September 15, 2014, 12:07:15 AM

Author Topic: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?  (Read 11158 times)

GmwDarkroom

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2013, 03:07:03 PM »
If you like the 50mm view on the crop, how about the 85mm f1.8?  It is quite sharp wide open and about the same price as the 50mm f1.4.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2013, 03:07:03 PM »

Harry Muff

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 409
    • View Profile
    • My Flickr:
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2013, 03:10:17 PM »
24-70 2.8L II?
Some cameras… With Canon written on them. Oh, and some lenses… Also with Canon written on them. Oh, and a shiny camera with Fuji written on it too...

Feel free to have a wander round my flickr

bchernicoff

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 550
    • View Profile
    • My Photos
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2013, 03:20:48 PM »
I'm very happy with  my Sigma compared to the Canon 1.4

It is bigger/heavier for sure though.
6D, Fuji X-E1
Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 50mm f/1.2L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 400mm f/2.8L II, 100mm L IS Macro, Sigma 85mm, & 35mm f/1.4's, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, Canon 2x Extender II, Kenko 1.4x, 430 EX II, Elinchroms

seamonster

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 38
    • View Profile
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2013, 03:26:18 PM »
If you like the 50mm view on the crop, how about the 85mm f1.8?  It is quite sharp wide open and about the same price as the 50mm f1.4.

already said I'd get it.
[5D Mk.III] [40mm f/2.8 STM] [85mm f/1.8 USM] [24-105mm f/4L IS USM] [70-200mm f/4L IS USM] [Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD] [600 EX-RT]

TommyLee

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2013, 04:13:09 PM »
In preparation for my upgrade to a 5d3 (from a 60D) later this year I'm trying to compile a list of potential prime lenses to get between the 35 and 100mm range. I've already got a 24-105L and will sell my non-L 70-300 to get the L version. Also have a 50mm 1.8 so I'll need to get a 85 1.8 to get my portrait capability back.

Then the question remains: Do I keep the little plastic toy (which never use wider than 2.8 anyways) or just get a pancake (which is actually pretty usable wide open, vignetting aside)? Do I even need a 50? I know the 50mm 1.4 isn't great wide open either and has fragility issues but at least it'll work with the automatic CA corrections in the 5d3 (I shoot RAW+jpeg). The sigma 50 1.4 is...really big for a 50mm prime, has AF quality control issues and won't work with auto CA corrections. Rumor mill has it that the sigma 50 is due for a rebody to the "art" line they've got going now but probably won't get an optics refresh... Oh yeah, the 50mm 1.2 is a no thanks I'll keep the money. Everything 50mm seems to be a compromise and you'd think after so many decades of people using such a prolific "normal" lens the designers would have perfected the formulas by now.

Do I even need a 50?

I have the 50 1.8 ...ok in a  pinch I suppose...

but.....NO ....skip the 50mm.....I never found one  that I liked

get the sigma 35 f1.4 ...
this is a VERY good 'normal' lens..
it is just GREAT wide open
sharper than most other lenses ...wide open
clean...from most aberrations..

I just went for a walk with what I think is essential......
an ultrawide 14L II (or choose a 16-35 II)
a sigma 35 1.4....really good value and sharp...and it pops the shots....
and a 100mmL macro (or choose the 135 f2)

add a 12mm tube and a 1.4x TC (a tamron fits the macro or the 135L)  - especially with the 135L ,

and insert your .... 5D3

love it all

I have the 24-105 (nice lens) if I only want ONE lens.... it never fails to please....24mm is pretty wide already
...
and....I also have a few specialty lenses ...85L II, 70-200 f4 I.S., 70-200 f2.8 II.... 24L (mk 1)

but the three basic lenses (100L versus 135L ...you decide)
are enough to do the typical stuff...

start there
I M O

TOM





« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 04:19:14 PM by TommyLee »

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2013, 04:25:49 PM »
It's not what you want and I do know that, but the sigma 50mm f2.8 macro DG is exceptional wide open.

