50mm 1.2

[jaayres20]

I thought the 1.2 was really slow to focus?  Or was that the 85mm?

That's the 85L.  The 50L is quite fast.

The 1.2 does not have a fast AF. The 1.4 focuses a lot faster and is actually sharper once you get past 1.8. Now the 1.2 has a lot better picture quality and better bokeh.

[RuneL]

I love mine but it's difficult to live with, but it's probably one of my favorites right now, just be aware that working at that DOF is tricky.

[KeeFy]

50L is IMO comparable to the 85L in focus speed. May be slightly faster, but by not much.

My 50L is mated to my 5d3 90% of the time. The image rendition is special imo and it's different from the 1.4 and 1.8. Bokeh is awesome. Even comparing the bokeh at fixed f2 for all 3 lenses (1.2, 1.4, 1., the 50L comes up tops with the bokeh as creamy as yoghurt. Obviously you buy such a fast lens to use it wide open as well regardless of sharpness.







All 3 pictures shot with a 5D classic. All shot wide open f1.2

[EOBeav]

I don't think I have ever even considered using any of my fast primes, except the 24 and 17 at apertures narrower than 2,0. 5,6 comparison? Not why you buy 1,2 lens.

I guess it depends on what else you've got in the stable. If you ONLY shoot your prime wide open, then you're probably not taking advantage of the versatility of a 50mm, which is one of the main reasons why they're so popular. Personally, if I want 50mm, regardless of aperture, I need to go with my 50mm f/1.4. My other zooms don't go through the 50mm range.

But if you bought a 50mm to only shoot at extremely wide apertures, and have other lenses to cover that focal range, then more power to you.

[Axilrod]

The 50mm f/1.4 is terrible past f/2, but definitely comparable to the 50L in terms of sharpness. 

[Axilrod]

What Filter should I purchase for the 50mm 1.2?

If you're asking questions like this you may want to reconsider your purchase.  Recently there has been a slew of people that seem very new to photography buying 5D3's and asking about the most expensive lenses like the gear is the most important aspect of learning photography.  Get the 50mm f/1.4, if you really like the 50mm focal length get the 1.2. 

My neighbor is the highest-paid photographer I've ever met and he uses the 50mm 1.4.  Actually the majority of his favorite shots are from the 24-70mm. 

[bdunbar79]

I personally wouldn't get the 50mm f/1.2L because I do not shoot in low light and I never use apertures wider than 2.0 at 50mm.  If you want better, all around coverage at 50mm, the 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.8 are nearly as sharp or sharper at 2.8 and above.  Also, in my experience, the 24-70L zoom lense performed just as well as the 50mm f/1.2L at f/2.8.  So if you don't really really need that narrow use of a 50mm lens, there are better lenses.  Unfortunately Canon does not make a 50mm lens that is super sharp across all apertures.  I wish they would make one comparable to the 35L and 85L.  You almost have to buy both the 50mm f/1.2L and the 50 f/1.4 or 24-70mm L to get full aperture coverage from Canon at 50mm.  Good luck!

[drjlo]

Also, in my experience, the 24-70L zoom lense performed just as well as the 50mm f/1.2L at f/2.8. 

While I do agree Canon needs to do better at 50mm compared to their 35 and 85, two things are still true:
1.  Canon 24-70L cannot shoot at f/1.2. 
2.  There is NO other 50mm prime available from any company that is sharper at f/1.2 than 50L. 

[niccyboy]

My 50 is permanently mounted to one of my 5ds. My absolute favourite lens.

If budget isn't an issue. Hire both, the feel, picture quality and bokeh will sell it to you then

The 1.4 and 1.8 are both fantastic lenses and very well priced also, but the 1.2 is brilliant.

[Michael_pfh]

I would strongly consider this Zeiss 50:  http://amzn.to/JvlU7I

I love it. It is an excellent lens, very well built, very high IQ. It's MF, which I find to be something that slows me down - in a good way - and forces me to think about my images before I make them.

Give it a look. It's awesome.

-MS

I eventually also settled for the Zeiss 50 f2.0 MP, was hesitant to get the 50 1.2L since I already got the 85 1.2L II. The ZE 50 is definitely great and I got used to the MF in no time, it's quite easy compared to some EF lenses.

[RLPhoto]

The 50mm 1.2L is the sharpest 50mm lens I've ever used from f1.2-2.8.   (and I've used alot of 50mm's)

The AF is faster than the 1.4, but not by much but it is alot more accurate.

The OOF is the best I've ever seen on a 50mm.

Then again, there is always the Leica 50mm's but I don't consider those in the same league.

If you love the 50mm focal length, there is no better on a SLR system.

[Marsu42]

The 1.4 and 1.8 are both fantastic lenses and very well priced also, but the 1.2 is brilliant.

Oh, time for my 50/1.8 rant: I have it and don't use it anymore because the af is terrible and the build quality is horrible. If you can ignore this, it certainly has the best "bang for the buck" if you don't shoot @f1.8, but the real killer is the so-called bokeh - anyone who gets this is well-advised to look at sample pictures with bokeh before a decision.

[Ricku]

I would love to rebuy the 50L if it wasn't such a "mixed feelings-lens".

I love the creamy bokeh and special rendering of this lens, but the focus shift issues and the somewhat soft results at wide open, just cant be overlooked.

The 35L, 135L and 85L are all very sharp wide open. So why can't the 50L be?

[bdunbar79]

I would love to rebuy the 50L if it wasn't such a "mixed feelings-lens".

I love the creamy bokeh and special rendering of this lens, but the focus shift issues and the somewhat soft results at wide open, just cant be overlooked.

The 35L, 135L and 85L are all very sharp wide open. So why can't the 50L be?

My feelings exactly.  The IQ on the 1.8 is good, but not as good as the 1.4 and 1.2.  My friend was shooting a lot of 50mm and his AF on the 1.4 stopped working.  The 50L is super, razor sharp from 1.2 to about 2.... something, but from 2.8 up there are other 50's sharper.  I tried out the 50L and it produced stunning images in low light, at wide apertures.  I was actually sorry to part with it.  But, photo to photo, I just didn't shoot enough low light at 50mm, so I suggest using the 1.8 and having a good photo editing program

[drjlo]

I would love to rebuy the 50L if it wasn't such a "mixed feelings-lens".

I love the creamy bokeh and special rendering of this lens, but the focus shift issues and the somewhat soft results at wide open, just cant be overlooked.

The 35L, 135L and 85L are all very sharp wide open. So why can't the 50L be?

The 50L is super, razor sharp from 1.2 to about 2

I wouldn't call it "razor" sharp.  It's decently sharp at 1.2 to pretty sharp at 2 IME, going on to quite sharp at 2.8.
One thing I've discovered, however, is Canon's "Digital Lens Optimizer" in DPP, and it does a surprisingly good job of bringing out 50L's sharpness without as much artifact as simpling bumping up the sharpness bar. 

I used DLO setting 50 (out of 100) for this 50L shot at f/1.8, which really helped with clarity. 


DZ3C2665Velv by drjlo1, on Flickr