Canon 35mm f/1.4 L or Canon 50 mm f.1.2 L - for Weddings

[RLPhoto]

I have just about every current AF Canon L prime between 24mm and 300mm. The 35mm f/1.4L and 85mm f/1.2L II are the best for weddings and stay on my cameras as much as possible. I have several friends who have sent their 50mm f/1.2L's back because the autofocus was so inconsistent and it was recommended to me to not purchase that lens so I'm going to pass that recommendation to you. At the moment I just use the 35mm prime and can crop it to around 50mm easily. If I need the extra focal length I just pull out my 85mm f/1.2L II and skip over the 50mm focal length (recommended if you are on full-frame).

I'm anxiously waiting for Canon to come out with a good 50mm lens. This is the weakest focal length in their line up if you ask me.

Also, if the 35mm f/1.4L gets updated with less CA and weather proofing (why does this lens not have this in the first place?) then I'd say the 35mm f/1.4L II is going to be as close to a perfect prime lens as you can get. Image quality is already amazing.

I've been wanting to pull out all of my primes and do a comparison at night time, maybe that can be my next blog entry. Till then here are some samples:

85mm f/1.2L II at f/2.0 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h3401c75e#h3401c75e

35mm f/1.4L at f/2.5 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h2027ab87#h2027ab87

50L is a awesome lens. Am I the only one here who got a good copy? I prefer it over the 35mm for its classic focal length. I suppose ive always been a fan of Henri cartier bressons subtle painting like perspective of the 50mm. No tricks, just a normal view.

[Cosk]

85mm f/1.2L II at f/2.0 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h3401c75e#h3401c75e

35mm f/1.4L at f/2.5 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h2027ab87#h2027ab87

Very, Very good portfolio... nice work. 

[swrightgfx]

When it comes to wedding, you often only have one chance to get "that shot." I have found the 50L a little too unreliable in this regard and the 85L (yes, I am aware this kens is not the topic of discussion) way too slow.

The 35L is actually very quick. I find they lock focus beautifully and the resultant image, especially if you are shooting at wide apertures, tends to be more pleasing than the 50L.

There is, as others have mentioned, the issue of 35L being a little wide (though taking into account the central angle of view of the human eye, the average equivalent focal length equates to not much more, at 43mm). In which case, I'd settle for the 50 1.4. Weddings aren't the most brutal of locations - you are more likely to get a bit of cake on your camera than an incoming blizzard storm front or flying gravel from motorcyclists, so the 50 1.4 can hold up in the majority of cases. Yes the USM has a habit of dying, but you will likely have other lenses with you - if you are really concerned and set on the 50mm focal length as an essential, pick up a 50 1.8 II as backup.

I'd suggest buying all five lenses mentioned. Just to account for that rare Antarctic wedding come car rally.

[SandyP]

I use the 35L and the 50L for almost the entire wedding, on my 5D3. And did so also, on my old 5D2. They are close together in terms of focal length, but they are very different lenses that let you do very different things. Two of my favorite weddings from last year were shot 90% on only the 50L, it was incredible. The 85L is awesome, but I feel like I'm too far away with it, even on full frame, to really feel IN the action. For portraits of course, it's incredible in certain situations.

[MarkWebbPhoto]

Sorry for getting off topic a bit but...

The 35L is quick enough to use AI Servo tracking even with the slow 5D2, I only use the 85L on single shot with the 5D2. However, if you pair the 85L with a 1D4 you can get great shots under the basket. Most of my favorite basketball photos last year were with the 85L on the 1D4, especially when I was in a dark high school gym.

College with lots of light (1D4, 85mm, f/2.2, 1/1600 sec, ISO 2000 )
http://markwebbphoto.com/photojournalism2012/h21ec8f42#h21ec8f42

Darkest high school gym in town (1D4, 85mm, f/1.8, ISO 4000, 1/800 sec, pushed 1 stop)
http://markwebbphoto.com/p225432823/h3ecfc41f#h3ecfc41f

I doubt you'll be shooting many sports with the 35L but I have had relatively good luck tracking the bride coming down the isle with this lens. This lens is great and it really doesn't need an update except for the weather sealing and new coating to reduce CA. The 85L should see more updates for those of us who shoot action because there is so much glass in the lens which slows it down. Not sure what is up with the 50L's AF, I'll wait for 50L II which I hope is as good as the 85L II. With the 50L's bad AF reputation, I would think that Canon would update this lens first. Kudos to those who get good AI servo results with the 50L, anyone mind sharing some??

