Canon EF 35mm 1'4L USM or 50mm 1'2L USM for weddings

[tonccy]

So, if you are using fix lenses, what is better solution for weddings:

Canon EF 35mm 1'4L USM or Canon EF 50mm 1'2L USM

Thank you!

Modified:

So, my whole story is...I build the sistem around 5D mark III. I already have body, 70-200mm 2'8L IS and 7D as second body. I intend to buy 24-70mm 2'8L II as an universal zoom. Now I have 24-105mm 4L IS which I going to sell.

I siriously thinking about one or two solutions for really bad light, the options are 35mm 1'4L, 50mm 1'2L and 85mm 1'2L II. For photgraphy and video.

At first I am a wedding photographer. But I often work some studio concerts or performances in small halls. So always in low light. The distance to performer are from 2 to 15 meters. And I have to cover the whole stage with performers and also some portraits and details.

I have to mention very important facts: I will work a lot of video. Weddings and indor men's gymnastics world cup contests.

So, any experiance or advices?

Thank you!

[birdman]

Hey there,

As a owner of the 35L, I can say that on FF cameras, it is a wonderful FL. Not great for portrait work, obviously, but excellent for miscellaneous work like shots of the wedding cake, flowers, wedding bands, etc. It has top notch IQ, even wide open.

I think the 50/1.2 is a little overpriced myself. I know a guy that does some weddings and he swears by it---even over his 85/1.2L. Hope this helps...

[dshipley]

Hey there,

As a owner of the 35L, I can say that on FF cameras, it is a wonderful FL. Not great for portrait work, obviously, but excellent for miscellaneous work like shots of the wedding cake, flowers, wedding bands, etc. It has top notch IQ, even wide open.

I think the 50/1.2 is a little overpriced myself. I know a guy that does some weddings and he swears by it---even over his 85/1.2L. Hope this helps...

I agree, especially with the 50L being a bit overpriced, however, I'm not sure I'd own the other Canon 50mm options (the 1.8 is a toy, the 1.4 doesn't have the greatest optical performance wide open... among other issues, and the Compact Macro is non USM).

Both are great lenses and I personally use both of them, but not for different situations. Before recommending one or the other I'd want to know what bodies/lenses you currently own and also would want to see your shooting style as well.

[jasonsim]

I'd recommend the 35mm f/1.4L first.  It is phenomenal and I would not think of parting with it.  If I had to let go of one, I'd get rid of the 50mm f/1.2L first.  I have a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 that is the optical equal to the 50mm L at f/1.4 and I prefer the bokeh delivered by the Sigma better actually.  So, you probably could get the 35 L and Sigma 50mm for just a bit more than just the 50mm L. 

Kind regards,
Jason

[chabotc]

They're both fantastic lenses with fantastic IQ, color, sharpness etc - however the 50 1.2 has a bit more CA, vignetting and I do end up missing focus with it more often then with the 35L - so purely on lens performance I'd highly recommend the 35L over the 50L.

[Axilrod]

This is a tough choice, both lenses are fairly versatile and produce excellent images.  But in terms of consistency and overall quality, I'd say the 35L would be the better first choice.  Even if you do get the 35L I would recommend getting the 50 down the road, they are both excellent lenses for weddings.

[gandhi]

I had the same question for several months, but I always thought 50mm as the best focal length that can be used as  a general walk around lens ,having said that I have been going on the reviews on 50mm and there are several versions of it , but to sum it up, some one extremely professional can produce good pictures out of 50mm 1.2 else some of the pics will be messed up, also lot of them complained about the out of focus issues , so I am still skeptical about 50mm. However 35mm has got excellent ratings but it cannot produce the same background blur as 50mm. As suggested by some one in the forum the sigma 50mm 1.4 might be a good option, but the reviews of it says that it is a lottery as some people get good lens and some get lemons and there are too many lemons.
Even I am in the same confusion whether to spend high amount for 50mm 1.2 (most of them say that its over priced) or get 35mm or get canon 50mm 1.4 (though not L lens can produce super sharp pictures) or to get sigma 50mm 1.4.

[tonccy]

So, my whole story is...I build the sistem around 5D mark III. I already have body, 70-200mm 2'8L IS and 7D as second body. I intend to buy 24-70mm 2'8L II as an universal zoom. Now I have 24-105mm 4L IS which I going to sell.

I siriously thinking about one or two solutions for really bad light, the options are 35mm 1'4L, 50mm 1'2L and 85mm 1'2L II. For photgraphy and video.

At first I am a wedding photographer. But I often work some studio concerts or performances in small halls. So always in low light. The distance to performer are from 2 to 15 meters. And I have to cover the whole stage with performers and also some portraits and details.

I have to mention very important facts: I will work a lot of video. Weddings and indor men's gymnastics world cup contests.

So, any experiance or advices?

Thank you!

[CJRodgers]

Have you thought about the 24mm 1.4? Or is this too wide?

[Sallivres]

Buy the 35mm 1.4L and you have both focal length on you current camera body setup.
on 5D mark III you have the 35MM
on 7D you have a 56MM

on the other hand if you buy 50mm 1.2L
you will have both (5DIII) 50mm and (7D) 80mm

[RLPhoto]

I've always preferred the 50mm focal length over the 35mm, probably because I learned photography on just that lens.

The 50mm is a neutral perspective and to me, provides a sense of unadulterated photos with no expansion or compression. This forces me to think harder on composition rather than moving around not trying to distort anything.

If your on a crop camera, I highly recommend the 24mm 1.4L II. On the 7d, it's a 35mm and on the 5D is a 24mm so if your really cramped, you can swap the 24 on the 5D and the 50mm on the 7D.

Id get the 50mm 1.2L over the 35mm 1.4L. I just prefer the look, and ive never experienced the famed focus shift or AF issues. It's dated stamped 2010 though. It's hit rate is really good 90% or more. (on the 7D and alittle less on the 5DC.)

[tonccy]

Thank you all for your answers.

Tomorrow I will buy 50mm 1'2. A big reason is neutral perpective for photos and video. 7D will be just a backup body.

Maybe another opinions?

[Snafoo]

You say video is an important consideration. Be aware that focus at f/1.2 will be a challenge for moving subjects, so you may not be able to use it wide open in those cases.

[tonccy]

I totaly agree with you. Controling DOF in video is the bigest challange in the future. I have to practice it a lot.
I also have to buy some equipment to help with. Follow focus, 7" LDC monitor...

Thank you.

[PhilDrinkwater]

Id get the 50mm 1.2L over the 35mm 1.4L. I just prefer the look, and ive never experienced the famed focus shift or AF issues. It's dated stamped 2010 though. It's hit rate is really good 90% or more. (on the 7D and alittle less on the 5DC.)

Thank you all for your answers.

Tomorrow I will buy 50mm 1'2. A big reason is neutral perpective for photos and video. 7D will be just a backup body.

+1

People look to much at peeping image quality and ignore the more important part of the equation: which photos will the couple prefer? I can guarantee that they would prefer shots of themselves from a 50 (on fulll frame) more than a 35.

I have both and they perform amazingly. The difference in sharpness is negligible. However, I use the 50 a lot and the 35 sparingly and for specific jobs.

I honestly don't know why people look at per pixel sharpness more than overall look. Choose focal length first - that's more important