Ef 50mm F 1.8 Stm Review

By | 21/10/2022

Canon has made a habit in recent of years of not building the lenses that we all approximate they are going to build while often announcing and and so swiftly releasing lenses that few people expected.  After Canon refreshed a number of its smaller, not-L series primes (24mm, 28mm, and 35mm) with critically acclaimed (and image stabilized) new designs, the common expectation was that Canon would side by side address its crumbling withal popular EF 50mm f/1.4 USM.  And so what did Canon do?  The reverse of expectations, of grade, and instead released a refreshed version of its “plastic fantastic” aka “nifty-fifty” aka EF 50mm f/1.8 Ii.  That new lens is the EF 50mm f/1.eight STM, and it is a significant upgrade in a number of means over its older predecessor.  Here is a summary of those updates from a preview article I wrote (we will elaborate further on many of these):

    • Redesign of the aperture iris. It is now vii rounded blades every bit compared to the 5 straighter blades earlier. The previous design would cause bokeh highlights to be a fleck ugly (I often apply the term “cartoonish” if the lens was stopped downward much. Expect the new lens to have better bokeh when stopped downwards and I wouldn’t exist surprised if highlights stay round until at least f/5.6 or so. This wasn’t the case even at f/2.viii with the older pattern.
    • Shorter minimum focus and maximum magnification. The older lens had a 1.5 foot minimum focus distance and thus a maximum magnification of .15x. This is pretty much the standard for 50mm lenses, but is definitely an Achilles’due south heel for them. That isn’t a very impressive magnification effigy. Canon has addressed that here, however, with a new minimum focus of but 1.1 feet and a maximum magnification of .21x. This is a much more useful figure and will permit for even more diffused backgrounds and more creativity when shooting “macro” type shots. This is a big deal to me, personally, every bit I actually bask using a 50mm lens in this way.
    • Better build quality, including a metallic mount. The redesign of the lens includes a more robust build quality (no more “plastic fantastic”) around a metal lens mountain (the MK 2 of the lens had simply a plastic mount). The original version of this lens has long been prized for its more robust build quality, and this new lens should prove a modernized version of that.
    • Meliorate focus band. The 50mm f/1.eight II might as well as not had a focus band at all. Information technology was terrible. Tiny, scratchy, and not at all fun to manually focus. The new focus ring will be a chip wider and definitely smoother, and STM does allow for full fourth dimension manual override (dissimilar previous versions of this lens). Only know that STM is “focus past wire”, significant that information technology is an electronic connectedness and non a physical one, meaning that the photographic camera must exist on for manual focus and that there can be a scrap of a lag betwixt your input on the focus band and the actually move of the elements. Not my favorite system, but here it will exist an comeback over what was there before.
    • Ameliorate coatings.
      While in that location isn’t a big change to the optical formula, there has been some “tweaking” forth with modern, improved coatings to assist the optical performance. This from Canon’southward printing release, “Equanimous of half-dozen elements in five groups, the new Canon EF 50mm f/1.8mm STM lens features an optimized lens placement and Super Spectra Coating (SSC), translating into less ghosting and flaring than the previous model, while at the same time helping to enhance lite transmission and optimize colour reproduction accuracy.”
    • Even more meaty size.
      The “nifty-50” was never a very big lens, and while the new lens isn’t the pancake lens that some had hoped for, it is a truly meaty lens. The previous lens was about 41mm long while the new lens is near 38mm. The new lens weighs well-nigh 30grams more than, only that is yet only 159 grams, and that is a groovy news as it reflects the more robust build quality of the new lens. By comparing, the EF 40mm f/ii.viii pancake weighs 130g and is 23mm long.
    • Exact same price. Perhaps most shocking is the fact that all of these improvements come at zippo toll penalty to potential buyers. The new lens can be ordered from B&H for simply $125, which is an amazing toll for what volition be a very competent little lens. It’due south hard to miss at this kind of price bespeak.

So after spending some quality time with the new nifty l, permit’south spring in and notice the reality of the new lens.  The new 50STM is a very nice lens for its extremely low price point. It feels similar a existent lens rather than the toy-like quality of the “plastic fantastic”. I let my married woman and children handle the erstwhile 50mm f/1.eight 2, and they were shocked at inexpensive and “plasticky” it felt in comparing to the usual book of lenses flowing across my desk. The 50mm STM is small and light, of course, but it feels like a existent lens. It’s not a Zeiss, of course (or even a Takumar), only it has a much more than reassuring “denseness” compared to its predecessor. When compared with the 40mm f/2.8 STM, the 40mm feels a bit more dense. It weighs less (130g vs. 159g) but is also just lx% as long (23mm vs. 38mm), then overall it is near 25% more dense.

