Thanks so much for your replies! I'm not ignoring you, I will get my information together here that you requested. Thanks!
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I own both the 1.4 and the 1.2L. I NEVER use the 1.4 now. Not because the 1.2L is L and looks awesome, the 50L makes nicer images. Nicer does not imply sharper (and my comment is not bias to which lens is sharper), as most tend to believe. If you only care for sharpness get the 50 macro. The 24L, 50L, and 200/2.0L are special. I'd like to try the 85L one day. You don't buy f1.2/1.4/2.0 lenses and stop them down.
There were a ton of them available on amazon and ebay two days ago. I purchased a refurbish one for around $4k. If you can rely on the seller on either site, they are available. I contacted each seller with many questions and got one in two days, as I just got mine after work today.
Congratulations - you will be able to see why we all rate them now
Here is the workaround to get the equiv on M mode + ec + auto iso
Objective: Set set a minimum and maximum shutter speed. In Av mode if the shutter speed dropped below the mimimum then the ISO would be bumped up so that the minimum was reached again.
- enable safety shift (iso speed) C.Fn 1 - 8
- set shutter speed range C.fn 1 - 12 ( set the minimum shutter speed )
- set the Av value
- set the base iso value (can be L so then it acts as auto iso)
- set exp comp as needed (yes we get exp comp and auto iso this way)
So there you are - how to get auto iso with iso and Av limits set.
...only have the 50 1.4 and I'm glad to hear that others haven't liked that lens. I'm hoping the images turn out to be sharper with the 1.2. We'll see.
Agree with awinphoto - you won't have better results with the 50 1.2. It is not nearly as sharp, from a clinical, pixel-peeping perspective, as the 85 1.2, which can be incredibly sharp but is even slower focus than the 50's. The 135L is crazy sharp or you might also look at the 100L - (70-200 MK2 is crazy sharp but pricey) - 35L and 24LII are also great in the wides, . I'm not crazy about any of Canon's 50's personally.
I'm taking receipt of my 5d3 today, nervous about processing issues but really excited to take it for a spin
Did some more testing this evening guys and gals. It seems to be, the most crips images were shot when I used Neutral mode (an auto mode). Normally I build a custom mode, but neutral was the sharpest. I DID have to go in post and add exposure, highlights, shadows, and saturation (I used Lightroom which has some other cool features) but setting the sharpness in my settings, in a sunny situation, left the edges of the bright objects, namely lettering, slightly blurred. I think you can program in an sharpness or contrast you'd like, it just looks like sharpness as low as possible is working right now.
Interesting, I heard some people claim that neutral mode made video slightly sharper, even at ISO100 with NR, so it seems they do some nasty bits of NR even at lowest ISO even with NR off and that in neutral it does it the least. I have wondered if custom modes would end up softer then, like marvelcinema etc. since will the camera treat it like neutral processing or standard and use mroe NR?
Anyway you'd think they could offer a fine tune option for this in firmware.
One final point from me on this... if you want to know if somebody is a pro or not look at their pictures. If you want to know how much money somebody has spent, look at their kit. There isn't always a correlation twixt the two.
Good luck with which ever you choose, I thought there were good technical reasons for opting for f2.8's such as improved AF performance, but there you go....
I just don't think 35mm will be a good portrait lens. If you have the f stop down pretty low, say 1.4-2, it will be impossible to get a whole group of people all in focus. Secondly, if you buy a 50mm prime, that's 80mm on a 1.6x, and that is actually not far away. So actually a 50 would work really well. If you still have your 55-250mm zoom lens, set it to 50mm and test it out to see what I mean. 35mm on a crop 1.6 is 56mm, so yes, that lens works but I have had a hard time getting everything in focus when the aperture is really wide.Thank you for the reply, but I don't really get you point: you suggested me to get 50mm, either 1.8 or 1.4 will have wider aperture and longer focal length compare to 35mm f/2, so the effect must be shallower DoF, and harder to get focus with wide aperture.
In previous post I just wonder will 35mm f/2 with its wide open aperture could produce shallow DoF like the 55-250mm or not. In other words, DoF is more depend on aperture or more depend on focal length?
You are right on the 50mm that it is not too far away. I will check it out for considering