December 17, 2017, 04:37:05 PM

Author Topic: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM  (Read 185582 times)

klickflip

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 94
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #135 on: June 25, 2014, 11:06:25 AM »
50L shot with minimal processing :) - love the color & contrast of this lens - and sorry about posting yet another cat photo :o:



Purrrrfect! love it. Beautiful. This is what I think the 50L does best.. cats, well people and objects too at relatively short distances and melts the background more beautifully than most other 50s wide open.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #135 on: June 25, 2014, 11:06:25 AM »

sandymandy

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 619
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #136 on: June 25, 2014, 11:43:24 AM »
Quote

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Post processing or not i think u can always see the character of a lens still. PP makes the shot better but not the feel. Something like that. Personally i think the more crappy a lens the more easy it is to notice the PP.

sparda79

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
    • Tingkap Vistaku
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #137 on: June 25, 2014, 11:58:03 AM »

Kak Enie by Sparda (AMT), on Flickr


Ashraf by Sparda (AMT), on Flickr
EOS 6D | 24-105L | 100L | 70-200L II | 2x III | RX100M3

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #138 on: June 25, 2014, 12:38:08 PM »
Purrrrfect! love it. Beautiful. This is what I think the 50L does best.. cats, well people and objects too at relatively short distances and melts the background more beautifully than most other 50s wide open.
Thanks, klickflip, and this is definitely one of my favorite lenses for those reasons!
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

klickflip

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 94
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #139 on: June 25, 2014, 05:20:57 PM »
Since Ive been commenting on a couple recently it's only fair that I submit one of my 50L shots to the sharks.. :)

klickflip

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 94
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #140 on: June 25, 2014, 05:36:29 PM »
while I'm here a couple more.. obligitory to include a cat pic :)


mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #141 on: June 26, 2014, 12:00:58 AM »
while I'm here a couple more.. obligitory to include a cat pic :)
Nice shots, but f/1.8 on that first one???  How could you ;)
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #141 on: June 26, 2014, 12:00:58 AM »

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6595
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #142 on: July 06, 2014, 02:36:43 AM »
I do not know why so many people hate this lens... I love it! I don't care what Sigma or what ever present, that 1.2L Glas is so damn lovely! <3
Shot on a 5D Lr + Ps for Skin. (all at 1.2, except the last one at 1.4)


The problem with "examples" like that is they are post process driven, I could give an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.

Disagree completely, what plant are you living on?!!
These are a brilliant wee set, shot nicely and processed beautifully to compliment the 50L's creamy quality wide open and take these way beyond what 'any 50 at any aperture' would do.
If you have a personal dislike for processed shots then just say they're not to your taste. but to say any 50 at any aperture with processing would get similar results is nuts!
There's a lot more consideration and skill gone into these than you may think than just processing.
Location, time of day, quality of light, shooting/model position and styling, and then finally processing to complete the shot's mood and style.
If you're sick of too many style centric processed shots everywhere you see then thats a different story, as most of us prob dislike average or crap shots over processed just to look cool or cover up bad shooting technique. But these are made with certain style and subtlety that actually works for the shot. Well done Imaxmax!

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Hey PD, I'll get of my high horse then.. but would you like to discuss factually how ' an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.'

To me thats a really generalising statement and technically untrue I believe, and especially invalid in the 50L discussion thread. Maybe could be seen to be 'similar' by joe public for the general processing colour look. But should we not be discussing the 50Ls merits / qualities here and with a very keen eye?
What I see is the 50Ls lovely smooth rendering of the OOF areas and to my eyes that has been brilliantly retained within the processing. I can tell when too much contrast, highlights / shadows pulled in, clarity, sharpening begin to affect the natural look of a lens and the 50L especially. If you process harder sharper it pushes it more towards the 50 1.4 look and feel but at 1.2 and 1.4 you'd never achieve as beautiful lens rendering with any other lens maybe aside from the Otis.

There's a few other examples on this page that I however see some slight heavy handed sharpening on shots not taken as wide open that start to make it harder to me to discern as that '50L Look' This isn't go at anyone else but just technical observations.
Sparda79's fighfighters shots are nicely made ,but to me these don't show the natural 50L qualities that makes the 50L really shine compared to when shot wide openish of a closer portrait. There's a touch too much sharpening on these that hardens the bokeh rings much like the 501.4 does. To me these set of shots would be much harder to say that the 50L was used. And might have been a more valid discussion than Imaxmax's set.

All I'm saying here PD is we should be discussing the lens attributes and be doing it discerningly, and this page is chance to see some great work produced by the lens, and see the differences different subject matters, apertures, light and backgrounds are rendered by this len. For people who already use it and those who are thinking about owning it. It's a special lens and can be difficult to work with so when good results are made is great to see.
But there is a sweat spot it shines at, and that is wideish open but does also rely on the light in scene, the background, subject matter and of course... processing :)

Quote

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Post processing or not i think u can always see the character of a lens still. PP makes the shot better but not the feel. Something like that. Personally i think the more crappy a lens the more easy it is to notice the PP.

