop you want, why stop down to f/5.6, when f/2.5 will give you subject pop and decent subject detail rendition?

Naturally, of course, stopping down to f/5.6 or f/8 is elementary when you want sharpness across the frame, but you must realise, everyone's definition of acceptable, and acceptable for what purpose, is different.

[Snoweagle]

Originally Posted by bernstein1234 Did you have a 50mm f1.8 II to test? I agree with Snoweagle that from 5.6 onwards the lens is the sharpest from centre to corner. At f2.8 the corner still looks very 'messy' especially when you shoot a newspaper then you'll see the result.

Well we pay for what we get. But overall this lens is really value for money, images produced by it are quite impressive.

[bernstein1234]

Originally Posted by Snoweagle Well we pay for what we get. But overall this lens is really value for money, images produced by it are quite impressive.

Yep its a super value for $ lens. Served me well during my undergrad days.. but I feel that the pics taken from it lacked that pop factor... and have since moved on to 501.4... The contrast and color are really different...

But nevertheless i will really encourage ppl get the 1.8, if they feel justified then they get the 1.4

[JeremyG]

on 'my' dictionary, "Sweet Spot" equals acceptable sharpness yet still achieve the bokelicious effect for background. I just love the effect @ F/2.0. Give it a go. at least mine are acceptable!

but of course, if you don't bother with bokeh or blur background, 2.8/5.6/8.0 was my fav too.

[Kit]

Originally Posted by nikkie by logic i think 50mm as a prime should be sharp and quite 'easily achievable' at f2.8 on wards. if it has to be f5.6 to be sharp, then it loses its appeal as prime. f5.6 is normally the domain of zooms already.

Sharpness is not the only deciding factor for buying a lens and if you know enough, a lens should not be judged solely on sharpness as well.

[Snoweagle]

Originally Posted by bernstein1234 Yep its a super value for $ lens. Served me well during my undergrad days.. but I feel that the pics taken from it lacked that pop factor... and have since moved on to 501.4... The contrast and color are really different... But nevertheless i will really encourage ppl get the 1.8, if they feel justified then they get the 1.4

That's right. Some felt the need to upgrade to the f/1.4. Thinking back, kinda missed mine (f/1.8 II one)

[bernstein1234]

Originally Posted by Snoweagle That's right. Some felt the need to upgrade to the f/1.4. Thinking back, kinda missed mine (f/1.8 II one)

How's the 50 1.2?

[king2penn]

really miss my 50mm f/1.8II, i found the sharpness acceptable from f/2.0 onwards... Great Lens

[Doughnuts]

People buy this for good bokeh at a very affordable price. sweet spot for me is at all stops, it depends on which effect i need.

[mervinb]

The original question and the various responses don't really match up... For some, the 'sweet spot' of an f1.8 lens has to be f1.8-2.4, where bokeh forms the major technical element of the shot. For the pixel peepers, it's totally different, and perhaps f5.6-8.0 gives the maximum border-to-border resolution. If you trust the report from photozone (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Cano...review?start=1), even at f1.8, centre to border resolution is in the very good range. DOF is extremely shallow, so something like a newspaper test is not really meaningful.

Using the plastic fantastic at f5.6-8.0 is *just* for sharpness is rather meaningless, IMOH. The 18-55mm IS kit lens will usually give more than satisfactory results at 6.3 or 8.0 (my copy has great resolution on at 55mm) and the IS makes the keeper rate much higher than I can ever get on the 50/1.8 for the same lighting. Plus the 50/1.8 seems to have poorer AF compared to the IS kit lens.

[Snoweagle]

Originally Posted by bernstein1234 How's the 50 1.2?

One word.....EXCELLENT! Everything abt it is excellent.

[electron]

Originally Posted by mervinb The 18-55mm IS kit lens will usually give more than satisfactory results at 6.3 or 8.0 (my copy has great resolution on at 55mm) and the IS makes the keeper rate much higher than I can ever get on the 50/1.8 for the same lighting. Plus the 50/1.8 seems to have poorer AF compared to the IS kit lens.

NAIL = HIT ON THE HEAD

I experienced the same thing. I thought a faster lens meant much less need for IS? But maybe that's just my impression and I could be wrong. Like Calebk mentioned earlier, there's is no substitute for hands on experience. In any case, I'm glad i got the IS kit lens too. Don't get me wrong I'm loving the 50mm for what it can do (brighter, shallower DOP) and I will continue using it for it's strengths.
Thanks to Melvin for the link btw. Great to have some facts & figures to save me from endlessly second guessing myself

[bernstein1234]

Originally Posted by mervinb The original question and the various responses don't really match up... For some, the 'sweet spot' of an f1.8 lens has to be f1.8-2.4, where bokeh forms the major technical element of the shot. For the pixel peepers, it's totally different, and perhaps f5.6-8.0 gives the maximum border-to-border resolution. If you trust the report from photozone (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Cano...review?start=1), even at f1.8, centre to border resolution is in the very good range. DOF is extremely shallow, so something like a newspaper test is not really meaningful. Using the plastic fantastic at f5.6-8.0 is *just* for sharpness is rather meaningless, IMOH. The 18-55mm IS kit lens will usually give more than satisfactory results at 6.3 or 8.0 (my copy has great resolution on at 55mm) and the IS makes the keeper rate much higher than I can ever get on the 50/1.8 for the same lighting. Plus the 50/1.8 seems to have poorer AF compared to the IS kit lens.

Ok, 1stly, the TS also did not say what he intends to use the lens for. He mentioned 1.8 is not sharp so he wants to know at which aperture will the image become sharp? So for my interpretation, he'll want a small aperture. But the point is that for 50 1.8, the beauty of it is low light. But TS also din say what is the use for? Low light, bokeh, or landscape? Then suddenly there's mention of bokeh and I was like, huh? So what's the exact use? So since if that's the case, I gave my 2cents answer, which is 5.6. I guess different people have different uses of 50 1.8. For me I can use it as landscape or portrait shots.

2cents