The new 50STM has a stop that is more than of a matte look than whatsoever Canon lens I’ve reviewed earlier. The look works, though, and while the design is simple (STM lenses eschew focus distance windows and whatsoever kind of hyperfocal markings) it is clean and works nicely. The focus ring is even so on the smallish side, but is wider than the focus ring on either the older 50mm f/1.8 or that on the 40mm STM.

One negative carried over here from the previous generation is that the lens is NOT internally focusing. The internal lens housing does extend during focus. Information technology is most pronounced at minimum focus and is fully retracted at infinity focus. Most annoying is the fact the lens housing does not retract when the camera is powered down, and the nature of STM technology means that you cannot manually retract information technology when the camera is powered off. That exposes a vulnerability, as it might be possible to damage the lens by something hitting that front barrel when it is extended. It makes the purchase of a lens hood an important consideration. The lens hood would prevent that happening in most all situations.  Yes, almost $27 for a piece of plastic is a bit ridiculous, simply considering the bargain price of the lens, just consider information technology part of the investment.

Some photographers were hoping that this lens would be a “pancake” like the 40mm f/2.8 STM. While it isn’t really a pancake, for all practical purposes it is almost as adept. Information technology should easily slip into a jacket pocket and be very easy to bring along, and will add together adjacent to no discernible weight to nigh lensman’southward handbag. I should also annotation that the compact size of the lens and its use of STM makes it a very natural lens to use with the EOS M line of photographic camera bodies via the EF adapter. It balances nicely there and focuses fairly close to native EOS M lenses in terms of speed. This lens might even replace the 40mm f/2.8 STM equally my most used EF lens on the EOS M.

The reality is that Canon has given us far more lens and charged united states of america no more for it, making this lens officially one of the best bargains (if non

the

best) in DSLR photography. Canon’southward margin on this lens is probably initially going to be adequately small (despite recycling a fair portion of the optical formula), but I have a feeling that they will make up for information technology in book. This lens is cheap enough that many photographers volition buy it even if they don’t intend to use it that often. I’ll probably do it myself, and that’s why Canon was very smart to keep this lens priced so aggressively. It also deflects the attack from Chinese maker Yongnuo with their “clone” of the 50mm f/1.8.

Autofocus

The fundamental component of this upgrade is plant in the name: STM. STM standings for “Stepping Motor”, and it is a newer focus motor technology that began with the EF 40mm STM lens.  While speed is always a cistron with autofocus motors, STM technology is more about the fashion focus is achieved. Specifically, “stepping” technology is near smoothness in focus, and smooth transitions from 1 focus point to some other. Its major application is in video capture when AF Servo focus tin be used to reach smooth video focus without hunting. A lens with STM used with, say, a Canon 70D similar mine will fifty-fifty practice smooth, natural “focus pulls” where extreme focus changes are made from a foreground to a background subject. STM motors also tend to exist quieter, particularly when compared to the older micro-motors used in many of Canon’s lower finish (non USM) lenses.  Take a look at the departure in the focus quality and sound during AF Servo video capture on a Canon EOS 70D body.

This 50mm lens is only the third full frame uniform lens that Catechism has released with STM technology, and it makes far more than sense than the final one that I reviewed (the 24-105mm STM). The use of STM makes perfect sense in Canon’south lower end and crop-sensor specific lenses (EF-S), as almost of the contempo Canon ingather sensor bodies can leverage that applied science (the Catechism 70D and 7DMKII well-nigh finer because of the Dual Pixel AF technology) and the fact that STM is an improvement upon the one-time micro-motor technology. Its apply in full frame lenses is a footling more puzzling, nonetheless, as to this point no Canon full frame body employs Dual Pixel AF or supports AF Servo video capture. I viewed the 24-105mm STM equally more than of a lens designed for time to come bodies, because its focal length is simply not a natural one for ingather sensor bodies (the 18-135 STM makes more sense if you lot are shooting crop). I’thousand non as concerned hither, considering the low buy price of the “nifty-l” ways that a lot of crop-sensor shooters are likely to employ information technology in improver to full frame shooters. The 50mm focal length is equally loved by full frame and crop sensor users, where the 50mm focal length becomes an effective 80mm (full frame equivalent). This puts information technology into a real sweet spot for portrait work as well as full general purpose.