I'm not suggesting you buy one as it's slow focusing, darker than you probably want, but it does tick the boxes if being the right fl, and being sharp eide open.  Even if wide open is f2.8.

On the other hand it will be more forgiving than a very shallow lens on full frame.

bvukich

  • Spam Assassin
  • Administrator
  • 5D Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
    • My (sparse) ZenFolio Site
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2013, 04:40:39 PM »
F/1.2 - 1.4 - 1.8 are compromises. I wouldn't classify them as suck, I only hold the EF 50mm F/1.0 in that category.

I really wouldn't say the 50/1.0 sucks, but it is a highly specialized use lens.  If you're not sure you need the 1.0, you're definitely better off with the 1.2.  If you're positive you need the 50/1.0, there's an 80% chance you're wrong, and you'd still be better off the the 1.2.

But... if you need to shoot a candle lit dinner in a coal mine, and don't mind (or like/want) the "dreamy" look the 50/1.0 gives, there really is no substitute.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2013, 04:40:39 PM »

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3444
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2013, 04:45:09 PM »
F/1.2 - 1.4 - 1.8 are compromises. I wouldn't classify them as suck, I only hold the EF 50mm F/1.0 in that category.

I really wouldn't say the 50/1.0 sucks, but it is a highly specialized use lens.  If you're not sure you need the 1.0, you're definitely better off with the 1.2.  If you're positive you need the 50/1.0, there's an 80% chance you're wrong, and you'd still be better off the the 1.2.

But... if you need to shoot a candle lit dinner in a coal mine, and don't mind (or like/want) the "dreamy" look the 50/1.0 gives, there really is no substitute.

If you need a 50mm F/1, get the leica... Or at least rent one.

Cannon Man

  • Guest
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2013, 04:57:47 PM »
You do need a 50 but they don't have one for you.  I sold the 50 1.2 in disgust of how soft the pictures were even stopping down.

ecka

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 630
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #24 on: July 11, 2013, 05:13:15 PM »
F/1.2 - 1.4 - 1.8 are compromises. I wouldn't classify them as suck, I only hold the EF 50mm F/1.0 in that category.

I really wouldn't say the 50/1.0 sucks, but it is a highly specialized use lens.  If you're not sure you need the 1.0, you're definitely better off with the 1.2.  If you're positive you need the 50/1.0, there's an 80% chance you're wrong, and you'd still be better off the the 1.2.

But... if you need to shoot a candle lit dinner in a coal mine, and don't mind (or like/want) the "dreamy" look the 50/1.0 gives, there really is no substitute.

If you need a 50mm F/1, get the leica... Or at least rent one.

If you can afford Leica 50/1, then you can afford all the fast 50s in question here (as a backup or just for fun) :).
FF + primes !

paulc

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #25 on: July 11, 2013, 05:30:42 PM »
The fragility of the Canon 50/1.4 focus barrel is mitigated by never taking the hood off it, even when you put it in your bag.  The motor and gears are weak, but at least they're replaceable by laymen.

The real question is if you love the results or not.

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3444
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #26 on: July 11, 2013, 06:02:33 PM »
F/1.2 - 1.4 - 1.8 are compromises. I wouldn't classify them as suck, I only hold the EF 50mm F/1.0 in that category.

I really wouldn't say the 50/1.0 sucks, but it is a highly specialized use lens.  If you're not sure you need the 1.0, you're definitely better off with the 1.2.  If you're positive you need the 50/1.0, there's an 80% chance you're wrong, and you'd still be better off the the 1.2.

But... if you need to shoot a candle lit dinner in a coal mine, and don't mind (or like/want) the "dreamy" look the 50/1.0 gives, there really is no substitute.

If you need a 50mm F/1, get the leica... Or at least rent one.

If you can afford Leica 50/1, then you can afford all the fast 50s in question here (as a backup or just for fun) :).

