Canon 50mm 1.8 Mark 1 v.s Mark II

[OchieGirl]

I have someone that is offering to sell me their Mark I for $180. I know I can get a Mark II for less. Is tehre much of a difference between the two? I'd be using it for portraits.

[inkista]

Yes and no. Build quality there's a difference, optically, not much. The main difference is that the MkI has a metal mount, while the MkII's mount is plastic. The MkI is better for manual focus use, since it has a distance scale and a proper manual focus ring. The MkII's MF ring is kind of a joke--it's thin, and on the end of the lens barrel. The MkI's is a good sized width and properly placed in the middle of the barrel.

Mk I: MkII:

This is why the MkI typically goes for more than the MkII. In build quality and usability, it's much closer to the EF 50/1.4 USM. Optically, however, they're more or less identical. If you don't plan to ever use a hyperfocal distance or scale/zone focus* the 50/1.8, and you're not worried about breaking the plastic mount, the Mk II will do you just as well.

*Scale or zone focusing is when you preset the focus by the distance scale (usually stopping down to help you out with DoF) so that you can focus without bringing the viewfinder to your eye. It's a street photography technique mostly used for shooting from the hip, so that you're not conspicuous when shooting.

[OsmosisStudios]

Okay Inkista, goddess of all: Why did Canon, and pardon my french, f*** things up so badly from one version to the next?

[OchieGirl]

sigh...I'm just going to spend the extra money and get the f1.4

[inkista]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Okay Inkista, goddess of all: Why did Canon, and pardon my french, f*** things up so badly from one version to the next?

I have no idea, but I'd guess it's a matter of creating a cheaper lens without compromising the optics, and the fact that with an autofocus lens a focus scale and throw is so small as to be less than precise, anyhoo.

I don't think it's nearly as much a f*** up as Nikon dropping focus motors from their entry level bodies.

Originally Posted by OchieGirl

sigh...I'm just going to spend the extra money and get the f1.4

Just be sure that you know 50mm is the length you want. On a crop-body camera some people find it a little long for portrait work, particularly when working close in (say, in a smallish space, or for a large group). The main reason the 50/1.8 is recommended is because it's really inexpensive, so it's a good "training wheels" lens. You can see if you like working with a prime and a large max. aperture without investing much. And once you use it, you can figure out if you're comfortable with something wider or longer.

I moved from the 50/1.8 to an 85/1.8 and I now most comfortably switch between a 35/2 and a 135/2 for portrait work.