Full frame shooters go the advantage of a meliorate/quieter/faster focusing lens even if their photographic camera body can’t leverage the AF Servo video focus function. Some crop sensor shooters with the right trunk will become the full functionality.

The older 50mm f/1.viii Two lens was one of the most notorious examples of the downsides of micro-motor focus. Its AF was loud, buzzy, and had a scratchy sound similar it was working through a scrap of grit every time. Micro-motors practise non back up total time transmission override, so you lot would have to select manual focus on the side of the lens earlier attempting to manually focus with the tiny manual focus ring that seemed to be barely attached to the very forepart of the barrel. Not cracking. It felt much like its price – cheap.

The STM version is a large step upwards. The focus motor is noticeably quieter (though not silent nor equally quiet as other STM lenses that I’ve used), and information technology is much smoother. Faster? Not noticeably, but definitely smoother. Check out this video for a look at the build, motor, and focus sound.

Unsurprisingly the focus shines the brightest when used in a fashion that the engineering science was designed for. I added a 70D to my kit for only this kind of evaluation, and in video AF Servo way the lens smoothly transitions from i focus signal to some other. It too focuses very chop-chop when utilizing the Dual Pixel AF in Live View style. On my 6D trunk the focus is besides nice and authentic, although the speed is unimpressive when compared to a variety of modern lenses using either USM (Canon), USD (Tamron), or HSM (Sigma) ultrasonic/hypersonic motors.

I should note that the re-create of the lens that I reviewed did require significant AFMA adjustment (focus tuning) on the bodies that I used information technology on (save the EOS M, obviously). This included two Canon 6D bodies and 1 Catechism 70D body. On all bodies the AFMA was at least -eleven. That is one of the more extreme adjustments that I accept had to make on a mod lens, but on a positive notation the result was consistent across multiple bodies and was repeatable in multiple tests.

If you have a body that does non back up AFMA adjustment and find that your copy of the lens is not focusing consistently (accurately), you lot might consider sending the combination (body + lens) to Canon for calibration. It might cost you a bit of coin just will save you a lot of heartache.

By comparison, the older 50II needed less extreme aligning but with less consistent results. I got a number of errors fifty-fifty trying to run the program, so I do think that overall focus accurateness has been improved.

Probably the biggest challenge for this type of lens is going to be in portrait use. We portrait photographers tend to like sharp, accurately focuses results. I typically focus on eyes, and I demand the focus there to exist accurate. You will probably notice that this type of shooting (typically at wide apertures similar f/2.8 or larger) will betrayal focus inconsistencies more than general shooting. I was initially disappointed with the focus accuracy of the copy on my main camera body that I was using after a series of portraits (cheers to my lovely wife for jumping in to model for me).


I knew the lens was capable of better results, and so I redid the AFMA adjustments in amend lit weather condition (always important when using an automated AFMA programme similar Reikan FoCal).  It settled in a consequence of -10 on that particular trunk compared to a previous figure of -xiv. This result solved my problem, and the side by side series of portraits (all at f/2) at various distances proved much more than accurate.


This allayed my concerns over focus accurateness.
Word to the wise: practise the microadjustment (AFMA) and then field test your results

before

using any lens for important piece of work.  The second serial proved that focus accuracy was dialed in at a multifariousness of focus distances.  I would now exist far more confident using the lens for professional/important piece of work.

One anecdotal observation:  On a recent outing I added an older Hoya circular polarizer from my vintage kit (a lot of legacy lenses used a 49mm standard filter). The round polarizer fabricated a noticeable difference in a couple of ways.

Information technology definitely improved the images (used correctly a polarizer usually does!), only I likewise noticed that the lens hunted more, particularly at shut distances. It was near noticeable with Live View shooting on the Canon 6D, but I noticed it a bit even with traditional AF through the viewfinder. I don’t recall whatsoever lens being quite so afflicted by the addition of a circular polarizer earlier. The lens seems to focus fine in lower low-cal weather equally a bare lens, so it may take been a fluke. It could too be the nature of the circular polarizer in some way; I’ve never used it on a modern AF lens before (I’ve never had a 49mm front filter thread on an AF lens!!

In summation, the lens focus accuracy is good on all four of my camera bodies (including the EOS M), although the lens is far from the fastest focusing that I’ve e’er used. It may be slightly (if at all) faster than the older 50mm f/1.eight, merely the major upgrade here is the mode of focus (and its accuracy) than the overall speed.

