Old Primers


Status
Not open for further replies.

pethuel

New Member
Feb 12, 2007
104
0
0
just wondering...

anyone used a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mark I (i think is the first generation of this lens)

i know that most of the cs-er would have a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mark II

is there any difference in the 2 lens?? the make? the mount? quality?
what bout the pictures taken with either ones? which is better?

thanks in advance~! :p
 

mace1980

Member
Jan 20, 2007
306
0
16
East & West
If I'm not wrong, the mk I has a metal lens body and mount. If you're lucky enough to find a 2nd hand copy, chances are it's gonna cost more than a brand new mk II.

Cheers
 

pethuel

New Member
Feb 12, 2007
104
0
0
If I'm not wrong, the mk I has a metal lens body and mount. If you're lucky enough to find a 2nd hand copy, chances are it's gonna cost more than a brand new mk II.

Cheers
hmm... only physical differences? how bout picture quality-wise??
how old is the mk I btw? any idea when did it come out in the market?
anyone can provide me more information about this lens?

thanks!!


and jus wanna confirm, the mkII body and mount is plastic?
 

Russ

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2003
1,639
0
36
Pasir Ris
Visit site
just wondering...

anyone used a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mark I (i think is the first generation of this lens)

i know that most of the cs-er would have a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mark II

is there any difference in the 2 lens?? the make? the mount? quality?
what bout the pictures taken with either ones? which is better?

thanks in advance~! :p
I am one of those "fortunate" users of the 1.8 Mk1 which has a UC code therefore 1988 manufacture, sat in TK for years and then I bought in 1992/3. I have not used a Mk2 but I believe very similar except for the distance scale, proper focussing ring and metal mount. Noisy AF. Nostalgic - don't think I would ever sell it. Overseas market price is about USD 150.

My 19 year old is still 9/10 in condition and pictures are still nice, sharp with good colours. Maybe I will replace it with a 1.4 USM one day ...
 

pethuel

New Member
Feb 12, 2007
104
0
0
I am one of those "fortunate" users of the 1.8 Mk1 which has a UC code therefore 1988 manufacture, sat in TK for years and then I bought in 1992/3. I have not used a Mk2 but I believe very similar except for the distance scale, proper focussing ring and metal mount. Noisy AF. Nostalgic - don't think I would ever sell it. Overseas market price is about USD 150.

My 19 year old is still 9/10 in condition and pictures are still nice, sharp with good colours. Maybe I will replace it with a 1.4 USM one day ...
hmmm... whats a UC code? sorry for my noobiness :p and how would you know if it was made in 1988? is it like printed somewhere on the lens?

from ur preference, is it better to have a metal or plastic mount? (i haven't got any DSLR yet... planning to learn and ask more about it first) my guess is plastic is better? coz it won't scratch the camera?
 

cantaresg

New Member
Feb 23, 2007
765
0
0
Woodlands
That is the serial code for the lens that indicates the year of manufacture. I heard that 50mm f1.8 MI is better/
 

pethuel

New Member
Feb 12, 2007
104
0
0
plastic will break if handled roughly :think:
the mounting area for the dslr is metal anyway.. dont think its that 'scratchable'

lens code? http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Lens-Aging.aspx
hmm... thats true... but i dun think it will be so breakable too? haha...

wow... nice webby... thanks anyway...!



Anyone has nice pictures taken with the Mk I lens? can show? thanks!
 

Stoned

Senior Member
May 7, 2004
4,378
0
0
34
Changi
www.photo.net
If im not wrong optically it's very similar to the current MKII, but naturally the current MKII loses out in terms of handling and build.

However, given the ridiculous prices the MK I goes at on the second hand market; sometimes 250-300, I would really rather pay another 100-150 to get a 2nd hand 50/1.4. I believe this was Canon's objective, but I'm fine with it as the 50/1.4 is well worth the price IMO.
 

Russ

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2003
1,639
0
36
Pasir Ris
Visit site
hmmm... whats a UC code? sorry for my noobiness :p and how would you know if it was made in 1988? is it like printed somewhere on the lens?

from ur preference, is it better to have a metal or plastic mount? (i haven't got any DSLR yet... planning to learn and ask more about it first) my guess is plastic is better? coz it won't scratch the camera?
All Canon L lenses and older consumer grade lenses have a production code UA = 1986, UB = 1987, ..., UV= 2007.

Cheaper budget grade Canon lenses have plastic mounts.
Metal is better of course but heavier too.

See this thread I started
http://forums.clubsnap.com/showthread.php?t=259854
 

pethuel

New Member
Feb 12, 2007
104
0
0
All Canon L lenses and older consumer grade lenses have a production code UA = 1986, UB = 1987, ..., UV= 2007.

Cheaper budget grade Canon lenses have plastic mounts.
Metal is better of course but heavier too.

See this thread I started
http://forums.clubsnap.com/showthread.php?t=259854
hmm... okie.. i shall go read up about it then... so the mk I is a budget lens? haha.. or i guess as it is metal? it should be normal consumer? but i think all older lens should be metal mount/body? no?
 

calebk

Senior Member
Jul 25, 2006
10,587
0
0
Clementi
hmm... okie.. i shall go read up about it then... so the mk I is a budget lens? haha.. or i guess as it is metal? it should be normal consumer? but i think all older lens should be metal mount/body? no?
Well both were intended as entry-level lenses, but the mkI's selling price now is ridiculously high, compared to the mkII's; with the second hand prices of the mkI, you could easily get two copies of the mkII.

Just to throw a spanner into the works, there are two versions of the mkII: one made in Japan, and one made elsewhere (according to a friend, made in Malaysia). The one made in japan has a yellow macro logo where the MFD is, and has a "Lens Made In Japan" on the "focus ring". The one made elsewhere has a white macro logo instead, and does not say "Lens Made In Japan" on the "focus ring".
 

Stoned

Senior Member
May 7, 2004
4,378
0
0
34
Changi
www.photo.net
Well both were intended as entry-level lenses, but the mkI's selling price now is ridiculously high, compared to the mkII's; with the second hand prices of the mkI, you could easily get two copies of the mkII.
Actually, they're not intended as entry-level lenses. They're cheap simply because the design of a 50/1.8 is extremely simple by lens standards, not because they don't produce professional results.
 

pethuel

New Member
Feb 12, 2007
104
0
0
cool... i didn't know that there were so many varision of the 50mm 1.8 lens!...

i saw one selling in some 2nd hand shop... but owner don't allow sales of lens only... must buy with the canon 1D body...! at $1700++ is it expensive??
 

Russ

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2003
1,639
0
36
Pasir Ris
Visit site
cool... i didn't know that there were so many varision of the 50mm 1.8 lens!...

i saw one selling in some 2nd hand shop... but owner don't allow sales of lens only... must buy with the canon 1D body...! at $1700++ is it expensive??
1D is worth 1,200-1,500 depending on condition
50mm 1.8 II is worth about 100 and only 150 new

If you don't need a 1D, for goodness sake, buy a new 50 1.8. Don't let the tail wag the dog.
 

pethuel

New Member
Feb 12, 2007
104
0
0
1D is worth 1,200-1,500 depending on condition
50mm 1.8 II is worth about 100 and only 150 new

If you don't need a 1D, for goodness sake, buy a new 50 1.8. Don't let the tail wag the dog.
hahaha... Don't let the tail wag the dog?? (dunno what it means!) hahaha... but i understand that its like quite crazy to buy the 1D lol... i jus saw the lens and was quite marvelled by it.. thats all... :p
 

Status
Not open for further replies.