Well if you two guys want to demonstrate your observational skills you will have no problems telling us which of these images was shot with the 50 f1.2. Of course if you can't get them all right I might just have made a valid point.

P.S. For some bonus points tell us which other lenses were used.

Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3473
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #143 on: July 06, 2014, 06:10:53 AM »
I do not know why so many people hate this lens... I love it! I don't care what Sigma or what ever present, that 1.2L Glas is so damn lovely! <3
Shot on a 5D Lr + Ps for Skin. (all at 1.2, except the last one at 1.4)


The problem with "examples" like that is they are post process driven, I could give an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.

Disagree completely, what plant are you living on?!!
These are a brilliant wee set, shot nicely and processed beautifully to compliment the 50L's creamy quality wide open and take these way beyond what 'any 50 at any aperture' would do.
If you have a personal dislike for processed shots then just say they're not to your taste. but to say any 50 at any aperture with processing would get similar results is nuts!
There's a lot more consideration and skill gone into these than you may think than just processing.
Location, time of day, quality of light, shooting/model position and styling, and then finally processing to complete the shot's mood and style.
If you're sick of too many style centric processed shots everywhere you see then thats a different story, as most of us prob dislike average or crap shots over processed just to look cool or cover up bad shooting technique. But these are made with certain style and subtlety that actually works for the shot. Well done Imaxmax!

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Hey PD, I'll get of my high horse then.. but would you like to discuss factually how ' an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.'

To me thats a really generalising statement and technically untrue I believe, and especially invalid in the 50L discussion thread. Maybe could be seen to be 'similar' by joe public for the general processing colour look. But should we not be discussing the 50Ls merits / qualities here and with a very keen eye?
What I see is the 50Ls lovely smooth rendering of the OOF areas and to my eyes that has been brilliantly retained within the processing. I can tell when too much contrast, highlights / shadows pulled in, clarity, sharpening begin to affect the natural look of a lens and the 50L especially. If you process harder sharper it pushes it more towards the 50 1.4 look and feel but at 1.2 and 1.4 you'd never achieve as beautiful lens rendering with any other lens maybe aside from the Otis.

There's a few other examples on this page that I however see some slight heavy handed sharpening on shots not taken as wide open that start to make it harder to me to discern as that '50L Look' This isn't go at anyone else but just technical observations.
Sparda79's fighfighters shots are nicely made ,but to me these don't show the natural 50L qualities that makes the 50L really shine compared to when shot wide openish of a closer portrait. There's a touch too much sharpening on these that hardens the bokeh rings much like the 501.4 does. To me these set of shots would be much harder to say that the 50L was used. And might have been a more valid discussion than Imaxmax's set.

All I'm saying here PD is we should be discussing the lens attributes and be doing it discerningly, and this page is chance to see some great work produced by the lens, and see the differences different subject matters, apertures, light and backgrounds are rendered by this len. For people who already use it and those who are thinking about owning it. It's a special lens and can be difficult to work with so when good results are made is great to see.
But there is a sweat spot it shines at, and that is wideish open but does also rely on the light in scene, the background, subject matter and of course... processing :)

Quote

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Post processing or not i think u can always see the character of a lens still. PP makes the shot better but not the feel. Something like that. Personally i think the more crappy a lens the more easy it is to notice the PP.

Well if you two guys want to demonstrate your observational skills you will have no problems telling us which of these images was shot with the 50 f1.2. Of course if you can't get them all right I might just have made a valid point.

P.S. For some bonus points tell us which other lenses were used.

That's not fair ! There's no reference point, such as 'EF 50L gallery" or 'anything shot on a mki 50 1.8'. How are we supposed to appreciate the subtleties of a favourite lens if we don't know which one we are looking at ?

Eldar

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3217
    • Flickr
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #144 on: July 06, 2014, 06:43:55 AM »
With all due respect, this discussion is rubbish. Looking at (over)processed, low resolution images, no exif and no objective comparative information ... It´s like sitting in the next room trying to guess what amplifier your neighbor is using in his hifi setup.

The only reasonable way to compare lenses is to have them side by side, shooting the same subjects, in the same lighting conditions, with the same settings, camera and post processing. I have seen what experts can do in post processing and they are certainly able to fool me.
More equipment than skills, but everything is used :)
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/eldarhauge/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/eldarhaugephotography

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6595
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #145 on: July 06, 2014, 08:15:54 AM »

That's not fair ! There's no reference point, such as 'EF 50L gallery" or 'anything shot on a mki 50 1.8'. How are we supposed to appreciate the subtleties of a favourite lens if we don't know which one we are looking at ?

 ;)
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6595
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #146 on: July 06, 2014, 08:17:14 AM »
With all due respect, this discussion is rubbish. Looking at (over)processed, low resolution images, no exif and no objective comparative information ... It´s like sitting in the next room trying to guess what amplifier your neighbor is using in his hifi setup.

