Buy one, its one of those lenses that you might not use all the time but you probably won't buy a lens for that price that produces sharp images and gives you F1.8.

The only bad thing I've heard about the canon is the build quality isn't great, its a bit plasticy but for the price you can't complain too much.

I've got one. Took it to a few of my old flamate's gigs, was perfect for small venues with not much light. Tis cool to use for portraits too.

I find it a bit long on my cropped body, I cant remember if you're full frame? I think I'm going to get a 30mm 1.4 instead.

Apart from that I love it, definitely the best value for money lens available.

It's all-plastic construction is somewhat flimsy, but it does produce sharp images down to f/1.8. With a 5 blade aperture however, out of focus highlights are pentagon in shape, rather than circular. The Canon f/1.4 does better in this regard and is more solidly built - at £280 it is more expensive, but perhaps worth considering. The Sigma f/1.4 is slightly more expensive again, but produces better IQ... provided you win the Sigma QA lottery.

Whichever 50mm you buy it has to be multiplied by the relevant sensor ratio, so a 1.6 multiplier on a Canon camera will give you an 80mm lens. That means it is pretty much perfect for most portrait work. Some prefer a shorter lens but that is going to lengthen the face in depth, others go for 135mm but longer lenses shorten the face.

To be really honest it isn't worth not having a 50, it's short light design make it easy to carry and the wide aperture makes low light photography easier. It also can do both photography in towns and country effectively if you don't have a wide angle.

That said I have used a 500mm lens to take photos of people with an aversion to being photographed, for some this would rate a phobia, but wanted a good picture of themselves and this gave acceptable results. My mother sat for one photo she knew I was taking, it looked terrible, she was obviously tense and stressed to be sitting there. When taken without her knowledge she looked much more normal and the product was far better.

All that said I wouldn't like it to be my only lens, but if I had to have just one then it would be a good compromise.

Quote from: Mongoose on February 24, 2012, 22:58:02 PM

it's not really worth NOT having one.

Unless you have the Canon or Sigma f/1.4... or the Canon f/1.2L 

Yes, but those are also 50mm lenses, and the precise reason I avoided putting in an f/number The f1.8 is also much cheaper for those buying on a budget. One or two stops doesn't make that much difference in normal photography.

I didn't say the others were not worth having, they are, if you can afford the price and can justify ownership.