Do all of canons 50 mm lens suck?

[cpsico]

I have had my 50 1.4 recalibrated every so often but sooner or later back to suck. Is the 1.2 version any better or should I just get the 35 1.4? It seems to be much better rated. I used it with an aps-h sensor anyway so is there any one that has used one or the other or both?

[Canon Rumors]

I love the 50 f/1.2L. I've heard the "focus shift" issue has gotten better over time. I've never really noticed it. Though it doesn't have a floating element, so it's probably there.

The 50 1.4 is in dire need of replacement, Canon makes a lot of money selling focus motors for it though.

[Stereohans]

I bought the EF-L 50/1.2 in December and have no issues with this lens. It is sharp even at 1.2, it focuses fast and there is no focus shift. Cons: that wonderful beast of a lens is heavy, huge and expensive - but it is also the best 50 I ever had including a 50/1.8 I and a 50/1.4.
So I can recommend the 1.2 if you are able to afford it.
I hope the next 85/1.2 will have similar qualities: No "electrofocus only" design, a bit less of weight and bulkiness and faster AF would be nice. If the improvement between 85/1.2 II and 85/1.2 III is as big as the step from 50/1.0 to 50/1.2 in terms of everyday usability I will buy that lens as soon as it is in the market.

Greetz, Hans

[Cannon Man]

I have a love hate relationship with my 50 1.2L..
Compared to my 85mm 1.2L II it.. well you can't even compare them because the 85mm is sharper at 1.2 than the 50mm is at 2.8!!!! and has better contrast.

On the other hand i love the size and the weather sealing and i love the focal length and the colors look really nice and its not bad at all its just that the 85mm is better.

I wish they would make a better 50mm!! i have been thinking they decided to make it more affordable and cos' of it didn't make it as good as they could have.

Ive been thinking to buy the 8000$ 50mm cine lens if it works good for still photos too.

[alipaulphotography]

I'm pretty happy with my sigma 50mm f/1.4 for now. But I will snap up a canon 50mm f/1.4 II as soon as it is released.

Dire need of replacement!

[Axilrod]

I have a love hate relationship with my 50 1.2L..
Compared to my 85mm 1.2L II it.. well you can't even compare them because the 85mm is sharper at 1.2 than the 50mm is at 2.8!!!! and has better contrast.

On the other hand i love the size and the weather sealing and i love the focal length and the colors look really nice and its not bad at all its just that the 85mm is better.

I wish they would make a better 50mm!! i have been thinking they decided to make it more affordable and cos' of it didn't make it as good as they could have.

Ive been thinking to buy the 8000$ 50mm cine lens if it works good for still photos too.

The cinema primes are supposed to be $6800 actually, but I guess with tax it'll be close.  But like the Zeiss CP.2, most of the added cost is for the focus marks, manual iris adjustment, and uniform housing size to make swapping easy.  I'm willing to bet the optics are very similar to the 50L, and when you factor in no autofocus it doesn't seem like a great deal.

[Axilrod]

I have had my 50 1.4 recalibrated every so often but sooner or later back to suck. Is the 1.2 version any better or should I just get the 35 1.4? It seems to be much better rated. I used it with an aps-h sensor anyway so is there any one that has used one or the other or both?

I've had the 1.8, 1.4 and 1.2L.  I can't say any of them really suck, sure the 1.8 is plastic and feels like a toy, but for $100 you can't complain.  I thought the 1.4 was very sharp for the money, and I really liked it.  I love my 1.2L, always did, but particularly so after I got it re-calibrated. 

If you're looking for something in-between the 1.4 and 1.2L, check out the Zeiss ZE 50mm f/1.4, it doesn't have autofocus but I think it's a wonderful lens.  I think it's around $725...

[Canon-F1]

Ive been thinking to buy the 8000$ 50mm cine lens if it works good for still photos too.

well others make money with the 50mm 1.2 and some just dream about more gear to improve their photography... it´s always the same.

[cpsico]

I love the 50 f/1.2L. I've heard the "focus shift" issue has gotten better over time. I've never really noticed it. Though it doesn't have a floating element, so it's probably there.

The 50 1.4 is in dire need of replacement, Canon makes a lot of money selling focus motors for it though.

I was wondering if the 1.2 had similar issues I find 50 mm to be a very useful focal length, it seems to focus best 4 to 5 feet away. When the 1.4 is on its very sharp ESP when used with a 580 ex useing focus assist. The weather sealing could be better on the 1.4 too

[Axilrod]

I love the 50 f/1.2L. I've heard the "focus shift" issue has gotten better over time. I've never really noticed it. Though it doesn't have a floating element, so it's probably there.

