Well, if you try jamming it into a tight orifice, it is going to chafe a bit...

On a more serious note, it's sharp, it's cheap, it's great in low light, great control over depth of field - what's not to like??

What caused you so much grief with it?

For the Minoltas, I think I've got about 4 50mm primes, all the same 1:1.7. There is a 1:1.4 out there. Maybe one day, but the 1:1.7 is the fastest lens I own so all my low light stuff (like the Tar Barrels) tends to be on the 50mm.

So, I was discussing the 50 last night with my mate and he offered me a comparison. He's just got the 24-105 'brick' and set it at 50mm. He set ISO200, 1/125th sec at F5.6 and mounted the camera on a tripod. Autofocus and manual focus snaps completed the test and the results were astounding. Although the 50 is a good lens, the IQ on a 100% crop showed almost a blurred image from the 50 as opposed to the 24-105. I'm starting to think a 10-22, 24-105 and my trusty 100-400 is the way to go. Still like the idea of a 17-40 though

Al

The above is fair comment but imho misses the point of a "nifty fifty" .

As has been said already the benefits of a "nifty fifty" are "fast, cheap and sharp", whereas while the 24-105 'brick' is sharp it doesn't go below F4 and at around £800 new is hardly cheap.

In good light there is little doubt that the 24-105 is better at 50mm, but in low light you can carry on shooting with a "nifty fifty" for a lot longer without having to increase ISO or put the camera on a tripod.

Sharp???
Take a look.



The difference is .... upsetting... 50 on the left...

Al

Whats wrong with her grandma?

Is this on a Canon body? I'm wondering if you've a back focus issue with that lens.
You could, of course, try focusing manually...

The one on the left is out of focus - quite impressively so...

i recognise those chimneys.

I think I'd be tempted to say that 50mm lens is broken.

Mine is pin sharp under most circumstances.

Prove it!
I want to see a photograph of the head of a pin taken using that 50mm lens you're talking about.
Money. Mouth.
(8+)

Mark

ƒ/1.8, at the closest point I could get handheld, ISO 100, and cropped to the centre of the frame. The focus missed the head, but at least the barrel of the pin is sharp...



Clicky for original link.

(8+)
Thank you.

Mark

You're welcome.

Like I say, I think the lens Al tried is broken. Actually, I seem to recall he mentioned there was a focus issue with another of his lenses, so I wonder if it's actually the camera at fault?

I was certainly shocked by the results he got. I like the idea of yours being pin-sharp though!