Which possible f/1.2 Primes would be practical for you?

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,150
1,710
Irving, Texas
With Canon seeming to be developing a line of f/1.2 primes I have to wonder which would be practical for my use. I can see a 35, 50, 85, and even a 100 f/1.2L prime being practical for what I do (portraits). I don't know that a 28 or 24 would be practical for portraits, but I could be very wrong. Even 35mm pushes the boundaries for me.

So what would be appealing for you and what you do? Also, how many of you shoot portraits at 28 or 24mm? Group shots come to mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
572
545
I'd really like a 1,2/100 mm IS macro or close-up RF lens (though I probably couldn't afford it).
When shooting "portraits", I tend to use longer (200 mm +) lenses.
And: a 1,2/28 mm would be fine too...
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,650
462
Germany
I'm totally in love with the 70 to 100 m portrait range.
So give me a good 85/whatever and i am happy.

If a 85/1.2 turns out ot be that big and expensive please give me a 85/1.8 for a reasonable price and I'd be happy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
514
304
I'd really like a 1,2/100 mm IS macro or close-up RF lens (though I probably couldn't afford it).
When shooting "portraits", I tend to use longer (200 mm +) lenses.
And: a 1,2/28 mm would be fine too...
I rented a Sigma 105mm f/1.4 last week and I found it way too heavy to be practical for my type of backyard macro work. So if you are used to tripods or don't have such weak arms as I have, it might work :)
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
572
545
I rented a Sigma 105mm f/1.4 last week and I found it way too heavy to be practical for my type of backyard macro work. So if you are used to tripods or don't have such weak arms as I have, it might work :)
My wife is strong...;)
 

Kit Lens Jockey

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 12, 2016
541
197

Kit Lens Jockey

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 12, 2016
541
197
To the original poster, you seem to be under the impression that the only use for a wide aperture prime is for portraits. I mostly just use them because I take a lot of photos in very poor light where I need a lens that will pull in as much light as possible. So wide angle wide aperture lenses are still very useful to me. I have a 24mm 1.4L II and I use it pretty frequently. I would probably use a 35mm fast prime if I had one of those too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,150
1,710
Irving, Texas
To the original poster, you seem to be under the impression that the only use for a wide aperture prime is for portraits. I mostly just use them because I take a lot of photos in very poor light where I need a lens that will pull in as much light as possible. So wide angle wide aperture lenses are still very useful to me. I have a 24mm 1.4L II and I use it pretty frequently. I would probably use a 35mm fast prime if I had one of those too.
I am aware there are many uses for wide primes other than portraits. Portraits are the majority I do, however, I am interested in what others might use them for. I am sure the astro folks have a strong interest in them.
 

Kit Lens Jockey

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 12, 2016
541
197
Do the astro people really like super-fast primes? I thought most of them have a little too much COMA wide open for star photos. And most of them, except the crazy Sigma 14mm f1.8, aren't wide enough angle for most astro stuff I would think.

Anyway, as far as what to do with your primes other than portraits... The world is yer oyster is all I can really tell ya. There's a lot out there other than portraits. Like I said I mainly use my primes for their ability to shoot in low light. But the nice shallow DOF is a nice perk too. These were both with my 24mm f1.4, at 1.4.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,150
1,710
Irving, Texas
Do the astro people really like super-fast primes? I thought most of them have a little too much COMA wide open for star photos. And most of them, except the crazy Sigma 14mm f1.8, aren't wide enough angle for most astro stuff I would think.

Anyway, as far as what to do with your primes other than portraits... The world is yer oyster is all I can really tell ya. There's a lot out there other than portraits. Like I said I mainly use my primes for their ability to shoot in low light. But the nice shallow DOF is a nice perk too. These were both with my 24mm f1.4, at 1.4.
From what I understand, many astro photographers stitch their photos, so maybe corner coma isn't such a concern many times? However, that's not my forte, just a quick guess. I used to have the Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 (not a prime) that performed very well coma wise. However, I found it too slow since I don't own any tracking gear.

Regardless, the question was, "Which f/1.2 primes would be practical for you?" And, "So what would be appealing for you and what you do? " Thanks for your answer.

I think a 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and a fast 135mm would do me just fine for what I do nearly 100% of the time, and for things you do too. I especially like your photo of the singer. I have a weakness for black and white photos.
 

navastronia

EOS RP + 5D Classic
Aug 31, 2018
230
243
I shoot portraits and events with the Sigma 35/1.4 and the Canon 85/1.8. For architecture/landscape and some extreme portraits, I just last month added the Samyang 14/2.8 to my kit. I would like to have the Canon 200/2.8 for use shooting outdoor theatre performances, but it isn't a priority at this time (though I probably couldn't say no if I found one in good shape for less than $450).

To be honest, I think (hope) shooting with the 35 and 85 is slowly improving my photography. It makes me extremely uncomfortable in some situations to not have a 50 in the middle or be able to go wider (down to 24), but being that uncomfortable makes me work very hard to see shots more clearly and then hustle to get them.

I got an RP the week before last and am now enjoying a host of bewildering shooting options (ISO above 3200! Yowza!). I don't expect I will buy an RF glass for a long while since the RP doesn't necessitate it, IMO. I'll certainly replace any of my gear if it breaks, but I'm satisfied with my mid/low end equipment for now. I could really use more lights and lighting gear for OCF, something I know just enough about to feel that I actually know relatively nothing :cool:

Cat photo (of course) from a walk I went on this evening around dusk, getting used to the RP + 35/1.4 combo.

EDIT: to answer your question (ha!)

RF 35 1.2 and RF 85 1.2, assuming those focal lengths haven't totally worn out my patience by the time I can afford them.

20191121_rp photo walk_IMG_0132.jpg
 
  • Love
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,028
120
I'd say the two that are already out - the 50 1.2 and 85 1.2

Not really a fan of anything wider than 50mm for portraits, but I've made it work before.

However, I'm finding that 35mm is nice for general walkaround use (and also happens to be just wide enough for "selfie" style pics with one other person on flip screen cameras - ha).
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,150
1,710
Irving, Texas
I shoot portraits and events with the Sigma 35/1.4 and the Canon 85/1.8. For architecture/landscape and some extreme portraits, I just last month added the Samyang 14/2.8 to my kit. I would like to have the Canon 200/2.8 for use shooting outdoor theatre performances, but it isn't a priority at this time (though I probably couldn't say no if I found one in good shape for less than $450).

To be honest, I think (hope) shooting with the 35 and 85 is slowly improving my photography. It makes me extremely uncomfortable in some situations to not have a 50 in the middle or be able to go wider (down to 24), but being that uncomfortable makes me work very hard to see shots more clearly and then hustle to get them.

I got an RP the week before last and am now enjoying a host of bewildering shooting options (ISO above 3200! Yowza!). I don't expect I will buy an RF glass for a long while since the RP doesn't necessitate it, IMO. I'll certainly replace any of my gear if it breaks, but I'm satisfied with my mid/low end equipment for now. I could really use more lights and lighting gear for OCF, something I know just enough about to feel that I actually know relatively nothing :cool:

Cat photo (of course) from a walk I went on this evening around dusk, getting used to the RP + 35/1.4 combo.

EDIT: to answer your question (ha!)

RF 35 1.2 and RF 85 1.2, assuming those focal lengths haven't totally worn out my patience by the time I can afford them.

View attachment 187587
Great shot! It looks to me like your lens/camera combo are fantastic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia