First look: Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM Image Quality

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,786
966
Southeastern USA
I don’t dislike the onion so much so that I want the 24-70 mk1 over the mk2 even slightly. It’s almost insane to me, lol:ROFLMAO:
I think the comparison was to the f/4 version, not version 1 of the 2.8. But I will tell you, I shot with version 1 throughout Yunnan province, and up in the northeast of China too. It was great in all kinds of weather. But after my wife knocked over the tripod she had it on, well, there was no reason not to upgrade to version 2. :D
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,336
933
I think the comparison was to the f/4 version, not version 1 of the 2.8. But I will tell you, I shot with version 1 throughout Yunnan province, and up in the northeast of China too. It was great in all kinds of weather. But after my wife knocked over the tripod she had it on, well, there was no reason not to upgrade to version 2. :D
Think it was Sporgon who commented on the mk1 vs mk2.(y)
I’ve used the mk1 extensively and always found it soft and full of CA and really sloppy AF, so after owning three copies of it and never liked it I’m not a fan of old lenses. The exception is the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS, while the color and contrast leave a lot to be desired I like what it does. And especially for the dirt cheap prices I’ve bought them for.
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
Think it was Sporgon who commented on the mk1 vs mk2.(y)
I’ve used the mk1 extensively and always found it soft and full of CA and really sloppy AF, so after owning three copies of it and never liked it I’m not a fan of old lenses. The exception is the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS, while the color and contrast leave a lot to be desired I like what it does. And especially for the dirt cheap prices I’ve bought them for.
My comment was tongue-in-cheek. Thought the winking emoticon would suffice. Clearly it didn’t :ROFLMAO:

Actually the problem with the old 24-70 as getting one that was optically set up correctly. That and the field curvature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viggo

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
287
230
Indeed. I think the new EF 400 and 600 L III lenses are a pretty solid statement (at $12 and $13K each, respectively) that EF isn't going to be obsolete any time soon.
As a likely imminent owner of the 400 III with only RF, I have a few thoughts and wishes:
  1. The investment in R&D to develop the IIIs can easily be transferred to an RF variant.
  2. They would overcome hesitation of RF owners like me by offering a dedicated adapter styled (colored) to match the lens and the R body (which the current adapters aren't - if should look like the tail end of an RF lens). For $12k I want to look like my lens goes with the camera.
  3. A dedicated adapter line could be expanded to offer dedicated TC/RF adapters. Presently EF/RF TC/adapters would be welcome.
  4. A new lens (III lightened variant of the 300mm?) could be sold with a removable RF adapter. My patent-pending aspect of this is to make the adapter removable only by an internal switch to prevent demating from the lens when on a camera. Another feature for the adapter would be some special control on the adapter that is useful only to R owners (like viewfinder brightness control, etc.)