[bdunbar79]

I have not gotten good AF stability with my 50L.  It is frustrating, because I've shot sports with the 85 f/1.2L II and a 1D4 and still had a great keeper rate.  I don't understand this lens.  It has problems that both the 35L and 85L don't have. 

[Viggo]

I have just about every current AF Canon L prime between 24mm and 300mm. The 35mm f/1.4L and 85mm f/1.2L II are the best for weddings and stay on my cameras as much as possible. I have several friends who have sent their 50mm f/1.2L's back because the autofocus was so inconsistent and it was recommended to me to not purchase that lens so I'm going to pass that recommendation to you. At the moment I just use the 35mm prime and can crop it to around 50mm easily. If I need the extra focal length I just pull out my 85mm f/1.2L II and skip over the 50mm focal length (recommended if you are on full-frame).

I'm anxiously waiting for Canon to come out with a good 50mm lens. This is the weakest focal length in their line up if you ask me.

Also, if the 35mm f/1.4L gets updated with less CA and weather proofing (why does this lens not have this in the first place?) then I'd say the 35mm f/1.4L II is going to be as close to a perfect prime lens as you can get. Image quality is already amazing.

I've been wanting to pull out all of my primes and do a comparison at night time, maybe that can be my next blog entry. Till then here are some samples:

85mm f/1.2L II at f/2.0 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h3401c75e#h3401c75e

35mm f/1.4L at f/2.5 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h2027ab87#h2027ab87

50L is a awesome lens. Am I the only one here who got a good copy? I prefer it over the 35mm for its classic focal length. I suppose ive always been a fan of Henri cartier bressons subtle painting like perspective of the 50mm. No tricks, just a normal view.

The normal view you get isn't about the 50 fov, it's about the compression you get at 50mm. But yeah, I love it too!

I think the 50 L is a great 50, but then again, I agree with what's being said, the Canon 50's suck (compared to 35 and 85)...

MY dream 50 is the same color and contrast and size+build of the current 50 L, but with the 24 L II AF, and the 35 wide open sharpness and way less CA. And get rid of the fact it's useless sharp at mfd, but great at 4 feet and beyond.

[RLPhoto]

I have just about every current AF Canon L prime between 24mm and 300mm. The 35mm f/1.4L and 85mm f/1.2L II are the best for weddings and stay on my cameras as much as possible. I have several friends who have sent their 50mm f/1.2L's back because the autofocus was so inconsistent and it was recommended to me to not purchase that lens so I'm going to pass that recommendation to you. At the moment I just use the 35mm prime and can crop it to around 50mm easily. If I need the extra focal length I just pull out my 85mm f/1.2L II and skip over the 50mm focal length (recommended if you are on full-frame).

I'm anxiously waiting for Canon to come out with a good 50mm lens. This is the weakest focal length in their line up if you ask me.

Also, if the 35mm f/1.4L gets updated with less CA and weather proofing (why does this lens not have this in the first place?) then I'd say the 35mm f/1.4L II is going to be as close to a perfect prime lens as you can get. Image quality is already amazing.

I've been wanting to pull out all of my primes and do a comparison at night time, maybe that can be my next blog entry. Till then here are some samples:

85mm f/1.2L II at f/2.0 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h3401c75e#h3401c75e

35mm f/1.4L at f/2.5 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h2027ab87#h2027ab87

50L is a awesome lens. Am I the only one here who got a good copy? I prefer it over the 35mm for its classic focal length. I suppose ive always been a fan of Henri cartier bressons subtle painting like perspective of the 50mm. No tricks, just a normal view.

The normal view you get isn't about the 50 fov, it's about the compression you get at 50mm. But yeah, I love it too!

I think the 50 L is a great 50, but then again, I agree with what's being said, the Canon 50's suck (compared to 35 and 85)...

MY dream 50 is the same color and contrast and size+build of the current 50 L, but with the 24 L II AF, and the 35 wide open sharpness and way less CA. And get rid of the fact it's useless sharp at mfd, but great at 4 feet and beyond.

I disagree, I like all the canon 50mm's. I've used them all before and all have there strengths and weaknesses. The 50L is my favorite 50mm of all time currently and i've used tons of different 50mms on 35mm and medium format 80mm's.

[Chris Geiger]

As a full time wedding shooter I normally shoot with zooms because I can get the shots fast. I love the look of a 1.2 wide open so I purchased the Canon 50 1.2. During the reception I am now getting some great stuff with it. I keep zoom on one body and the 50 on a second body. Maybe someday I can work toward shooting the reception with a pair of primes like the 35 and the 85. I think I will always stick to zooms for the ceremony.

