50mm 1.2L + 24mm 1.4L on crop body?

[sandymandy]

Hi there,

sorry for opening up another thread about the 50mm 1.2L. I searched around a little and didnt find the answer i was looking for.

I got a Rebel body cuz my philosophy always was that one day i will go full frame anyway so i better buy good lenses first, body second. I bought the 1100D cuz it delivers the same image quality like the other crop bodys from canon and thats all what i care for.

So far i just got a 50mm 1.8II and im quite happy with it but i think the bokeh looks really harsh. I never use it smaller than f/2.8.

I was thinking about buying the 50mm 1.2L and i wanna know if that works out on a crop body or if the 1.2L only starts to shine on full frame?

Same applies to the 24mm 1.4L. Makes sense to buy it for my crop body? I like the wider view i can get from it. I dont need a really super wide lens cuz im just doing portraits. And im just a bokeh addict

Oh and i just dont like zooms. I dont know why....even when i was just using a Finepix point and shoot and had no ideas about rule of thirds n stuff.....i always refused to use the zoom on it. Just dont like it.

So my basic question: L Lenses make sense on a crop body?

p.s.

i dont mind it probably gonna balance out badly with the 1100D. Im just a hobbyist. Dont HAVE TO carry my camera all day. Well and im not so weak

Hope somebody here got a crop body and the named lenses and can give me some more insight.

Maybe even sample pictures?! Would be much appreciated.

 

[Random Orbits]

Yes, L lenses make sense on a crop body. What you get is better IQ, build quality, consistent AF, and weather resistence, but it costs you money, size and weight.

I've used the 50L and 24L II on my crop body and FF, and they work great. Increased control over DOF/OOF blur is big reason why people choose prime over zooms. That said, the DOF/OOF gets a bigger effect when you move to full frame, but lenses retain their value much better than bodies.

 

[albron00]

You should look closer to EF 35mm L 1.4
Excellent lens!

 

[hendrik-sg]

a 1100D with 24Lii and 50L may be overkill for the prinzip of bigger importance on good glas.

With about the same budget you could buy a 5D2 + 35 2.0 + 85 1.8 and keep the 50 1.8

This gives you the same perspective, similar shallow DoF and the same light gattering possibility. The %d2 has a much better ISO performance, so cou can shoot one stop more ISO with same noise

 

[sandymandy]

Well i would just buy one lens first. Im not rich like that . At the moment i cant even afford one but i just wanna know for the future. 35mm 1.4L hmmmmmmmm

 

[bdunbar79]

a 1100D with 24Lii and 50L may be overkill for the prinzip of bigger importance on good glas.

With about the same budget you could buy a 5D2 + 35 2.0 + 85 1.8 and keep the 50 1.8

This gives you the same perspective, similar shallow DoF and the same light gattering possibility. The %d2 has a much better ISO performance, so cou can shoot one stop more ISO with same noise

Definitely wouldn't recommend the 35 f/2 on a FF camera. 85 1.8 and 50 1.8 a full go!

 

[Daniel Flather]

Buy a full frame camera first, then the lenses. What other lenses do you currently own? I used the 50 1.2 and 35 1.4 on a 50d for a few years. I much prefer them on ff. I shoot wide open, so ff allows shallower dof. The extra cost of the fast lenses (not that that is the only reason they cost more) is lost on a crop.

You should look closer to EF 35mm L 1.4
Excellent lens!

+1

 

[Daniel Flather]

Also, putting the 24L on a crop is a shame. That lens is awesome in every aspect, and its magic would be killed on a crop. After going from a crop to a full frame, I really believe if you buy L lenses you should really go to a 5 or 1 Series.

 

[sandymandy]

I only got the 50mm 1.8 II. Perhaps i will just buy the 35mm f/2.0 (is it any good?) and then leave it like that until i buy a fullframe camera. I dont need a tele lens.

I just wonder if Canon will release another fullframe body. The 5D Mark 3 is waaay more expensive than the 5D MK 2. Nearly 1500 Euro difference. And its a difference for me to save up money like that. Was the 5D mk2 also that damn expensive when it was released?! Im not going fullframe soon, so im 99,9% sure mk2 will be sold out everywhere when i wanna upgrade.

 

[RLPhoto]

Both lenses are superb on crop. I use both alot on my 7D because I may need alittle extra reach so my 50mm 1.2L becomes a 85mm, which is a awesome portrait length.

The 24mm becomes a 35mm which is awesome if you need alittle wider than the 50mm on FF but not too wide like 24mm on FF.

Its a great combo if you have both FF and a Crop camera. Use those two to complement each other alot.

 

[Dylan777]

You almost can't go wrong with L prime lenses - crop or FF.

 

[briansquibb]

You almost can't go wrong with L prime lenses - crop or FF.

I agree - the TS-E24 is great on the 7D

Musn't forget that L lens were designed to be good on 1.3 crop bodies .....

 

[IIIHobbs]

The 50 1.2 and the 24 1.4 are both excellent lenses.
Based on your self-assessment as hobbyist, you may find the results just as satisfying with the 50 1.4 and 24 2.8 on your current bodies at a significantly lower price of admission.
If you are thinking of a full frame, maybe now is the time to make the move. You will need an 85mm however to give you the focal length you are accustom to shooting with the 50 on the crop.