The only reasonable way to compare lenses is to have them side by side, shooting the same subjects, in the same lighting conditions, with the same settings, camera and post processing. I have seen what experts can do in post processing and they are certainly able to fool me.
Eldar, that was my point.
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

Eldar

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3217
    • Flickr
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #147 on: July 06, 2014, 08:39:12 AM »
More equipment than skills, but everything is used :)
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/eldarhauge/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/eldarhaugephotography

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #147 on: July 06, 2014, 08:39:12 AM »

Andrew Davies Photography

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 110
  • Canon 5dmk3
    • Andrew Davies Wedding Photography
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #148 on: July 06, 2014, 11:08:51 AM »
I do not know why so many people hate this lens... I love it! I don't care what Sigma or what ever present, that 1.2L Glas is so damn lovely! <3
Shot on a 5D Lr + Ps for Skin. (all at 1.2, except the last one at 1.4)


The problem with "examples" like that is they are post process driven, I could give an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.

Disagree completely, what plant are you living on?!!
These are a brilliant wee set, shot nicely and processed beautifully to compliment the 50L's creamy quality wide open and take these way beyond what 'any 50 at any aperture' would do.
If you have a personal dislike for processed shots then just say they're not to your taste. but to say any 50 at any aperture with processing would get similar results is nuts!
There's a lot more consideration and skill gone into these than you may think than just processing.
Location, time of day, quality of light, shooting/model position and styling, and then finally processing to complete the shot's mood and style.
If you're sick of too many style centric processed shots everywhere you see then thats a different story, as most of us prob dislike average or crap shots over processed just to look cool or cover up bad shooting technique. But these are made with certain style and subtlety that actually works for the shot. Well done Imaxmax!

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Hey PD, I'll get of my high horse then.. but would you like to discuss factually how ' an image shot taken with any 50mm lens at any aperture (at the same shoot) to a decent post processor and get them to look very similar.'

To me thats a really generalising statement and technically untrue I believe, and especially invalid in the 50L discussion thread. Maybe could be seen to be 'similar' by joe public for the general processing colour look. But should we not be discussing the 50Ls merits / qualities here and with a very keen eye?
What I see is the 50Ls lovely smooth rendering of the OOF areas and to my eyes that has been brilliantly retained within the processing. I can tell when too much contrast, highlights / shadows pulled in, clarity, sharpening begin to affect the natural look of a lens and the 50L especially. If you process harder sharper it pushes it more towards the 50 1.4 look and feel but at 1.2 and 1.4 you'd never achieve as beautiful lens rendering with any other lens maybe aside from the Otis.

There's a few other examples on this page that I however see some slight heavy handed sharpening on shots not taken as wide open that start to make it harder to me to discern as that '50L Look' This isn't go at anyone else but just technical observations.
Sparda79's fighfighters shots are nicely made ,but to me these don't show the natural 50L qualities that makes the 50L really shine compared to when shot wide openish of a closer portrait. There's a touch too much sharpening on these that hardens the bokeh rings much like the 501.4 does. To me these set of shots would be much harder to say that the 50L was used. And might have been a more valid discussion than Imaxmax's set.

All I'm saying here PD is we should be discussing the lens attributes and be doing it discerningly, and this page is chance to see some great work produced by the lens, and see the differences different subject matters, apertures, light and backgrounds are rendered by this len. For people who already use it and those who are thinking about owning it. It's a special lens and can be difficult to work with so when good results are made is great to see.
But there is a sweat spot it shines at, and that is wideish open but does also rely on the light in scene, the background, subject matter and of course... processing :)

Quote

Get off your high horse and read what I actually wrote. And, I don't live on a plant [sic].

I cast no judgement and expressed no opinion of the images other than to point out that with that much post processing any lens characteristics are heavily masked. That is not a contentious comment, it is a factual statement.

Post processing or not i think u can always see the character of a lens still. PP makes the shot better but not the feel. Something like that. Personally i think the more crappy a lens the more easy it is to notice the PP.

Well if you two guys want to demonstrate your observational skills you will have no problems telling us which of these images was shot with the 50 f1.2. Of course if you can't get them all right I might just have made a valid point.

P.S. For some bonus points tell us which other lenses were used.

Looking at those images as they are ALL of them could have been taken with the 50 1.2 at different apertures and processed differently.

In its unaltered state and wide open a shot with the 50 1.2 would be more recognizable but like that they could be anything.

I used to own the 50 1.2L and sold it mainly down to not liking the perspective , i use a 35 and 85 now and find those suit my style much better and they can produce as good bokeh as the 50 1.2. I hardly ever shoot at anything under F2 for my work mind as it just gets to shallow for the subject otherwise.

www.andrew-davies.com
Canon 5Dmk3 x 2 , 135mm F2L, 16-35 F4LIS, 35mm F2IS, 24mm F2.8IS, 24-105L , 70-200 F4L,  85mm 1.8, 600exII x2

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6595
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #149 on: July 06, 2014, 06:18:31 PM »
Interesting, but not surprising, over 600 views of 24 example images and not one person even ventures to make a guess on one single one of them, even though we had people saying stuff like "Post processing or not i think u can always see the character of a lens still." and "shot nicely and processed beautifully to compliment the 50L's creamy quality wide open and take these way beyond what 'any 50 at any aperture' would do."

Kinda funny really..........
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« Reply #149 on: July 06, 2014, 06:18:31 PM »