50mm 1.2

[Bosman]

some say once you go black theres no goin back. I say once you go 50L theres no goin 1.4 or 1.8.

[Matthew19]

I've owned the 1.8, 1.4, 1.2 and zeiss 1.4. As others have said, the 1.2 has great rendering and bokeh, the 1.4 build quality and focus ring are a bit cheap feeling. I hated the bokeh on the zeiss 50mm. It also had some weird distortion on portraits. Thats was the deal breaker for me on the zeiss, I really wanted to like it.

If you shoot wide open and do video (manual focus), the 1.2 is the way to go.
If you are just shooting pictures and stop down often, I'd grab a 50mm 1.4 and a 100mm macro for the same price!

[Dylan777]

I wanted to purchase a 50mm 1.2 but wanted to know if a new 50mm will be coming out soon. Putting budget aside, would you get a 50mm 1.2 or a 1.4?

This lens is 3-4yrs old. You might not see mrk II anytimes soon here. If you already decided to go for L, I think should should go for it, since Canon is offering $120 rebate end June 2nd.

I was in this situation many times; the L or 1.4???  I tested both lenses side by side. At the end I decided to stay with 1.4 --- this is the only lens left in my bag that doesn't have a red ring

My reason is simple, the IQ on L is not 3-times better than 1.4. I was hoping 2 times better, not even. I say 1.35 to 1.5 better. The ONLY thing I like MOST about the L is build quality. Very solid.

[sandymandy]

some say once you go black theres no goin back. I say once you go 50L theres no goin 1.4 or 1.8.

And once you go asian you never go caucasian

I always wanted to get the 50mm 1.2L for my crop body but i think thats a bad decision
Using the 50mm 1.8II at the moment. Thinking if i should get the 1.4...

[Viggo]

I am on my third copy of the 50 L and as much I love parts of this lens I have SERIOUS AF problems....

If I aim at 30 meters the lens is dead on with midpoints and 10 meters in front on the outer points. I adjust to make the outer work, and then it's waaay behind when I use midpoints.

It was the same with the two others, this one is production code UA03, so it's brand new. It's much better than the two others for stabillity, the two others were all over and damn near impossible to MA, never got them to be consistent at one setting.

But it still is the same issue. try the second to last row to the right/left, which are crosstypes (5d3) and it misses both in Ai and One Shot, with spot, single, expanded by four or 9, I can try 40 times, and just doesn't hit. use points closer to the middle and it's sharper than any of the two others, by far.

Anyone else experiencing this ? As I said, three copies used on three different bodies, 1d4, 5d2 and 5d3.

And for the record, neither copies of my 85 L II and 35 had or have this issue.

[K3nt]

I love my 50mm f/1.4... great bang for the buck and once I had my 7D and the lenses all calibrated it has never missed a shot. If it does, I can most certainly look in the mirror to confirm that I missed the shot and not the lens/camera combo.

[melbournite]

Always wanted to have a 1.2 lens in the kit for that creamy bokeh.  I've found the need for a 50mm in a studio environment but specifically for F8 usage.  So from what I understand, the 1.4 is sharper at F8 than the 1.2? That would be a shame because I'd be prepared to the pay the money for the 1.2 otherwise?

[ontarian]

Get the FD 55mm 1.2 Aspherical for a grand for equivalent IQ performance as the 50L or the FD 55mm 1.2 SSC or chrome nose (or FL 55mm 1.2) for a 300 dollar budget option that is nearly as nice.  Obviously you'd need one of my adapters to make them work but I would go for this over the zeiss if you can handle the manual focus.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/180855493584?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649#ht_1255wt_1385

[jasonsim]

I guess I should chime in on this discussion, since I started on on FredMiranda.com a month or so ago.  There I discussed the bokeh quality of the 50mm 1.2L vs the Sigma 50mm 1.4.  I still have both and kinda prefer the Sigma's bokeh.  Note that at 1.4 both appear to be equally sharp..at least to my eyes. 

