50 1.4 on 5d3 anyone?

[bykes]

I'm thinking about picking up the 50 1.4 for a fast option instead of lugging my 24-105 around to family events etc.  Is anyone using one on a 5d3?  Your thoughts?

[bdunbar79]

I use one on a 5D Mark III.  It focuses very quickly and is very sharp f/2 and narrower.  I think it's a great lens.

[rj79in]

Mine works brilliantly. I thought I was a goner when I was using it on the 7D but it works great on the 5D3.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Its fine, but not as useful or as sharp as my 24-105mmL for all around use.  Where it comes in handy is in low light, or for a shallow depth of field. 
If you a new 5D MK III user, give it a while with the 24-105, you will get used to the weight.  Good lenses are heavier due to the large amount of glass in them.  The 24-105 is on the light side compared to the 24-70 f/2.8 or some of the other popular "L" lenses.

[rj79in]

Its fine, but not as useful or as sharp as my 24-105mmL for all around use.  Where it comes in handy is in low light, or for a shallow depth of field. 
If you a new 5D MK III user, give it a while with the 24-105, you will get used to the weight.  Good lenses are heavier due to the large amount of glass in them.  The 24-105 is on the light side compared to the 24-70 f/2.8 or some of the other popular "L" lenses.

+1 ... The 50 mm 1.4 is best used in low light or where you want better bokeh. For well lit scenes, I'd use the 24-105 for the versatility in framing the shots

[iso79]

The 50mm 1.4 is a cheap crappy lens. Invest in the 35mm 1.4 L instead.

[RLPhoto]

The 50mm 1.4 is a cheap crappy lens. Invest in the 35mm 1.4 L instead.

Its not that terrible.  I've used the 50mm 1.4 Professionally for sometime before getting the 50L.

Its a good lens for the $$$.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The 50mm 1.4 is a cheap crappy lens. Invest in the 35mm 1.4 L instead.

Some buy lenses to take photos, some buy the best one, even if its the wrong focal length. 

[bykes]

I doubt I'd use it on any paid gigs.  Just something easy to shoot with in low light.  For example at my sisters to shoot her kids indoors acting like maniacs. 

[vmk]

Good lens, i'm using it with 5d mark iii. You get sharp images under low light.

I have not used 50mm 1.2L, so i can't compare with it...

[Knut Skywalker]

Though I have a 5D2 and not the 5D3, I want to share my opinion. First i thought this lens was unusable wide open at 1.4, but when i played around with the AFMA-Function and found the right setting, I was getting way better results with it when shooting @ 1.4. The hazy look on the edges that I got from this lens was gone and the pictures looked way better when there was high contrast. At 2.0 this lens is getting really sharp on my 5D2 and I like the results very much.

[elflord]

I doubt I'd use it on any paid gigs.  Just something easy to shoot with in low light.  For example at my sisters to shoot her kids indoors acting like maniacs.

I took a 50mm f/1.4 with the 5DII on an international trip to see my parents (and my daughters grandparents) -- primary usage was family pics. I left at home the 35L, 135L and Sigma 85mm f/1.4. No regrets -- it worked out perfectly for that trip. The funny thing is, I don't otherwise use that lens very often on full frame (though it was my favourite on APS-C)

[crasher8]

Funny, My bag frequently has both the 24-105 and the 50 1.4. Decent range and light options with the two. I had a bad copy when I used crop and took a chance on one last month, this one is super sharp at 2.0 and needed no AMFA.

[infared]

I use a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 on my 5D3.  More to lug than the Canon...but results are excellent. I am a canon "L" man but I found this lens to be somewhere in between or closer to the Canon 50mm "L". Made a compromise on the 50mm, saved my money and went for the gusto for the ultimate low DOF and bought the Canon 85mm "L". 
...but for the cost and the size and the quality the Canon 50mm f/1.4 is a good lens too!

[bdunbar79]

The 50mm 1.4 is a cheap crappy lens. Invest in the 35mm 1.4 L instead.

Terrible advice, just terrible.