This lens has not changed my mind about manual focus or MF override in an STM lens. The camera has to be awake and prepared to accept input from the lens earlier it will do anything at all, and even then, there is a lag when making transmission adjustments because the manual input is sent to the focus motor that really makes the adjustment. This is sometimes called “focus by wire”, and then true transmission focus is nonexistent.  Forget pre-focusing.  Information technology is e’er the focus motor that drives adjustment, non a physical coupling to the lens elements like other type focus motors. This is pretty difficult to accept for a guy who loves Zeiss lenses (frankly, I hate manually focusing this lens), only, in this example, it is unquestionable that the overall focus and even the focus band are an upgrade over the previous version of the lens. By the way, no STM lens to date has included a distance window or hyperfocal marking, and then yous know that manual focus is definitely not a priority in these applications.

Paradigm Quality

Canon has not fabricated a lot of claims of improved optical performance from the lens, even coming out and saying that information technology uses the same optical formula as the previous lens. Information technology seems like they are beingness modest, still, as I do perceive a very slight bump in resolution (particularly towards the eye) along with noticeably better dissimilarity.  What Canon does claim is that the optical formula has “optimized lens placement”, and that has produced a amend image overall. Information technology is very small-scale jump, merely when one considers that we are getting a vastly improved lens in other ways for the aforementioned money, it still feels pretty good.  Better contrast helps to create the impression of slightly better resolution. In some situations the image quality looks identical, while in others I exercise encounter a flake of an comeback from the new lens.  Hither are some crops that show straight comparisons.  I notice a considerable difference in the eye on a crop sensor in this comparison:

I see less divergence in the centre on this full frame comparison, but there is a slight improvement beyond the frame, mostly in the perception of less “haze” due to reduced contrast and resolution.

Here is an outdoor serial comparing the 50mm STM, 50mmII, 40mm STM, and SMC Takumar 50mm f/one.4.  Hither is a series of shots + eye crops from the 50STM (this series will also give you an idea of overall expect of images from the lens at apertures including: f/1.8, f/2, f/two.8, and f/4)

You can compare that with the same series from the EF 50mm f/1.8:

At present allow’due south take a wait at an f/2.8 and f/4 series from the 40mm STM pancake (annotation the framing departure from the 40mm focal length):

Finally, for the fun of it (and because I know that some of you lot are interested), here is what the vintage SMC Takumar 50mm f/one.4 does in the aforementioned setting: (this serial replaces f/ane.8 with f/one.4):

Y’all will annotation the nicest bokeh here is from the older SMC (Super Multi-Coated) Takumar.  That isn’t but due to the wider aperture (f/i.4 vs. f/1.8);  the bokeh has less of a difficult edge (every bit we will see in our aperture comparison), and, as a upshot, the overall wait of the bokeh region is softer.  Remember that in its day the SMC Tak 50mm f/1.4 was a premium lens.  It is actually sharper in the middle at f/2 when compared with the new STM lens:

The sharpness advantage reverses when you lot motility out into the corner, with the 50STM the winner there.  This next series does a similar comparison as the previous series, merely now the field of study has been moved into the extreme upper right corner.  I chose this at random, but haven’t noticed a centering issue with whatsoever of our competitors.  First, the 50STM at f/1.8, f/2, f/2.8, and f/4).  In this series I will only show the full image wide open to testify placement of the subject, and then the crops at each discontinuity.

Now from the 50mm f/1.8 II:

At present, the 40mm STM (f/2.8 and f/iv):

Finally, we will take a await at the corner functioning of the SMC Takumar lens:

This series should also help you see how vignetting clears upward every bit the lenses are stepped downward.  All of the 50mm lenses vignette adequately heavily with the 40mm lagging merely slightly behind.  The SMC Takumar surprisingly exhibits a footling less vignette despite being an f/1.4 lens with a tiny 49mm front end element.

The good news is that the paradigm quality was already pretty good with the older lens; it was the other areas like the build, aperture, and focus motor that were higher priority needs, and Catechism has addressed those.

