Phil Drinkwater
Posts: 4,233
Manchester, England, United Kingdom
The Canon 50mm 1.4 focussing breaks quite easily if you don't treat it well, so that's not a great choice either Mine went, which is why I ended up with the fantastic 1.2
Mine works so well, auto focuses on a dime, dropped into rocks many, many times, still going strong! So good is my Canon 50mm f/1.8, I'd buy another in a heart beat - of course, that is if I ever experienced any problems or flaws with this wonderful, affordable, cheap lens.
But so far, 5+ years of ownership, and it works perfectly.
Come on Canon, keep making these awesome, cheap lenses exactly like you have been doing - don't change a thing!
WMcK
Posts: 5,190
Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
PR Zone wrote:
Although it's only taken ~1000 shots - it is 6 months old - so I'm OK waiting 2 weeks for a repair
I reckon they'll just ship a new one :-)
The shop cannot demand a repair. You have the legal right to a refund or replacement, which you decide. If you had not agreed to a repair you would have a replacement now.
I have never had problems with any Canon Lenses, I had a 24 to 70 Tamron fail miserably and I was one month out of their warranty, I replaced it with a Canon 24 to 70 2.8L.
Sorry about your experience, but why would a lens be marked so cheap to begin with. Sometimes a great deal isn't that at all.
PR Zone
Posts: 546
London, England, United Kingdom
Appreciate all the replies...
...I think my mind is still in the same place...
"Wish Canon spent a TINY bit more on this lens to guarantee consistency and/or improved the QA to reduce issues"
When I dropped it back into the store, the guy said "Yeah, we get these back a lot"
:-(
p.s. Gareth: Could be that they made them much better 6-10 years ago, but have replaced too many key components with cheap alternatives. You get the feeling that Far East manufacture is like a game of KerPlunk... "How many bits can we remove before all the marbles fall?"
Rare...I used one of those plastic fantastics for a couple years without incident. The 1.4 is more easily damaged because of the way the AF motor is constructed. For what they cost you can replace those things once a year (working professional) and get great images as long as the slower AF doesn't bug ya.
ChristerArt
Posts: 2,786
Cambridge, England, United Kingdom
Phil Drinkwater wrote: The Canon 50mm 1.4 focussing breaks quite easily if you don't treat it well, so that's not a great choice either Mine went, which is why I ended up with the fantastic 1.2
I've had a 50 mm 1.4 for about 5 years. Then a friend (now ex-friend) who was short on money asked to borrow it - at that time it looked brand new as I've only used it maybe 10 times (extreme low light situations) - and I take damn good care of my gear.
The "lend-lease" was supposed to be for a couple of months. By the time I finally got it back it was about 9 months (and quite a few requests for it or at least an answer my emails) - and when I took it out of the box it made rattling noises when i turned it over....
...I don't think that is what they consider a "pro" lens...it is less durable, and I don't think the Canon Professional Service folks wish to get involved...
This happened to me while I was out in Utah. Yea it was the 1.8 cannon 50. We were on a 1000 plus foot high cliff. I took the lens and threw it out as far as I could over the cliff.. So maybe in 1000 years some guy will find it about 25 miles away from the cliff and wonder how the hell this thing got out here. bs
SillyEddy
Posts: 2,246
Coventry, England, United Kingdom
If it was Jessops, did you not take out a warranty/repair plan with them? I honestly didn't with my 50mm 1.8, but I did with my camera body for the first couple of years.
But yeah, they're cheap lenses. I always suggest them as a throw-away lens because they're so inexpensive to buy a new one. They're okay for image quality, but they're cheaply made.
I do agree that it would be worth another £50 or so to have a really solid construction, better focusing system and a better mounting bracket. The 1.4 is about £200 more, but I hear all sorts of problems with that lens too. Hopefully they'll update the design one day, and go with the 1.4 or 1.8, not both.
Ok. I get what you are saying but it's $100. What do you expect? lol. For the cost it more than performs. I've had one 3 years and works fine. I use the 1.4 but the 1.8 is hanging around just in case so super tragedy happens. It's a throw away lens. You can get a 1.4 for around 300. 200 more and you have a GREAT lens.
kgreggbruce wrote: Mine works so well, auto focuses on a dime, dropped into rocks many, many times, still going strong! So good is my Canon 50mm f/1.8, I'd buy another in a heart beat - of course, that is if I ever experienced any problems or flaws with this wonderful, affordable, cheap lens.