The 50 1.4 is in dire need of replacement, Canon makes a lot of money selling focus motors for it though.

I was wondering if the 1.2 had similar issues I find 50 mm to be a very useful focal length, it seems to focus best 4 to 5 feet away. When the 1.4 is on its very sharp ESP when used with a 580 ex useing focus assist. The weather sealing could be better on the 1.4 too

I agree about the weather sealing, the design for the 50 1.4 is from 1987 I believe, it's long due for an update (sooner rather than later, I suspect).

[JR]

I have the 50 1.2 and had no issues with it.  I had it for a year now and I must say it sits on my camera most of the time.  I also had the 50 1.4 (actually still have it as I never got around to selling it) and I find the 1.2 much better.

For portrait it is a killer!  Now you mentionned the 35 1.4.  It is a amazing lens as well.  I plan to get the mk II version hopefully announced this week (I place a lot of fait in the CR guy here  )!

In the end it comes down to your needs.  If you need a 50mm, go for the 1.2.  If you use 35mm more, you will be happy with the 35 1.4.

[pwp]

I'm pretty happy with my sigma 50mm f/1.4 for now. But I will snap up a canon 50mm f/1.4 II as soon as it is released.

Pretty much my feelings too. The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 is a competent though hefty piece of glass, better than my previous EF 50mm f/1.4 at the wide end...nothing between them past f/4.

Hoping the eventual replacement for the EF 50mm f/1.4 is just as compact as the original. Somehow I doubt there will be a replacement anytime soon...it would cannibalize 50mm f/1.2L sales in a big way.

Paul Wright

[willrobb]

I'm pretty happy with my sigma 50mm f/1.4 for now. But I will snap up a canon 50mm f/1.4 II as soon as it is released.

Pretty much my feelings too. The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 is a competent though hefty piece of glass, better than my previous EF 50mm f/1.4 at the wide end...nothing between them past f/4.

Hoping the eventual replacement for the EF 50mm f/1.4 is just as compact as the original. Somehow I doubt there will be a replacement anytime soon...it would cannibalize 50mm f/1.2L sales in a big way.

Paul Wright

Have to agree with Paul here, I think a new canon 50mm f1.4II would eat away at the 1.2L sales. Saying that though, with a lot of people saying they like the Sigma 50mm f1.4 canon are going to have do something....perhaps we'll see a canon 50mm f1.4II with a better AF motor and a sleeker look.

Anyway, I am very happy with my 50mm f1.2L. Been happily using it now for 18 months and it delivers every time.

[Viggo]

I have used the 35 24 and 50 extensively on an aps-h sensor.

For IQ you much better off with the 35, IF the focal is what you need, they're very different. Second when it comes to sharpness you want the 35. However, if you need weatherseal, MUCH nicer bokeh, color and resistance to flare, you want the 50.

I use 24 and 50 on a mk4, and I love them both. But IQ of 50mm lenses will never match the equiv in 35 and 85mm. I hope they will, but it just seems like they haven't yet, so my money is on never.

If you want the best possible 50, and my god how wonderful the 50 is on both aps-h and FF, color, contrast sharpness from wide open (1,2) through 2,8, you absolutely want the 50L. It will never break and is in my eyes at least the best handling lens on a 1-series body ever made. It just fits right.

Nevermind the shift focus talk, it's not a big deal between 1,2 and 2,5. And this is where you use this lens. Be aware however, that the 50 L is very much softer closer than 3 ft than at some distance. So don't go shooting at mfd if you try this lens (as nearly 100% of the customers in my shop do when testing a lens)

[foobar]

Can't say anything about the 50L (I don't use this focal length often enough to justify the price difference), but I have tried the 50mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.4 and currently own the Sigma.

The 50mm f/1.8 is a great lens for the price, but the noisy AF, shoddy build quality and non-rounded 5-blade aperture means it's not for me.

The 50mm f/1.4 is an okay lens. In terms of image quality, I'd like to see rounded aperture blades here as well. Apart from that, it ticks most of the boxes, but only in theory. I could live with the micro-USM AF if the mechanism wasn't so fragile.

The Sigma has everything I want from a 50mm in terms of image quality. It may not win a sharpness race against Canon's 50mm f/1.4 but it's "sharp enough" and the way it renders is just beautiful. Sadly, its autofocus isn't as reliable as the Canon alternatives, at least on my copy. It's also bloody heavy because of that huge front element (77mm filter thread!).

So in short: Yes, if Canon would release a 50mm f/1.4 USM II (even if it was just a refresh of the old lens with ring-USM and rounded aperture blades), I would buy it in an instant.