Discontinuity Iris Comeback

Probably the best way to examine the update to the discontinuity iris is by viewing this video:

The video highlights a articulate advantage for the new lens. The older version of the lens had 5 straight aperture blades that quickly began to produce a pentagonal shape in bokeh highlights. My feeling is that even by f/2.8 this wait was somewhat cartoonish (not a fan of “creative apertures). The new lens has a vastly improved (modernized) discontinuity iris with seven curved aperture blades. As a result the aperture stays quite round through most f/v.6, and only and so does the shape of the blades become apparent. This is a huge comeback and addresses 1 of the fundamental flaws of the earlier lens. You can also bank check out this discontinuity comparison serial.  First, from the new STM lens:

Hither is a similar series from the older 50mm f/i.viii II:

Finally, just for comparison, here is a look at the vintage SMC Takumar 50mm f/ane.4:

Here are a few observations:

  1. Wide open the bokeh looks virtually identical to the older lens, which supports what Canon has said regarding a largely recycled optical formula.
  2. By f/2.eight the difference in the bokeh quality from the one-time lens to the two is extremely dramatic.  The roundness of the bokeh highlights on the STM lens is actually improved over the wide open up expect.
  3. The STM lens keeps largely round bokeh highlights through f/5.6, and while you can see the shape of the aperture blades then, the look is yet pleasing.
  4. The Takumar lens has more blades (8), just they aren’t equally rounded.  It shows a octagonal shape fifty-fifty by f/ii, though that shape is preferable to the pentagon shape of the older 50mm Ii.
  5. The Takumar bokeh has less of a difficult edge towards the outer edges, resulting in softer looking bokeh in field use.

The overall quality of the bokeh character in the new STM is unchanged, though there is a vast improvement to the shape of bokeh highlights when the lens is stopped down. Overall bokeh quality is decent but unexceptional, with harder edges and less flossy softness of the better lenses.  Still, in field apply the bokeh is far from displeasing in nearly settings:

Hither is a gallery of other bokeh images at differing focus distances:

Other Optical Observations

Chromatic aberrations are also noticeably more controlled. I am seeing very little chromatic aberrations in field employ, and that is a big pace upwardly. The reduction of CA (probably through improved coatings) helps improve the bokeh quality, as bokeh highlights are frequent places where green or royal fringing testify upwardly. I have seen a bit of that at 100% magnification, only for the most part I’ve seen very little chromatic aberrations at all.

It is clear the optical formula has at the least been optimized, peculiarly when considers that they besides managed to reduce the minimum focus distance from 1.5 ft to one.1 ft while improving the maximum magnification from .15x to .21x. Something has changed! If this the same optical formula (and direct comparison tells me it probably is), the improved coatings and optimization of element placement has produced the ability to take images that at least appear to take higher resolution.

Speaking of that closer focus distance: my findings are a mixed pocketbook. Then lens does focus closer, but image quality at wide apertures nigh minimum focus doesn’t seem quite as adept as less extreme distances. I’ve seen stronger performances almost minimum focus than what this lens gives (similar, for example, from the 40mm f/2.8). However, I don’t think the lens is any worse than the previous version at minimum focus, and in my aperture comparison I noted a slightly amend result for the newer lens.

Canon 50STM (f/1.8 and f/2.8:

Canon 50mm II (f/i.8 and f/2.8):

Canon 40mm STM (f/2.8):

SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.iv (f/1.4, f/2, and f/2.8):

Stopping downwardly the lens a fleck helps shut focus sharpness, and with the improver of extension tubes the lens will open upwardly a world of macro photography (though with the limitations that extension tubes bring).  That improved magnification effigy is certainly some other plus.

Flare resistance is as well dramatically improved due to Catechism’southward new coatings on the lens. It volition produce a few ghosting artifacts when the lord’s day is in the frame, but the veiling is about gone and those artifacts are far less disruptive. It is subtle improvements like this that really make the lens a much better value.

Distortion was already very low for field use, and that is unchanged hither.  In field utilize the tiny amount of barrel baloney should be imperceptible.

Paradigm quality overall is quite good for the money. I’ve recently reviewed the Canon 50mm f/1.2L and the Zeiss Otus 1.four/55mm, so the fact that I’m not completely disappointed is a compliment in and of itself. I’k impressed with what I’m seeing from this little lens overall. Do understand that my evaluation is relative to the price point; it isn’t well-nigh to challenge the Otus or the Sigma Art. In that location is even so some haze at apertures wider than f/2.viii when y’all examine images at 100%, and color allegiance isn’t likely to threaten Zeiss anytime before long, merely the images I’ve gotten from this lens are punching well above its bargain basement price. It is providing very strong optical performance for the price, and the fact that image quality is quite good wide open from the lens helps eliminate some of the sting of non having an f/ane.4 aperture. Stopping the lens downwardly helps eliminate the brume and also extends the sharpness into the corners. At f/ii.8 and beyond the image quality is impressive by whatever standard. This is great news for those of yous that are looking to use the lens for general purpose piece of work.  I tend to use primes similar this in specific ways (and unremarkably at wide apertures), simply I recognize that anybody has different needs.

