For a lot of shots, yeah. I find that I prefer the sharpness/bokeh quality on my f/1.4 after about f/2. And a lot of times, I'll keep it at f/2.8. At those aperture settings, there is virtually no difference in IQ between the two lenses. And I think that's the point the guy was trying to make.
If f2.8 is your fav. then save your money for 24-70 II. It much more versatile and sharp @ f2.8
There is no fun shooting f2.8 with f1ish lens, that just me of course.
Besides, most wedding shooters would carry 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 anyways.
Not to be argumentative, but I know you are possibly the biggest supporter of the f/1.2 here. Outside of the bokeh, can you replicate the contrast and color in lightroom?
And again... not to be argumentative... or maybe I should say, With all due respect (Talladega Nights anyone?), I haven't heard of the 50 f/1.2L having a magic bokeh except recently. The 135L yes, the 85mm f/1.2L yes, even the 200mm f/2L... I've even heard contrasting opinions regarding the bokeh of the 70-200mm f/2.8L Is mkii.
I know bokeh can be subjective, but would you contend that the 50's bokeh is on par with the 85/135/200?
With raw file, photo above can be easily PP x2 to x3 better. Those are just one of goofy photos I took at work with JPEG. Standard setting on 5D III.
"I haven't heard of the 50 f/1.2L having a magic bokeh except recently" ==> because you were too busy shooting with 50 f1.4 @ f2.8 that's why
"I know bokeh can be subjective, but would you contend that the 50's bokeh is on par with the 85/135/200?" ==> try to rent 50L. AFMA is almost required. start shooting from f1.2 to f1.6(mine is great at f1.4, others claimed f1.6ish). Magic distance 4-5ft away from your model. Once you done this exp, pls share your photos with us