We've all read the praise about the Canon 50mm 1.8 lens. I'm one that owns it and loves it. My question is, "Why can't they make more lens of this quality in this price range?" It would be nice to have more lens choices for us amatures who don't need a professional quality lens that costs $800. I just want something that will take nice photos that I can enjoy or maybe even post online. With the number of people who seemed to have purchased the 50mm 1.8 that there would be a market for them. Any thought?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
More Canon 50mm 1.8 lens
- Thread starter gzamira
- Start date
PH-Digi
Veteran Member
I agree with that. They should make lenses a little more affordable.
--
Paul Hakimata
http://www.hakimata.com
.....and in the end everything will be okay. If it's not okay, it's not the end......
--
Paul Hakimata
http://www.hakimata.com
.....and in the end everything will be okay. If it's not okay, it's not the end......
MartynLyon
Leading Member
and get better build quality. My 50mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/2 are built so poorly, for good build quality at a reasonable price check out the 85mm f/1.8, its a cracker.
--
My music photography - http://www.martynlyon.com
--
My music photography - http://www.martynlyon.com
i'm sure canon would just love to give everything for free. it's employees and it's shareholders (owners) want just that.
before you make a "this should be cheaper/free" statement, consider the fact that another person could ask/demand the exact same thing of you - that you give them whatever you do for less.
if you feel the glass is too expensive, you have several tactics. either don't buy it, use an alternative or start a competing business (provide alternative) yourself. since lenses are not a right but luxury (do i have to remind anybody that most people in the world dream of water, food and health, not L glass), so that's about all you can do about it.
anyway, lenses cost at least double US price here in my country and we didn't kill any canon person (yet) (perhaps because there is no proper canon center and hence canon personnel for a few hundred kilometers around
.
Nekdo je moral Josefa K. o'crniti, zakaj ne da bi bil storil kaj slabega, so ga nekega jutra prijeli.
before you make a "this should be cheaper/free" statement, consider the fact that another person could ask/demand the exact same thing of you - that you give them whatever you do for less.
if you feel the glass is too expensive, you have several tactics. either don't buy it, use an alternative or start a competing business (provide alternative) yourself. since lenses are not a right but luxury (do i have to remind anybody that most people in the world dream of water, food and health, not L glass), so that's about all you can do about it.
anyway, lenses cost at least double US price here in my country and we didn't kill any canon person (yet) (perhaps because there is no proper canon center and hence canon personnel for a few hundred kilometers around
.--
Nekdo je moral Josefa K. o'crniti, zakaj ne da bi bil storil kaj slabega, so ga nekega jutra prijeli.
... but its simply not gonna happen on my budget. There is no way I could afford to pay US$300 for a lens unless it was gonna earn me money, even then I'd need a loan to pay for it.
I simply can't afford expensive glass so some more cheap lenses in the same quality range as the 50mm 1.8 would be nice.
Mred32
--
For most PC troubleshooting, a .22 will do the job.
I simply can't afford expensive glass so some more cheap lenses in the same quality range as the 50mm 1.8 would be nice.
Mred32
--
For most PC troubleshooting, a .22 will do the job.
Nobody is saying give anything away for free. But just like with cars, or televisions, or clothes you can have a variety of lines for every price range. Just because you choose to buy lower end doesn't mean it has to be garbage. My wife buys the Jaquline Smith line of clothes at K-mart. They are inexpensive and she says they are very good quality. I don't expect to get the same results from $200 zoom lens as I would with a $2000 lens. But if they can make an affordable 50mm lens that has decent quality why can't they make a bigger variety of "good" lens?
CityLights
Veteran Member
The answer is simple.
That is simple construction. Take a look at the optics diagram for the 50mm f/1.8 lens which sells for $80:
Now take a looke at the optics diagram for the canon 17-40mm f/4 L which sells for about $600:
Combine that with construction materials and a better focus motor and they must charge the heafty price.
When you can figure out how to make the $600 one look as simple as the $80 you will see the price drop.
Canon does not pull these prices out of thin air. They are based on real development and manufacturing cost plus a small profit margin.
--
CityLights
http://www.pbase.com/citylights/favorites
.
Your camparing apples and oranges. I'm not asking for a 17-40mm f/4 L for $80. But I'm sure with all of Canons years of experiance they can come up with a $200 17-40mm f/4 that can take good (not asking for great) but good quality photos.
Try Sigma. 18-200mm (HUGE zoom range) for about $400.