Though modest, that footling bit of optical comeback is going to be enough to make a lot of photographers happy (meet a number of other photos at the Image Gallery), merely information technology besides still leaves plenty of room for Canon to do something very impressive with their update to the 50mm f/i.4. I wouldn’t be surprised to encounter that lens get a bit larger (something like the crawly 35mm f/2 IS) and a little more expensive (ditto). Catechism has left themselves with a little wiggle room and reasonably low evolution costs on this lens due to leveraging the existing optical formula and other existing technologies (STM motor).

The Holy Grail…and Conclusions

The quest for the “Holy Grail” of 50mm lenses continues. I’ve however to use one that really checks all the boxes for me. I am yet looking for a 50mm lens with the attributes and size factor of the 35mm f/two IS. Namely, 1) Fast, accurate USM AF, two) Excellent wide open sharpness, 3) A moderate size 4) Quality drawing and bokeh. IS (image stabilization) would exist the icing on the cake. I’ve reviewed and used more than than 17 50mm options, both modern and legacy, and none of them take quite hit the sweet spot for me. My hope is that Canon’southward replacement for 50mm f/1.4 volition be the lens I’ve been looking for. By the way, if you lot shoot a ingather sensor camera and want an upgrade over the 50mm STM, get the 35mm f/2 IS. Information technology becomes the best general purpose 50mm lens (equivalent) that I could recommend.

Just I’m spoiled by owning a big kit of splendid lenses and getting to constantly apply the newest and the all-time every bit a lens reviewer. The target audience for this lens isn’t me; it is the millions of users who have a limited budget but want a competent broad aperture prime number lens…and the EF 50mm f/i.8 STM is exactly that. It is hard to be disquisitional when Catechism has updated a number of primal areas of this lens while leaving the cost at a bargain basement level (merely $125 in the U.s.). The “nifty 50” was already one of the best values in photography; the new lens raises the value fifty-fifty higher. It is pretty much better in every area while remaining the exact aforementioned price.  Kudos to Canon for giving us so much for so little!

Pros:

  • Amazing value for the money
  • Improved build quality, including a metal bayonet mountain.
  • Vastly improved discontinuity iris (modernistic design)
  • Autofocus quality and accuracy through STM
  • Slightly improved optical operation in key areas
  • Improved flare resistance, chromatic aberration command, and contrast
  • Improved minimum focus distance and maximum magnification

Cons:

  • STM functioning here slightly beneath the standard of other lenses
  • Optical comeback marginal
  • Manual focus with STM
  • Bokeh quality isn’t infrequent

Should I Upgrade to the 50mm STM?

Expect the used market to become pretty flooded with the MKII version of the lens as, for a lot of people, the reply volition be yes. If yous are happy with what you take already, then know that optically at that place isn’t a big change. If you lot take problems with the aperture shape or want to shoot video and need quieter, smoother focus, then the reply is a big yes. If you’ve not notwithstanding purchased and want a cheap prime for portrait work or general purpose shooting, then this is an piece of cake choice. It’s non that it is exceptional at anything, but the 50mm STM is good enough at everything that most users will exist satisfied.  If y’all don’t mind manual focus, consider picking upwards an SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.four off the used market.  The 40mm f/two.8 pancake remains a solid culling too.


Review Notes:
I desire to give thanks B&H Photo for providing me with this retail sample for review purposes.  Delight consider purchasing through these links; its costs you zilch, simply provides a little income to me that helps me keep these reviews coming and this site maintained.

Updated Code:
Gear Used:

Canon EOS 6D DSLR Camera (Body Just)
Canon EF 50mm f/i.8 STM Lens
Adobe Lightroom CC Software for Mac and Windows (Boxed Version)
Adobe Photoshop Creative Deject 1-Year Subscription
Conflicting Skin Exposure 7 (Utilise Lawmaking “dustinabbott” to go 10% anything and everything)

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Thank you for your support.

B&H Logo

In Canada?
Take a look here at Amazon.ca to purchase the lens: Canon EF 50mm f/1.eight STM

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains chapter links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Source: https://dustinabbott.net/2015/06/canon-ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-review/