I'd pay $5,000+ to get a 35-85 f1.4 zoom!

[tt]

Jasmine Star has a great blog entry on her favorite prime lenses for weddings.   (But she loves them all... so it's not going to give you a definite answer.)  Click the link below and scroll down half-way for her lens comments. 

http://www.jasminestarblog.com/index.cfm?m=10&y=2011

I no longer shoot weddings professionally (working started to take the joy out of photography for me).  But - when I shoot weddings and events as favors, I only bring my prime kit (35/50/85/135) - and I always seem to grab the 35 and 85.  Those two deliver stunning results.  The 35 delivers low-light, journalistic shots with a 3D quality - and without a flash (getting ready, the reception).  The 85 delivers magical portraits that no zoom can match.  (The 1.8 and 1.2 are both incredible... I say start with the 1.8 ).  My poor 50 is neglected.   

Hope that helps...

What look do you want? What kind of compression? Then what kind of f stop/bokeh?

Jasmine Star does a nice visual comparison between the 50 and the 35mm -
http://www.jasminestarblog.com/index.cfm?postID=990&review-canon-35mm-1-4

The 50mm 1.2 might get a bad rep on its focus because how many do adjustment, and also take into account what they want to focus on may not be what it sees as nearest thing to focus on.
At 1.2 - like the 85mm, the actual in focus depth is in the millimeters dependent on how far you're focusing out at. I'd imagine on a full frame like the 5D Mark II you could also use the EgS focusing screen to help
 

[Viggo]

I have just about every current AF Canon L prime between 24mm and 300mm. The 35mm f/1.4L and 85mm f/1.2L II are the best for weddings and stay on my cameras as much as possible. I have several friends who have sent their 50mm f/1.2L's back because the autofocus was so inconsistent and it was recommended to me to not purchase that lens so I'm going to pass that recommendation to you. At the moment I just use the 35mm prime and can crop it to around 50mm easily. If I need the extra focal length I just pull out my 85mm f/1.2L II and skip over the 50mm focal length (recommended if you are on full-frame).

I'm anxiously waiting for Canon to come out with a good 50mm lens. This is the weakest focal length in their line up if you ask me.

Also, if the 35mm f/1.4L gets updated with less CA and weather proofing (why does this lens not have this in the first place?) then I'd say the 35mm f/1.4L II is going to be as close to a perfect prime lens as you can get. Image quality is already amazing.

I've been wanting to pull out all of my primes and do a comparison at night time, maybe that can be my next blog entry. Till then here are some samples:

85mm f/1.2L II at f/2.0 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h3401c75e#h3401c75e

35mm f/1.4L at f/2.5 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h2027ab87#h2027ab87

50L is a awesome lens. Am I the only one here who got a good copy? I prefer it over the 35mm for its classic focal length. I suppose ive always been a fan of Henri cartier bressons subtle painting like perspective of the 50mm. No tricks, just a normal view.

The normal view you get isn't about the 50 fov, it's about the compression you get at 50mm. But yeah, I love it too!

I think the 50 L is a great 50, but then again, I agree with what's being said, the Canon 50's suck (compared to 35 and 85)...

MY dream 50 is the same color and contrast and size+build of the current 50 L, but with the 24 L II AF, and the 35 wide open sharpness and way less CA. And get rid of the fact it's useless sharp at mfd, but great at 4 feet and beyond.

I disagree, I like all the canon 50mm's. I've used them all before and all have there strengths and weaknesses. The 50L is my favorite 50mm of all time currently and i've used tons of different 50mms on 35mm and medium format 80mm's.

Yeah well, I really like the 50 L too, but are you saying you're happy with sharpness at all distances and CA control? The focus is sluggish compared to the 85, but that's very slow and way too long focal for most of what I shoot, the 35 is precise and fast, but it lacks all the goodiness in color, contrast bokeh of the 50 L, and of course is wideangle with distortion.

To me the 50 focal is perfect for almost everything I shoot, but it's hard to use when I have both the 35 and 85 which are CLEARLY better IQ, in some ways over the 50.

Why can't they make a 50 that is as good as the 85 L or the 35 or the 24 or the 135 ?!

