Canon 50 F1.4 VS 50 F1.2L Lenses

[Secretariat]

How do the Canon 50 F1.4 and 50 F1.2L lenses compare to each other?Which has a better IQ and sharper?Which has better contrast and color rendering?Which focusses faster?And lastly,if the 50 F1.2L is better,would it be worth getting it over the 50 F1.4?

Thanks.

[bdunbar79]

50 f/1.2L is sharper from f/1.2 to about f/2.0.  From f/2.8 and beyond, the 50 f/1.4 lens is sharper.  By f/8 it's noticeably sharper in your photos.  The 50 f/1.4 focuses faster.  I own both and am selling the 50L and keeping the 1.4.  Then again, I'm getting a 24-70L II as well.

The 50L wider than 2.8 is amazing, but if you're up close to your subject DOF becomes a technique issue.  It is better constructed as well.  Overall, it's the most disappointing L lens I own.  It just doesn't do better than even the nifty fifty narrower than f/4 or so.

The only reason you'd buy it is if you need to shoot a lot of f/1.2 to f/2.  I don't anymore, so I'm selling.  If you shoot at f/1.8 let's say, it is truly amazing and the bokeh approaches that of the 85 f/1.2L II.

[pwp]

I have had both, but now have the pick of the bunch, a Sigma 50 f/1.4.

Read up on this lens. No it's not 10/10 perfect score perfect, but in my experience it's one of the few non-Canon aftermarket lenses than really stands out from the crowd. Same goes for the Sigma 85.

I'm generally not one for aftermarket non genuine hardware, but the Sigma 50 was too hard to ignore.

-PW

[wickidwombat]

I have had both, but now have the pick of the bunch, a Sigma 50 f/1.4.

Read up on this lens. No it's not 10/10 perfect score perfect, but in my experience it's one of the few non-Canon aftermarket lenses than really stands out from the crowd. Same goes for the Sigma 85.

I'm generally not one for aftermarket non genuine hardware, but the Sigma 50 was too hard to ignore.

-PW

same here i got the 85 first and it was so damn good i just had to try out the sigma 50 too i have the new version sigma 50 not the old one with crinkly paint

[nicku]

I don't own a 50L but i have a 50 1.4... very sharp even at 1.8 ( on a crop frame sensor) on FF is even sharper

the 50 f/1.4 is an older design.... so you need to do some micro adjustment using in camera AFMA to get the maximum out of that lens.

[Stefan]

I dont have the 1.2 but I do have the 1.4 and it is hands down my favorite lens. I have had it for about 6-7 years with no issues. The focus is reasonable fast, I would say on-par with other L lenses that I own (70-200 2.8 IS, 17-40L). I have used it on both crop (20D) and full frame (5D3) and quality is surprisingly sharp at 1.8 and above. I normally shoot at around 1.8 or 2.0, I sometimes go all the way to 1.4 and you can tell its not as sharp as you'd like it to be but its still very much usable.

I can post a couple of sample photos if you like (let me know).

[bdunbar79]

I did this dusk shot in June of a passing coal train with the coal dust blowing across the field.  This was with the 1.4 on a 5D Mark III.

[dswatson83]

The 50 1.4 has some issues. The sharpness is good, especially from f/2.0 on, but the focusing is slow and sometimes not on. Probably due to the fact that this is an older design and does not have a USM motor on it. Thus, it is fairly slow. That said, your only other option is the Sigma 50 or the overly expensive Canon 50L. For the price, the 50 1.4 is not bad, other than the focusing.

[bdunbar79]

The 50 1.4 has some issues. The sharpness is good, especially from f/2.0 on, but the focusing is slow and sometimes not on. Probably due to the fact that this is an older design and does not have a USM motor on it. Thus, it is fairly slow. That said, your only other option is the Sigma 50 or the overly expensive Canon 50L. For the price, the 50 1.4 is not bad, other than the focusing.

Hmm.  I have not noticed this problem with mine on the 5D Mark III.  I use it a ton and it focuses really fast.  The 50L is slower.

[cliffwang]

I have had both, but now have the pick of the bunch, a Sigma 50 f/1.4.

Read up on this lens. No it's not 10/10 perfect score perfect, but in my experience it's one of the few non-Canon aftermarket lenses than really stands out from the crowd. Same goes for the Sigma 85.

I'm generally not one for aftermarket non genuine hardware, but the Sigma 50 was too hard to ignore.

-PW

I haven't use 50mm F/1.2, so I cannot tell how is the 50mm F/1.2.  However, I had both Canon 50mm F/1.4 and Sigma 50mm F/1.4.  I end up to keep Sigma 50mm F/1.4.  The IQ and the bokeh of Sigma 50mm F/1.4 is better than Canon 50mm F/1.4.  The only problem is the focus issue.  I have to do +17 MA for this lens.  Sigma lenses are not good for camera without AFMA feature.

[DB]

I got rid of my Canon 50mm f/1.4 was too noisy and slow to AF. The Sigma sounds interesting but at 2x the weight and almost 2x the price it had better be a lot better than the Canon equivalent.

[RLPhoto]

The 50L is the sharpest 50mm from 1.2-2.8. After that the 1.4 is better but yes, once I bought the 50L I never wanted anything else.

Its AF was slightly faster than the 1.4 IMO, and hit better.

[pwp]

I did this dusk shot in June of a passing coal train with the coal dust blowing across the field.  This was with the 1.4 on a 5D Mark III.

Damn! I sure wouldn't want to be living downwind from the rail line! Most places on the planet legislate that coal must be drenched before being freighted in open rail-cars. But like smoke, smog, fog and dust storms, coal dust can be the photographers friend. Nice shot.

-PW

[CharlieB]

MY 50/1.4 is very old... from the EOS-5 days - mid 90's era.

Never had a focusing issue - the key there is to not stress the part of the lens that carries the glass, the part that moves in-out as it focuses.  The hood on - all the time - does that, so mine still does ok.

The focusing repeatability on the 9 focus point cameras.... is so-so.    At f/1.4 its hit and miss.  I've tried others, and they're the same.  You can set up the tests, shoot checkerboards, do all the jumping thru hoops... its hit or miss.  At close distances, say under 10 feet or so, avoid shooting at less than f/2.8 if you can.   Now that really sucks for me.  I'm used to shooting Leica, and with my M4's or M6TTL - you focus on an eye, and the eye is in focus, assuming nobody moved.  I love shallow DOF, and rarely shoot a Leica stopped down much at all.

Which leads to.... some hardware is better suited than others for certain purposes.  You want to shoot close and wide open at f/1.4 or f/2.0 all the time... and have corner to corner sharp (which the Canon 50/1.4 doesn't do until about f/4.5 or so), then you choose the equipment that will do it best.

There will be an M9 in my bag very soon.  Can't sell all the film Leicas, but... gotta keep one, maybe the M4-2 since I'll get the least for it. 

[TexPhoto]

The 50L is the sharpest 50mm from 1.2-2.8. After that the 1.4 is better but yes, once I bought the 50L I never wanted anything else.

Its AF was slightly faster than the 1.4 IMO, and hit better.

2X the price?  Where are you shopping.  I got mine new for < $400, love it.
Here's a short video shot with it:

Monster Bokeh	Small | Large