I had to try two Canon 50mm L's before finding a keeper and 3 Sigma's before finding a keeper.  I strongly recommend that, if you decide to get either that you go to a store where you can try them out on your body before buying.  Previous copies of both the Canon and Sigma had AF issues.

Also note that the Canon will suffer more CA at 1.2 and 1.4 than the Sigma.

Link to my discussion:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1107121/0

[drjlo]

One reason to stick with Canon EF fast primes is Canon's Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO), which was rolled out without much hoopla with DPP but carries a wallop!

For example, the venerable 85L II has tons of color fringing at f/1.2, and even stopped down to f/2.8 there is substantial amount. Similar observations occur with 50L.  First photo is 85L f/2.8 shot with sharpening set to 0 in DPP, no DLO applied.  These are ~400% crops.


C2.8S0 by drjlo1, on Flickr

Second shot is same settings, sharpness 0, with DLO applied at 60 (out of 100).


C2.8DLO60S0 by drjlo1, on Flickr

[RLPhoto]

Proof Is in the pudding.

Here is a shot of my 50mm 1.2L copy. This particular sample is @ F1.4 but it demonstrates everything that's good about this lens.

COLOR
CHARACTER
BOKEH
SHARPNESS WIDE OPEN.

On my copy there is no issues, Perfect lens. Its just as sharp wide open as it is stopped down, I only stopped down to get more DOF. In this case, F1.4 but I missed focus a tiny bit and nailed the subject shirt. ITS MY FAULT, Not the lens.

Still liked the photo because no other 50mm gave me that "swirling bokeh" kinda look. Its all subjective and the sigma model i've demoed didn't exhibit this kind of character.

[Marsu42]

One reason to stick with Canon EF fast primes is Canon's Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO), which was rolled out without much hoopla with DPP but carries a wallop!

Did you try Lightroom 4.1 RC2, too and even compare it to DPP? It has even further improved on lateral & axial CA elimination and you're able to fine-tune it or use a lens profile, so with this I don't think any color fringing should be a problem anymore after postprocessing:

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2012/04/new-color-fringe-correction-controls.html

[drjlo]

I don't use LR, so can't say.  I use DPP for RAW, then transfer to photoshop if I need to use further processes. DLO makes much more difference in overall detail and clarity, more in compared to the Chromatic Aberration correction tool in DPP.  In fact, when DLO is used, CA correction tool is greyed out in DPP. 

"New in DPP v3.11 is Digital Lens Optimizer – a revolutionary new tool designed to drastically improve image resolution. Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO) precisely imitates lens performance, with a series of complex mathematical functions replicating each stage of the journey of light through the optical path. Using this information DLO can correct a range of typical optical aberrations and loss of resolution caused by a camera’s low pass filter, by applying an inverse function to each shot to take the image nearer to how the scene appears to the naked eye."

[Daniel Flather]

I own both the 1.4 and the 1.2L.  I NEVER use the 1.4 now.  Not because the 1.2L is L and looks awesome, the 50L makes nicer images.  Nicer does not imply sharper (and my comment is not bias to which lens is sharper), as most tend to believe.  If you only care for sharpness get the 50 macro.  The 24L, 50L, and 200/2.0L are special.  I'd like to try the 85L one day.  You don't buy f1.2/1.4/2.0 lenses and stop them down. 

[drjlo]

You don't buy f1.2/1.4/2.0 lenses and stop them down.

Well, I hope stopping down 50L to f/1.8 is still in the spirit.  I just sold my 50 f/1.4 after getting 50L, and even before I got the 50L, I found myself using other lenses to "make do" like 35L.  There's something about 50 f/1.4 images that is a bit unrefined and bothers me.  I can say that 50L at f/1.8 is even sharper than 50 f/1.4 at f/1.8, in addition to the refinement in rendering.


DZ3C2797 by drjlo1, on Flickr