I don't care if it would cost the same as the 85 or if it was as heavy as the 85. I just want a 50 that can easily match the other L-primes, because all of the others are way better overall. And they should put some effort into the 50 as more and more people using FF and the 50 is such a great focal the 85 and 35 just aren't close too.

[risc32]

This thread has gone bonkers. Did someone just say the 85L is a good deal? The 35L can't really be improved? I really hope that's wrong as the cheap as can be samyang is much better. Are we still talking about the 50L's focus demons? i say get a 50mm1.8 and a 35mmL, and you shouldn't really be taking "portraits" with a 35mm lens. I'll also say that, then turn around and say it doesn't really matter. Your shooting distance matters.

 -oh, and my 300mm2.8IS also had to be sent in for focus issues, and did someone really also recommend a 2k+$ as yet unreleased 24-70mm 2.8?

[bdunbar79]

Viggo, you triggered the comparison I wanted to make.  No sane person would argue that the 50L lens is not better in bokeh and color rendition than the 50 f/1.4.  Afterall, I have the 50L and even stopped down, the colors are very good.  Having said that though, let's look at SHARPNESS ONLY.  And let's look at 3 focal lengths.  For the 35L, it is sharper at f/8 than the 35 f/2.  Okay, so the 35L is a better overall lens.  Now, let's look at the 85L.  The 85L is sharper than the 85 f/1.8 at f/8.  Again, the 85L is a better lens overall.  That leaves the 50L.  The 50L is NOT sharper than the 50 f/1.4 at f/8, in fact, the 1.4 is sharper.  See Bryan Carnathan's Tools/Tests if you don't believe me.  This is why the 50L leaves a lot to be desired.  For maximum sharpness across all apertures, I have to have two 50mm prime lenses, in effect, and that is not so for the 35 and 85mm focal lengths.  Would I get rid of my 50L?  No.  I like it wider than f/2.2.  It's a very, very good night lens too for street shots.  I like the saturation too.  But again, my comparison was center sharpness, which does matter too.

If I were shooting weddings, I would NOT purchase this lens just because I was shooting weddings.  Shoot your shots with the 50L, 50 1.4, load 'em onto your computer and compare.  You'll see no difference at all in IQ at f/2.8 and narrower, which is where I spend all of my time even in wedding photography.  So what would be the point in spending $1499 vs. $369?  If you want the awesome bokeh effects for elsewhere outside of weddings, then yes it is worth it.

[wickidwombat]

I'd pay $5,000+ to get a 35-85 f1.4 zoom!

ditto

L series and weather sealed

I'm not sure if i could bring myself to remove that lens from my camera if it existed
for 5K it would be nice if they included IS too

There is a real market for a lens like this and people who want it would happily pay supertele price if it delivers the goods

[RLPhoto]

Viggo, you triggered the comparison I wanted to make.  No sane person would argue that the 50L lens is not better in bokeh and color rendition than the 50 f/1.4.  Afterall, I have the 50L and even stopped down, the colors are very good.  Having said that though, let's look at SHARPNESS ONLY.  And let's look at 3 focal lengths.  For the 35L, it is sharper at f/8 than the 35 f/2.  Okay, so the 35L is a better overall lens.  Now, let's look at the 85L.  The 85L is sharper than the 85 f/1.8 at f/8.  Again, the 85L is a better lens overall.  That leaves the 50L.  The 50L is NOT sharper than the 50 f/1.4 at f/8, in fact, the 1.4 is sharper.  See Bryan Carnathan's Tools/Tests if you don't believe me.  This is why the 50L leaves a lot to be desired.  For maximum sharpness across all apertures, I have to have two 50mm prime lenses, in effect, and that is not so for the 35 and 85mm focal lengths.  Would I get rid of my 50L?  No.  I like it wider than f/2.2.  It's a very, very good night lens too for street shots.  I like the saturation too.  But again, my comparison was center sharpness, which does matter too.

If I were shooting weddings, I would NOT purchase this lens just because I was shooting weddings.  Shoot your shots with the 50L, 50 1.4, load 'em onto your computer and compare.  You'll see no difference at all in IQ at f/2.8 and narrower, which is where I spend all of my time even in wedding photography.  So what would be the point in spending $1499 vs. $369?  If you want the awesome bokeh effects for elsewhere outside of weddings, then yes it is worth it.

50L has a look to it. Its just AWESOME! Look! This is my change bank on my nightstand but the 50L and window light with a FF camera made it look Great!

Once I took my first 50L shot, I dropped and sold my other 50mm's.

5Dc - ISO 3200 - F1.6 - 1/60th