You're into an expensive hobby...don't complain about it if you can't afford it. Sell your camera and drop it altogether. Collect stamps or something. And don't complain when there's a rare stamp you want but can't afford.
apologies for the watermarks.
You're into an expensive hobby...don't complain about it if you can't afford it. Sell your camera and drop it altogether. Collect stamps or something. And don't complain when there's a rare stamp you want but can't afford.
--
apologies for the watermarks.
Look at these photos I just saw on another post:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=16303481
These were taken with a "kit lens". These are beautiful photos. Not the most expensive lens but something affordable to make good images with.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=16303481
These were taken with a "kit lens". These are beautiful photos. Not the most expensive lens but something affordable to make good images with.
Ok then buy the kit lens. If you have it already...be happy with it. Almost ANY lens will be more than sufficient for web-size photos...but then of course you could just get yourself a little point and shoot if that's all the quality you want.
apologies for the watermarks.
--
apologies for the watermarks.
CityLights
Veteran Member
I think you missed my point. You pay for what you get. Canon has both consumer grade and professional grade lenses.
Consumer grade lenses have less expensive glass, housing, focus motor, etc. Professional grade has all the best.
Canon is one of the nicer systems that has the whole gambit of equipment from very inexpensive entry level through the very best made on the planet.
They have sub $200 lenses that take good pictures. The Kit 18-55mm EF-S is a perfect example. Inexpensive optics and constrution. Beautiful picture results in the hands of a skilled person.
Become that skilled person and you will see those results.
--
CityLights
http://www.pbase.com/citylights/favorites
.
Some people have taken your question as whining about lenses being too expensive. I'll take it as a legitimate desire to understand. I'm not an expert by any means. Here is my guess at why the 50mm 1.8 is so inexpensive relative to other lenses.
If you look through your camera with the 50mm lens on it, things look approximately the same size as they do when you look with just your eyes. So at 50mm, the lens doesn't have to do a lot of bending of light. This makes the optics simpler than at other lengths. Another thing that can be misleading is that small numbers (length in mm) seem like small differences which should be similar to manufacture. However, you need to consider the ratio of the numbers when determining how difficult it is to build a lens. 10mm and 500mm are the same offset from 50mm. So slight offsets from 50mm could be significantly more complex to build. Zooms take it to another level of complexity beyond that.
As I said, this is just a guess. I've never built a lens.
Hope this is helpful,
jbf
If you look through your camera with the 50mm lens on it, things look approximately the same size as they do when you look with just your eyes. So at 50mm, the lens doesn't have to do a lot of bending of light. This makes the optics simpler than at other lengths. Another thing that can be misleading is that small numbers (length in mm) seem like small differences which should be similar to manufacture. However, you need to consider the ratio of the numbers when determining how difficult it is to build a lens. 10mm and 500mm are the same offset from 50mm. So slight offsets from 50mm could be significantly more complex to build. Zooms take it to another level of complexity beyond that.
As I said, this is just a guess. I've never built a lens.
Hope this is helpful,
jbf
barristerwa
Member
The original poster never said the lens should be "free." And, among his choices of things "to do about it" is to complain via his voice and his pocketbook which thereby puts pressure on the seller to lower the price. The consumer can affect the price by purchasing competing products. So, he is simply exercising his right to speak up and complain about the need for "good" products at an inexpensive price.
You want to make more out of it than he has set forth. Every company needs to make a profit; I don't think anyone would argue with that idea. Just because he complains about the lack of product in a certain price range doesn't mean he should jump out of the photography hobby, that's illogical.
You want to make more out of it than he has set forth. Every company needs to make a profit; I don't think anyone would argue with that idea. Just because he complains about the lack of product in a certain price range doesn't mean he should jump out of the photography hobby, that's illogical.
Smeegles
Forum Enthusiast
I alwyas read about this myuthical build quality etc
so what if it is lightweight and a touch more fragile?
iut still takes excellent pictures.
It's attitudes like yours that keep prices artifically high for lenses
Canon looks out for stooges with that sort of thinking and rub their hands with glee.
The 50mm f1.8 is an EXCELLENT lens for its price and the image quality is second to none.
If you cannot take a good picture with this lens then hand in your camera and take up oil painitng.
Look beyond your reflection in the window.
so what if it is lightweight and a touch more fragile?
iut still takes excellent pictures.
It's attitudes like yours that keep prices artifically high for lenses
Canon looks out for stooges with that sort of thinking and rub their hands with glee.
The 50mm f1.8 is an EXCELLENT lens for its price and the image quality is second to none.
If you cannot take a good picture with this lens then hand in your camera and take up oil painitng.
