October 24, 2014, 07:34:28 AM

Author Topic: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0  (Read 19064 times)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14739
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #60 on: November 22, 2013, 02:00:07 PM »
Jessica Claire has a blog post with some good photos made with this lens:
http://www.jessicaclaire.net/index.cfm/postID/263/Wedding-with-DJ-Brittany-Rod

For a lens known for its wonderful and creamy bokeh, IMO it left something to be desired with the OOF highlights here:

EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #60 on: November 22, 2013, 02:00:07 PM »

RomainF

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #61 on: November 22, 2013, 02:01:33 PM »

What BEAST of a camera is she using to get a shutter time of 1/12000 s ?!


Canon 1D mk.1 reaches the 1/16000. Is it the only digital Canon that can ?
Leica & Canon
35 1.4 for both ; ultra-wide & teles for the Canon

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14739
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #62 on: November 22, 2013, 02:03:51 PM »

What BEAST of a camera is she using to get a shutter time of 1/12000 s ?!


Canon 1D mk.1 reaches the 1/16000. Is it the only digital Canon that can ?

Or just a typo...
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1647
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #63 on: November 22, 2013, 02:15:15 PM »
For a lens known for its wonderful and creamy bokeh, IMO it left something to be desired with the OOF highlights here:
I would expect this to be partly wrecked in pp.
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

zlatko

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 349
    • View Profile
    • http://www.zlatkobatistich.com
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #64 on: November 22, 2013, 02:22:32 PM »
For a lens known for its wonderful and creamy bokeh, IMO it left something to be desired with the OOF highlights here:
I'm pretty sure that out of focus tree leaves against a bright sky will make any wide to standard fast lens look bad at that distance.  A telephoto could do much better, but then it would be a different photo.

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3934
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #65 on: November 22, 2013, 02:25:55 PM »
I've never used it but pretty much every report has it less sharp than all of the other 50mm lenses and that means miles less sharp than the new Otus. I'd bet it has way more longitudinal CA too.

OTOH it also has AF, which the Otus lacks and for some stuff that can make it a lot more usable.

Also it's not as much super faster than other 50mm lenses as he claims either, at least not on most digital bodies. Most DSLR sensors simply can't capture the extreme pathways of light that such fast lenses let through so the shutter speed gains and lessening of DOF are not nearly as much compared to an f/1.4 or 1.2 lens as you'd expect.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 02:56:31 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3934
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #66 on: November 22, 2013, 02:33:39 PM »
Light gathering with f1.0 vs f1.2 isn't important to me, it's the dof and feel and look.

If it doesn't gather the extra light than it's doesn't deliver the lesser DOF. (now it does gather some of it, just not as much as you'd think and once you go below f/1.8 it gathers ever less so than you'd have expected the faster you get).
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 03:04:38 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #66 on: November 22, 2013, 02:33:39 PM »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3934
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #67 on: November 22, 2013, 02:39:49 PM »
BTW, for any of you who criticize him (and I often find myself in that group), his site has an Alexa ranking in the top 5000 for US and top 8000 globally. He could choose to monetize that with Google ads (and make A LOT of money), but he doesn't. Yes, he posts affiliate links and solicits contributions, but no one is forced to give a donation or click on a link. Just saying...

Probably because he already lives so well off it as is, why toss in ads and risk killing the golden goose. I don't know if it is true, but he claims to not need to work because of his website and yet he lives in a big house in one of the fanciest and most expensive towns in the entire nation and has many kids so his website must be doing more than fine just with the links and donations (assuming he is not just joking around with his claims about not needing to work because of the website).