Really, I believe don't so but point here is the Leica 50mm doesn't suck.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/LEICA-NOCTILUX-M-50mm-f-1-11821-E60-/121136252503?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item1c34488657

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1-0L-f-1-0-L-f-1LLens-Made-in-Japan-Nr-MINT-/181148016924?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item2a2d43611c

ecka

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 630
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #27 on: July 11, 2013, 06:28:05 PM »
F/1.2 - 1.4 - 1.8 are compromises. I wouldn't classify them as suck, I only hold the EF 50mm F/1.0 in that category.

I really wouldn't say the 50/1.0 sucks, but it is a highly specialized use lens.  If you're not sure you need the 1.0, you're definitely better off with the 1.2.  If you're positive you need the 50/1.0, there's an 80% chance you're wrong, and you'd still be better off the the 1.2.

But... if you need to shoot a candle lit dinner in a coal mine, and don't mind (or like/want) the "dreamy" look the 50/1.0 gives, there really is no substitute.

If you need a 50mm F/1, get the leica... Or at least rent one.

If you can afford Leica 50/1, then you can afford all the fast 50s in question here (as a backup or just for fun) :).

Really, I believe don't so but point here is the Leica 50mm doesn't suck.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/LEICA-NOCTILUX-M-50mm-f-1-11821-E60-/121136252503?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item1c34488657

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1-0L-f-1-0-L-f-1LLens-Made-in-Japan-Nr-MINT-/181148016924?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item2a2d43611c

Leica M autofocus sucks :) and Canon 50/1.0L is just as good optically, if not better.
FF + primes !

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #27 on: July 11, 2013, 06:28:05 PM »

skullyspice

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
    • Photojensen.com
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #28 on: July 11, 2013, 07:17:30 PM »
How does the old FD 50 1.2 lens compare to todays 50 1.2?
5D3, 1vHS, 1nRS, F-1N x6, Fuji X-T1, Fuji X100
50 F1.2L, 100 F2.8L Macro, 200 F2.8L, 40 F2.8, 17-40 F4L, 24-105 F4L, 70-300 F4-5.6L
www.photojensen.com

Fleetie

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Watching for pigs on the wing
    • View Profile
    • My Facebook
Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #29 on: July 11, 2013, 09:03:34 PM »
The OM 55/1.2 is soft when wide open and sharp at f/2. I'm not finished with it yet. typically $550+

The OM 50/1.8 is sharp at all apertures but has weird bokeh - probably a result of its rudimentary aperture control. That said, they can be had for about $30 and are compact, well made and robust.

Ah! A Zuikophile!

Yes, I have both of the f/1.2 lenses: The 50/1.2 and the 55/1.2. The 55/1.2 is NOT the older one with the radioactive glass element.

They are both pretty terrible wide-open, but pin-sharp at f/2.

I did a comparison of those 2 lenses with the Canon 50/1.4. I found that the Canon is faster (i.e. brighter in terms of T-stop or light transmittance) than the Zuiko f/1.2 lenses. But there wasn't a lot in it.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1282664807273.38454.1849695638&type=1&l=33b6f14d3f

I also have a Zuiko 50/1.4 silvernose that I had cleaned internally and it came back in really good nick, nice and clean.

And a 50/1.4 that has SOME fungus inside but not a huge amount.

And a final-version 50/1.8, the final version they did. That is totally 100% clean inside and out.

One day I intend to do a rigorous comparison of all of them.

I like the 50/1.8 cos it is tiny (short, almost pancake-y) compared to the f/1.4 and f/1.2 versions. So more portable.

When the EOS M II comes out, I intend to get it and use it (sometimes) with the Zuiko 50/1.8 on it.

Canon 5D3  ,  70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II ,  24-105mm f/4 L IS  ,  50mm f/1.4  ,  85mm f/1.8 ,  EF 2x III
Olympus OM2-SP , 50mm f/1.2 , 55mm f/1.2 , 50mm f/1.4 Silvernose , 135mm f/2.8 , 28mm f/2.8

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« Reply #29 on: July 11, 2013, 09:03:34 PM »