A final goodbye to my 50mm f1.4 lens

[Dylan777]

I finally posted my 50mm f1.4 on CL yesterday around 3:30PM and the lens got sold by 6PM same day for $290 cash.

When I opened my camera bag this morning, I see an empty spot in my bag - where the 50mm sits when not in use. 

My feeling right now =    to 

[neuroanatomist]

Gone, but not forgotten.  It's still listed in your signature...

 

[pierceography]

Why'd you get rid of it?  I have one myself, but have been considering upgrading to the Sigma.  Not on the top of my priority list though.

[Dylan777]

Gone, but not forgotten.  It's still listed in your signature...

 

Thanks for remind me Neuro ...will replace with 35L soon

[Dylan777]

Why'd you get rid of it?  I have one myself, but have been considering upgrading to the Sigma.  Not on the top of my priority list though.

Hi pierceography,
I feel I don't need this lens anymore after my 24-70 II arrived. The 5D III + 24-70 II can handle most low light conditions.  However...35L is on my "WANTED LIST"

[paul13walnut5]

I still miss my 28mm f2.8.  Sold to make way for bigger and better things, apparently.

Was a perfect little walkaround lens on my 7D & Rebel.  May still yet pick up a used one, or I might see if the stop-faster 35mm f2.0 does anything for me!

[ChrisAnderson]

I love my 50 f/1.4,  don't know that i'd ever sell it unless I upgraded to a faster 50.  I've considered going with a FD-mount f/1.2, and I don't mind a fully manual lens.  It's all worth it for the beautiful bokeh!  I love how it looks on FF, with the circular warping of the blur at the corners.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I finally posted my 50mm f1.4 on CL yesterday around 3:30PM and the lens got sold by 6PM same day for $290 cash.

When I opened my camera bag this morning, I see an empty spot in my bag - where the 50mm sits when not in use. 

My feeling right now =    to 

Thats a low price.  They go for $350 around here.  No wonder you sold it so quickly.
I've been thinkinng of selling mine, I've had it boxed up for the last 4 months, but have not been able to part with it.  I might sell it if I buy a 24-70 MK II. I also have the 50mm f/1.8 MK I with metal mount.  I just finished doing a AFMA with it (-11).  I want to do a comparison of images before I decide which to keep.

[Tammy]

i'm considering selling mine as well since getting the 24-70L II too.

[Dylan777]

I finally posted my 50mm f1.4 on CL yesterday around 3:30PM and the lens got sold by 6PM same day for $290 cash.

When I opened my camera bag this morning, I see an empty spot in my bag - where the 50mm sits when not in use. 

My feeling right now =    to 

Thats a low price.  They go for $350 around here.  No wonder you sold it so quickly.
I've been thinkinng of selling mine, I've had it boxed up for the last 4 months, but have not been able to part with it.  I might sell it if I buy a 24-70 MK II. I also have the 50mm f/1.8 MK I with metal mount.  I just finished doing a AFMA with it (-11).  I want to do a comparison of images before I decide which to keep.

To me...the 24-70 II is a "SUPER" lens. This will be my most use lens for indoor.

The copy I have right now is sharp, even before AFMA.  I decided to run through FoCal, the results are -5 @ 24mm and +1 @ 70mm. Regardless AFMA or not, I know the copy I have is a keeper.

I'll keep this lens until Canon offers 24-105 f2.8 IS

[AudioGlenn]

I feel your pain.  Since I got my 35L, my 50 1.4 hasn't seen much use.  I've been meaning to sell it but just can't seem to put up the craigslist ad. 

[Dylan777]

I feel your pain.  Since I got my 35L, my 50 1.4 hasn't seen much use.  I've been meaning to sell it but just can't seem to put up the craigslist ad. 

It was a hard decision, but I did it

Bottom line is, I want latest "L" lenses in my bag - as long as I can afford without selling my kidney of course

[keithfullermusic]

While the 24-70 ii seems like an amazing lens, it does not replace the 50 1.4.  When I have that thing on I tend to stick around 1.6-2.2.  This is for the nice bokeh which 2.8 cannot replicate (unless you are super zoomed).  Also, 1.4 vs 2.8 is completely different in low light.

I'm not saying I wouldn't rather have the 24-70ii, but it does not replace the 50 1.4, but I can see how the 35L does.

[Dylan777]

While the 24-70 ii seems like an amazing lens, it does not replace the 50 1.4.  When I have that thing on I tend to stick around 1.6-2.2.  This is for the nice bokeh which 2.8 cannot replicate (unless you are super zoomed).  Also, 1.4 vs 2.8 is completely different in low light.

I'm not saying I wouldn't rather have the 24-70ii, but it does not replace the 50 1.4, but I can see how the 35L does.

I agree....just like food - see and smell are not enough, you gotta taste it.

[extremeinstability]

I had one of these all of 2 days.  Always had a 1.8 with my crop cams but hardly ever used it.  Went full frame and was ready to use 50mm more, but was so done messing with the "focus ring" of the 1.8.  So snatched up the Canon 1.4 largely just to have a real focus ring that doesn't change if you sneeze within 100 yards of the tripod.  Last night shooting northern lights for the first real shoot with it, I saw how lame the coma was on stars in the full frame edges and corners.  Soooo just swapped it out for the Sigma 1.4 and hoping it is better in that regard.