So I guess he is a genius in a way.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 02:56:51 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3934
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #68 on: November 22, 2013, 02:44:56 PM »
he gets under my skin sometimes but he can write a good article, his piece on the "leica man" is a great read. the world would be a duller place without KR

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/leica-man.htm

Duller, perhaps, and yes, he sometimes makes good points; and he sometimes provides useful information (e.g. yesterday he linked to a remarkable deal on the 28mm IS at Adorama that was not mentioned here as far as I can tell) but his presentation of those points is terrible - unless you like badly written, unedited stream-of-consciousness stuff that constantly repeats itself and contradicts itself from one article to the next (FF is better, no it's not; don't shoot raw, shoot raw; I never use a tripod, these were shot with a tripod; etc., etc.).   Leaving content aside, he badly needs an editor.  That said, given how popular his site is he doesn't have much incentive to do anything about it....

He actually did have some useful things to say about the new canon 24-70 lenses. And for all the weird nonsense on his site, and much of his site is weird nonsense, there can be useful tidbits in that he sometimes tests for edge bokeh, coma, and so on, lots of things that can affect image quality that the MTF chart only tests sites never bother to get into, some of that stuff is actually very hard to find elsewhere.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 03:06:17 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3934
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #69 on: November 22, 2013, 02:46:43 PM »
Nevertheless, you have a persistent belief that apertures wider than about f/1.4 decrease the depth of field even though very little additional light reaches the photodiode.
Of course they do.  You can see it.  Compare a photo taken at f/1 with a photo taken at f/1.4.  The one at f/1 has less depth of field.

On most digital sensors the one at f/1 won't have nearly as much less DOF as expected, less but not as much less and the faster you get the ever more less than expected. Some DSLR sensros are much better than others at getting closer to full advantage.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 02:58:01 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

Viggo

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2082
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #70 on: November 22, 2013, 02:50:23 PM »
If that were the criterion we would ignore Roger Cicala too - I don't recall seeing any appealing images on his blog either.

What photographer wouldn't find this appealing?!?   ;)



That's a very appropriate picture for Today, Neuro. We are proud Norwegians today as Magnus Carlsen became the Chess World Champion by destroying Anand 7-3!
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 02:52:41 PM by Viggo »
1dx, 24-70 L II, 50 Art, 200 f2.0 L

Mitch.Conner

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 212
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #71 on: November 22, 2013, 03:05:11 PM »
I finally have to ask since I've seen a lot of hate here for Ken Rockwell - can somebody please explain why this is?

kennephoto

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #72 on: November 22, 2013, 03:06:51 PM »
Quote
Jessica Claire has a blog post with some good photos made with this lens:http://www.jessicaclaire.net/index.cfm/postID/263/Wedding-with-DJ-Brittany-Rod
[/font]



What BEAST of a camera is she using to get a shutter time of 1/12000 s ?!




My canon 1D classic does this!
Canon 5d Mark II Canon 1D classic EOSM 20-35 2.8L 50 1.2L 135 2.0L 80-200 2.8L 40 Pancake and a bunch of old film cameras

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #72 on: November 22, 2013, 03:06:51 PM »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3934
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #73 on: November 22, 2013, 03:08:53 PM »
I finally have to ask since I've seen a lot of hate here for Ken Rockwell - can somebody please explain why this is?

Because he had been trolling around for years tossing out bizarre mini-blogs to make controversy and grab traffic and then got tons of traffic and then became labelled the go to camera expert on the net despite having so much nonsense mixed in all over his site and many of the more beginning photographers he was trying to attract wouldn't have a clue as what parts of his website were good and what parts were nonsense passed off as wisdom or the truth.

Mitch.Conner

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 212
    • View Profile
Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #74 on: November 22, 2013, 03:18:18 PM »
I finally have to ask since I've seen a lot of hate here for Ken Rockwell - can somebody please explain why this is?

Because he had been trolling around for years tossing out bizarre mini-blogs to make controversy and grab traffic and then got tons of traffic and then became labelled the go to camera expert on the net despite having so much nonsense mixed in all over his site and many of the more beginning photographers he was trying to attract wouldn't have a clue as what parts of his website were good and what parts were nonsense passed off as wisdom or the truth.

I bolded the part that describes the majority of the internet.   ;D

... but I appreciate you explaining that there is a back-story to this that I didn't know about.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« Reply #74 on: November 22, 2013, 03:18:18 PM »