But so far, 5+ years of ownership, and it works perfectly.
Come on Canon, keep making these awesome, cheap lenses exactly like you have been doing - don't change a thing!
SillyEddy
Posts: 2,246
Coventry, England, United Kingdom
Erick Prince wrote: Ok. I get what you are saying but it's $100. What do you expect? lol. For the cost it more than performs. I've had one 3 years and works fine. I use the 1.4 but the 1.8 is hanging around just in case so super tragedy happens. It's a throw away lens. You can get a 1.4 for around 300. 200 more and you have a GREAT lens.
More like $150 for us over here actually, but even so, it's cheap as chips in the lens world.
I don't count on mine lasting all too long, but I'd probably move onto the Samyang 85mm 1.4 by then anyway.
WMcK
Posts: 5,190
Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
eos3_300 wrote: Based on what quality glass costs I would not be expecting too much with the 50 1.8
Why not spend more ?
Actually the quality of the glass is superb, the lens is very sharp, but is ruined only by the ugly rendering of a 5 blade iris. For this reason I upgraded to the 1.4, which is not any sharper, just better made, faster focusing and with more iris blades.
I've had mine for 20+ years. It works fine but is a little loud when focusing. Its the MK1 version though, made of metal and with focusing marks. I'll be sad when it dies, knowing what the "replacement" is.
I've had mine since January, I think I've put about 3000 shots on it since then. I'm pretty careful with it though, because I've heard so much about how easily they break.
I've known 2 Canon shooters personally who have had their 50 1.8's literally fall in half. Optically good or not, I can't see how Canon can be comfortable putting their name on something so fragile. I'm a Nikon shooter, but if I went Canon, I would skip ahead to the 1.4, much better build quality.
If you client damaged a print after you gave it to them would you give them a full refund.
People seriously, you buy cheap then that is what you get, spend the extra money and you won't be disappointed.
Good luck
A lens should be able to withstand a 4" drop. I returned it because it was of such poor construction quality. If I dropped on a concrete floor, that would be different.
A lens should be able to withstand a 4" drop. I returned it because it was of such poor construction quality. If I dropped on a concrete floor, that would be different.
That's why it's called:
A) nifty-fifty
B) plastic fantastic
But I call BS on the 4" drop. I did that on quite a few occasions when I had one...from table height changing glass during shoots. It worked just fine in each case. Any lens can suffer damage from dropping, no matter what the height is. The 50 1.8 is a decent lens.
Dropped mine a few times and once even 5 feet onto a sidewalk. No damage and works great. All lenses have problems. I am sure I can find someone who had any lens out there that had to be sent in for repairs under 1000 clicks.
Done and Gone
Posts: 7,650
Chiredzi, Masvingo, Zimbabwe
I've owned 3 of them, two of them were Mk I metal mount. The third one I owned briefly twice, both times I just quickly reached the point where I wanted it gone.
Cheap, noisy, sharp but UGLY bokeh. I want to like it but I cannot.
I HUGELY prefer the 50mm 2.5 macro over both the 1.8 and the 1.4. Better build, more versatile and nice bokeh. Common enough and usually in the $200 range so not much more money for something decent.
I also prefer my Pentax SMC M 50 1.4 with focus confirmation adapter. Got the lens for $3 at Goodwill and you could beat a pile of Canon 50 1.8 plastic fantastic lenses into rubble with it and it would still work.
PhotoPower
Posts: 1,309
Elmsdale, Nova Scotia, Canada
Phil Drinkwater wrote: The Canon 50mm 1.4 focussing breaks quite easily if you don't treat it well, so that's not a great choice either Mine went, which is why I ended up with the fantastic 1.2
I had the auto focus flake with my 50mm f/1.4 last weekend and it made me nervous that there might be a problem. I've been testing it like crazy since the shoot and it seems fine, but I'm nervous about reliability and wondering about the next step up ... the next $1,200 step up!!
Mine went, which is why I ended up with the fantastic 1.2 
Sounds like you got a lemon, it happens.
| 
| 
| edu