Canon 40D w/ 50mm 1.2 1/1000@f4

 

[Jettatore]

If you have the 50 f/1.8 and it's still working, and that's all you have, then don't get 50 f/1.2 as your next lens... If you need to alter bokeh on your f/1.8 you can probably smooth it out a bit it post using a feathered selection and a touch of Gaussian blur. That said, my L lenses all work great on my crop body, you just end up cropping out large areas of what the glass can do and in most cases this isn't ideal.

I'd agree with the advice of switching to a full frame first if your intent is to spend thousands on a collection of super high-end primes. For a long while I thought the versatility of Crop + FF sounded great on paper as your lenses do different things on both, so long as your Crop bodies resolution is equal or greater than your FF's res... I don't think I'll ever buy a crop body again, they are best suited for Telephoto and Macro and even still I suspect that the same images taken on a full frame will have much more character. With a 5DIII, I suspect I would have no personal qualms about heavily cropping any image to sorta/somewhat match a crop and still have a fine, printable image.

I have an old used 5D classic and a 7D. The 5D I have can't do video, while the 7D can, and the 7D's resolution is greater than the 5Dc so there is no realistic way to crop a 5Dc image anything close to a straight 7D shot and still have the same detail/resolution in place. It gives me a backup having both but to be honest I wouldn't re-buy the crop if I could do it over, I would however get the 5Dc again in a heartbeat but the price of a used 5Dc was not reasonable back when I bought the 7D and I was at the time more concerned with video until I fell in love with stills. Unless you are doing a lot of f/8-f/16+ shots with a large DOF you are losing a ton of built in character on a crop body, and to me it's an utter waste and a big dent in your photography.

In a year or two if work treats me decently I'll probably upgrade to a 5DIII, the camera hit about 99.9% of everything I wanted it to be, and if I could afford it (fat chance), I'd seriously consider switching to Lieca after thorough test driving, it appears to suit my style better for photo only purposes, I've looked into just about every other system in the same range, and nothing else does it for me.

 

[Daniel Flather]

Both lenses are superb on crop. I use both alot on my 7D because I may need alittle extra reach so my 50mm 1.2L becomes a 85mm, which is a awesome portrait length.

Remember, a 50mm lens on a 1.6 might be about 85mm, but you still have the 50mm perspective.

 

[RLPhoto]

Both lenses are superb on crop. I use both alot on my 7D because I may need alittle extra reach so my 50mm 1.2L becomes a 85mm, which is a awesome portrait length.

Remember, a 50mm lens on a 1.6 might be about 85mm, but you still have the 50mm perspective.

Never the less, crop gives me what I need when I need it. It does a fine job at it also.

 

[wickidwombat]

actually its 80mm

 

[nightbreath]

Remember, a 50mm lens on a 1.6 might be about 85mm, but you still have the 50mm perspective.

What the heck are you talking about? What's might be a 85mm but have 50mm perspective?

That's the biggest mis-concept ppl have been stating over and over again.

focal length and frame size determines angle of view. Angle of view AND position determines framing. Position alone determines perspective.

Putting a 50 on crop, putting a 85 (approx) on FF, stand at the same position, frame the same picture, the perspective are exactly the same.

Conclusion? 50mm on crop will have 85mm equivalent angle of view as on FF, and will have 85mm equivalent perspective as on FF.

I believe that "compression" is what was meant there. Yes, you can compose approximately the same frame with crop + 50mm and fullframe + 85mm, but with 85mm distant objects will be 1.6 times closer than with 50mm.

 

[sandymandy]

In a year or two if work treats me decently I'll probably upgrade to a 5DIII, the camera hit about 99.9% of everything I wanted it to be, and if I could afford it (fat chance), I'd seriously consider switching to Lieca after thorough test driving, it appears to suit my style better for photo only purposes, I've looked into just about every other system in the same range, and nothing else does it for me.

Yeah i also wish i had a Leica. M9 monochrome to be exact Its just too damn expensive for me. Probably I could save for a M9 Body but oh well then i gotta pay the same price or even more for a lens

Well my conclusion is....no changes in the near future.

35mm f/2.0 lens is any good? Probably the only other lens i will buy before going fullframe. Just remember i like to shoot at wide open usually. Maybe 35mm 1.4L makes more sense?

 

[koolman]

Sandy:

I have experienced the same dilemma. I have a t2i - but lusted for quality glass.

True, by using a FF lens on a crop you are "wasting" the sides of the lens. On the other hand you are utilizing the "sweet spot" of the center of the lens. The newer crops such as the t2i, 60d, 7d have awesome resolution, and you will easily see the difference between L glass and consumer glass.

In your post you asked about the 24L and the 50L. Again theoretically you are "wasting" the whole idea of the 24L as being a wide angle on a FF, and are "only" getting a 38mm lens. On the other hand, 38mm is a nice walk around focal length, and the 24L can work as that.

The 50L could work as an awesome portrait lens, with the working distance of an 85mm on FF.

In short, you could benefit from the L glass as far as IQ. If you want to spend the money.

I personally have the 35L on my crop, and the IQ is awesome, much better then say the 35f/2 which I also have.