--
Look beyond your reflection in the window.
Smeegles
Forum Enthusiast
erm one is a prime the other is a zoom
silly comparison.
Look beyond your reflection in the window.
silly comparison.
--The answer is simple.
That is simple construction. Take a look at the optics diagram for
the 50mm f/1.8 lens which sells for $80:
Now take a looke at the optics diagram for the canon 17-40mm f/4 L
which sells for about $600:
Combine that with construction materials and a better focus motor
and they must charge the heafty price.
When you can figure out how to make the $600 one look as simple as
the $80 you will see the price drop.
Canon does not pull these prices out of thin air. They are based
on real development and manufacturing cost plus a small profit
margin.
--
CityLights
http://www.pbase.com/citylights/favorites
.
Look beyond your reflection in the window.
rbhun
Forum Enthusiast
if they produce $200 lenses that perform as good as an L, no one will buy an L-lens.
When the 300D came in, a lot of pro photographers bought it as an 'try-out DSLR'. They made a good decision, and they just laughed on those people who bought the 10d for 6 times more. They eventually went to 20D/5D/1D, but its not like lenses. a lot of pro people uses the 50/1,8, and if canon builds other primes so good, they will lose profit. Just think why they changed the original design of the 50/1,8 I and left out the meter scale and metal bayonett? because they wanted to frighten the pros away. Meanwhile, this lens showed a lot of us what a great lens can do - you only knows the difference when you saw it. I'd never wanted a constant 2,8 wide-angle zoom instead of my (close to free) kit lens until I bought my 50mm. Now I want another one, and another one, and looks like I'm willing to pay much more for them than the 50mm costed. These guys know their business. They could have made a cheap prime series, they just doesnt want to... based on my experience with sony and other japanese companies, I'm not suprised if they have already designed and tested 2 or 3 future generations of our cameras. Sony built a pro digital video recorder in 1983, and used the technology in its analog recorders until 2001. Then, when the market was craving for a digital recorder, they just relased the model they developed in 1983, with a bit of re-shaping for today's look. Now they are selling it for $40k per piece, and they market buys it. They could have done this 20 years earlier, but that would mean they lost 20 years of profit from analog betacam recorders... why would canon do that?
my 2 cents...
rb
When the 300D came in, a lot of pro photographers bought it as an 'try-out DSLR'. They made a good decision, and they just laughed on those people who bought the 10d for 6 times more. They eventually went to 20D/5D/1D, but its not like lenses. a lot of pro people uses the 50/1,8, and if canon builds other primes so good, they will lose profit. Just think why they changed the original design of the 50/1,8 I and left out the meter scale and metal bayonett? because they wanted to frighten the pros away. Meanwhile, this lens showed a lot of us what a great lens can do - you only knows the difference when you saw it. I'd never wanted a constant 2,8 wide-angle zoom instead of my (close to free) kit lens until I bought my 50mm. Now I want another one, and another one, and looks like I'm willing to pay much more for them than the 50mm costed. These guys know their business. They could have made a cheap prime series, they just doesnt want to... based on my experience with sony and other japanese companies, I'm not suprised if they have already designed and tested 2 or 3 future generations of our cameras. Sony built a pro digital video recorder in 1983, and used the technology in its analog recorders until 2001. Then, when the market was craving for a digital recorder, they just relased the model they developed in 1983, with a bit of re-shaping for today's look. Now they are selling it for $40k per piece, and they market buys it. They could have done this 20 years earlier, but that would mean they lost 20 years of profit from analog betacam recorders... why would canon do that?
my 2 cents...
rb
jfan
Forum Enthusiast
It is nothing more than simple business...... if people are buying enough expensive glass with the high profit margin, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to offer a less expensive competitor. Especially if your name represents high quality. Canon also provides excellent quality control and service to customers who pay for their products.......something that manufacturers of lower quality goods cannot afford to do.
yido
Forum Enthusiast
Canon is a large international corporation. It's job is to make as much money as possible. They will charge the most that they can get to maximize their profits.
The good thing is that you aren't limited to only Canon lenses.
There are many makers that make excellent lenses that work with your camera for a substantial less money.
--
T.Y.
http://www.yido.smugmug.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LAShooters/
The good thing is that you aren't limited to only Canon lenses.
There are many makers that make excellent lenses that work with your camera for a substantial less money.
--
T.Y.
http://www.yido.smugmug.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LAShooters/
It is more than adequate for "taking nice photos that you can enjoy or maybe even post online".
--
Regards
alexeig
http://www.pbase.com/alexeig
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum