Brian Diaz wrote:
It's my absolute favorite lens ever.  That I can afford.

Once caveat; because it does not have true USM (it uses a slightly smaller, cheaper mechanism) the autofocus is prone to breaking.  Mine went through a LOT of HEAVY use over a year and a half or so before it went out, then, after I had it repaired, it lasted another 6 months.  At that point, because my budget was very tight, I decided that it would be more cost efficient to go for the 50mm f/1.8 than to get it repaired again.

But I still love it.  The 1.8 is a fine lens, and it's the best value in photography (well, it's neck and neck with the $1.48 Kodak's Most Basic Book of 35mm Photography, although that's most valuable in the beginning stages of learning photography) but I still love and miss my 1.4.

Thanks... FYI, tip if you're going for the f/1.8.  Dig around for the 50mm f/1.8 MK I (mark 1).  They have metal mounts unlike the current mark II.  They sell roughly $150 used (since they're discontinued and very hard to get).  These rarely ever break.  I had one until I upgraded to this one as the bokeh is soooo much sweeter.

John Pringle wrote:
I tend to like my 85 1.2L or TS 90 for headshots. The 135 2.0L is better but a little tight. My 200 1.8L is awesome, but I do not use it that much.

Yeah, I love those L's but with my budget I can only afford to RENT those multiples of $1,000 dollar lenses. 

Psst, if you ever wanna "dump" and L's and sell me some,

Muevelo NYC Productions wrote:
On a digital SLR with the 1.6X crop factor, this lens is quite possibly the ideal portrait lens with such a wide aperture.  The bokeh it produces is quite pleasing and the aperture is perfect for keeping only the face in focus!  Also with this fast of a lens, lighting (as long as it's white) is a non-issue.

Any other photographers here have any opinions?

still too short of a focal length for my taste.  I still use my 70-200 f2.8 on a monopod, or my 28-75 f2.8 (@75mm) for most of my portrait work.  i have the 50 1.8, and barely used it.

Muevelo NYC Productions wrote:
Finally got my 50mm f/1.4 USM lens.  Man this thing is the most insane lens that's a non-L grade glass.  On a digital SLR with the 1.6X crop factor, this lens is quite possibly the ideal portrait lens with such a wide aperture.  The bokeh it produces is quite pleasing and the aperture is perfect for keeping only the face in focus!  Also with this fast of a lens, lighting (as long as it's white) is a non-issue.

Any other photographers here have any opinions?

Its ok for full lenght shots but for headshots I use the 70-200 2.8 L

Gary L. wrote:
i have the 50 1.8, and barely used it.

If you're looking to get rid of it I'm in the market!  I've been looking to get some good primes.

Gary L. wrote:
still too short of a focal length for my taste.  I still use my 70-200 f2.8 on a monopod, or my 28-75 f2.8 (@75mm) for most of my portrait work.  i have the 50 1.8, and barely used it.

Gary, is your 28-75 2.8 the Tamron XR DI? (I have one and like it a lot).

I can't seem to use my 70-200 2.8 in my studio but I use it shooting live burlesque and it works well there since I'm 25 feet away from the stage.

raveneyes wrote:

If you're looking to get rid of it I'm in the market!  I've been looking to get some good primes.

At $75, there's no reason not to get it. 

http://www.adorama.com/CA5018AF.html

Brian Diaz wrote:
At $75, there's no reason not to get it. 

http://www.adorama.com/CA5018AF.html

Thanks for the link Brian, but do you know the difference between the US version and the Gray market lens?
The US version is only $5 more

"Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Standard AutoFocus Lens - Gray Market"

Craig Thomson wrote:
Thanks for the link Brian, but do you know the difference between the US version and the Gray market lens?
The US version is only $5 more

"Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Standard AutoFocus Lens - Gray Market"

The grey market version was made for sale outside of the US, so it's cheaper, but it doesn't come with a manufacturer's warranty.  But that's okay because Adorama (and other reputable sellers like B&H) cover it for you.  Here's what they have to say about it:
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=f … formation:

Brian Diaz wrote:
The grey market version was made for sale outside of the US, so it's cheaper, but it doesn't come with a manufacturer's warranty.  But that's okay because Adorama (and other reputable sellers like B&H) cover it for you.  Here's what they have to say about it:
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=f … formation:

Thanks, I guess I'll get one in a few mins (eBay actions ending soon)

Edit:

Snip from Adorama:

Product Warranties:
All new merchandise bought from Adorama are genuine, authentic and of consistent high quality and value. All items are warranted by either the manufacturer's warranty or if it is Grey market equipment it will be covered by Adorama for one year from date of shipment


EDIT UPDATE:
I can buy the US version locally (Glazers) for the same price and pick up the roll of gaffers tape I need as well. Shipping from Adorama would be $10, which is the same as tax on the two products I'm buying.
I'll support the local shop on this purchase.

Muevelo NYC Productions wrote:
Finally got my 50mm f/1.4 USM lens.  Man this thing is the most insane lens that's a non-L grade glass.  On a digital SLR with the 1.6X crop factor, this lens is quite possibly the ideal portrait lens with such a wide aperture.  The bokeh it produces is quite pleasing and the aperture is perfect for keeping only the face in focus!  Also with this fast of a lens, lighting (as long as it's white) is a non-issue.

Any other photographers here have any opinions?

Almost 100% of what I posted on Model Mayhem is shot with that same lens. Even when I try not to use it, it still ends up the star of the shoot.

LOVE THAT LENS!

RobHowardStudios wrote:
Almost 100% of what I posted on Model Mayhem is shot with that same lens. Even when I try not to use it, it still ends up the star of the shoot.

LOVE THAT LENS!

Mine is split

75% of my shots are with the Tamron 28-75 2.8 and the rest are with 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS.

A. H A M I L T O N wrote:
I thought I was sort of an oddball in this arena but I guess I'm not.

For testing and just about anything I do where someone is getting charged I use almost exclusively my 85mm 1.2/L or my 50mm 1.8.

$1700 lens and a $75 lens, it's wierd when you think about it.  Granted, I can tell the difference, and I don't dare open the 50mm up all the way (does great at 2.2 though), but the client generally can't.

Seems kinda wierd when you think about it, it's interesting to see there are a fair number of other shooters doing the same or similar thing though.

Andy

Single sharpest lens I own is the 45mm f/2 Planar for Contax G series. It's less than about $400 new and I got used mine with a body and a flash for $400 total, and it weighs a few ounces. Sharper than any of the $1000 to $2000 and up (and much larger) lenses I've got.

Craig Thomson wrote:
Gary, is your 28-75 2.8 the Tamron XR DI? (I have one and like it a lot).

I can't seem to use my 70-200 2.8 in my studio but I use it shooting live burlesque and it works well there since I'm 25 feet away from the stage.

yes, i have the Tamron lens, and it's bloody sharp and I love it to death.  I use my 70-200 f2.8 outside, where i have the space.  The Tamron is used for inside work.

Chip Willis wrote:
Gotta keep in perpective, you can shoot pure junk with expensive glass easy. You can shoot pure beauty with a holga too, if you do it right.

Tools they all are.

So true.

Craig Thomson wrote:
Gary, is your 28-75 2.8 the Tamron XR DI? (I have one and like it a lot).

I can't seem to use my 70-200 2.8 in my studio but I use it shooting live burlesque and it works well there since I'm 25 feet away from the stage.

Gary L. wrote:
yes, i have the Tamron lens, and it's bloody sharp and I love it to death.  I use my 70-200 f2.8 outside, where i have the space.  The Tamron is used for inside work.

Thank you for clearing that up.

Charcoal Artist wrote:
I got my 50mm f1.4 a couple of days ago,  I'm taking it for a test drive on a beach shoot tomorrow morning.    If I get a chance I'll try to shoot the same pose with the 50mm f1.8 for comparison.

P.S I'll be selling my f1.8  which is about 2 months old.

keep it as a backup. Are you in desperate need for $50?  That's how much a 50 1.8 like new lens is worth.

easyonthe eyes wrote:
Bokeh is not one of those words I'm comfortable saying out loud in mixed company - but just between you, you, you and me, it really is punk on the 1.8. That's the only thing that keeps me wanting to borrow or buy the 1.4, but I can't talk myself into dropping  the dough on another 50mm. Especially since the bokeh (and cereal box prize construction) is the only issue for me. If I avoid creating specular highlights, I'm perfectly content*.

*that's patently false. I am not now, nor have I ever been, perfectly content with any piece of equipment I've been able to afford.

I know what you mean man...  This review made me a believer:
http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

Bruce Muir wrote:
I dont have the 1.4 version. How sharp is your copy wide open?

Extremely.  I comared it to my friend's zoom L lens at 50mm and it's nearly impossible to compare as they look identical, except that the 1.4 will give you much better bokeh!

Gary L. wrote:

Muevelo NYC Productions wrote:
On a digital SLR with the 1.6X crop factor, this lens is quite possibly the ideal portrait lens with such a wide aperture.  The bokeh it produces is quite pleasing and the aperture is perfect for keeping only the face in focus!  Also with this fast of a lens, lighting (as long as it's white) is a non-issue.

Any other photographers here have any opinions?

still too short of a focal length for my taste.  I still use my 70-200 f2.8 on a monopod, or my 28-75 f2.8 (@75mm) for most of my portrait work.  i have the 50 1.8, and barely used it.

Yeah, if I need to get longer focal length, I can revert back to my Sigma 70-300 APO DG which is what I used for the B&W headshots in my portfolio.  But I wanted something where I didn't have to be 15 feet away to take a nice headshot.  LOL  Shooting in NYC is annoying because people are jerks and will literally walk in front of you even if they can clearly see that you're shooting photos.

Craig Thomson wrote:

Gary, is your 28-75 2.8 the Tamron XR DI? (I have one and like it a lot).

I can't seem to use my 70-200 2.8 in my studio but I use it shooting live burlesque and it works well there since I'm 25 feet away from the stage.

28-75 2.8 the Tamron XR DI is next on my to buy list...

For those looking for 50mm f/1.8 MK II, I suggest digging around ebay for the MK I which will sell for $150 (yes costs more used than a new MK II), but that's becuase the MK I is metal mount vs. plastic mounts on the MKII (thus will last you a lot longer)

Gray market lenses generally will give you harder time getting warranty work done.  With the 50mm primes they're a 1 in 1,000 chance that the autofocus may be screwed up and will need to be returned.  With adorama though you can always hand it back and get a new one though, so it's no big deal.

For the guy selling the 1.8, don't.  It's not going to get you much used, but if you keep it, it'll pay off as a backup or if you want to use it for reverse macro on the 50 f/1.4 using a double reverse filter thread.

Just ordered the Kenko extension tubes using the paypal coupons I just posted up, so that I can take macro shots of this mini lego greenwich village I'm making.  So far I have the washington square arch done, and now working on the cube on Astor Place.  I have over 150 lego mini figures (although only 4 of them are women, but hey its the village).  Should be a fun project for me.

Wow this thread turned out better than what i thought it would be.  It's about time we get some hardcore photography talk on here! 

Muevelo NYC Productions wrote:
Any other photographers here have any opinions?

It's the only lens I shoot with and everything in my portfolio is taken with that lens. It worked fantastic on my 20D. I have a FF now and would LOVE an 85mm f/1.2L but I'm not likely going to drop 1.5 grand on that anytime soon. Nor am I willing to sacrifice a full stop by purchasing an 85mm f/1.8, (stopped down that lens would do great though).

-TMH