50mm.. Upgrade or not?
- Thread starter iSy
- Start date
- Status
Sold my 1.2 and returned to the 1.4. 1.2 had terrible CA and was very soft. I am desperately awaiting a new 50 from canon or Sigma.
Upvote
0
Finally. Someone who shares my same sentiment. I have posted regularly in support of the 50L before but got tired of the rhetoric by one too many pixel peepers. I too use the 50L professionally. It is the lens I use the most on assignments as well as the lens I always take when I am traveling. It is nothing short of stellar. If you're seriously considering this lens, do the research yourself and you will find many happy users, most of which I can say are out shooting and not spending time bitching on forums.
Upvote
0
Standard said:
Awesome. The only problem is, is that the OP is asking for advice based upon his current gear. If he didn't already have the f/1.4 and the 24-70L II, then it would be different. But since he already has those two lenses, he's thinking by spending a ton of money on the 50L that he's getting better gear and or IQ, only to find out later, he's not.
Upvote
0
me <-- no, i can live with my 50mm f/1.4 to save money. all images that i have recently posted on his forum was shooting from my everyday test equipments canon 30d and 50mm f/1.4 (http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6019.150).
note: i am waiting for new 50mm with IS
note: i am waiting for new 50mm with IS
Upvote
0
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
+1
My thoughts EXACTLY. (Thanks, TWI for making my contribution so simple as a +1 and this line). I'm waiting to see what Canon (& other lens manufacturers) will put out in the next 12 to 18 months re: 50mm primes. A Canon 50mm IS USM lens would be great, or a Sigma 50mm 'A' - if either were f/1.4 - f/2
Upvote
0
>Awesome. The only problem is, is that the OP is asking for advice based upon his current gear. If he didn't
>already have the f/1.4 and the 24-70L II, then it would be different. But since he already has those two lenses,
>he's thinking by spending a ton of money on the 50L that he's getting better gear and or IQ, only to find out
>later, he's not.
I totally second that. If he hasn't already the 50mm 1.4, I would suggest to try the 50 1.2, but with the 50mm 1.4
I think there will be no "wow"-effect with a 50mm 1.2.
@V_Raptor
I agree with you. If I would earn my money with it, the weathersealing would be a killerfeature, but I don't.
I just said that you get a less sharper lense from f1.4 to f2.5, what should be the aperture-range why I would
spend a grand more. On my 85 1.8 the update to the f1.2 was a immense difference, upon a already fantastic
85mm lense. I could pray on the 50 1.2, too, for the nice bokeh and build... but at the end. I don't think it's
worth it. The 50mm f1.0 is an even more fascinating lense everyone wants to hold in his hands... but this is
even less sharp. At the moment I don't have any 50mm lense left, because the range is too boring for me.
That's a punch in a face of classic artists, but I'm more addicted to 35mm.
I think Canon should make a 50mm 1.2 II with the specs of the 85mm 1.2 and everyony will hold still a moment,
bend down to their knees and buy it again.
>already have the f/1.4 and the 24-70L II, then it would be different. But since he already has those two lenses,
>he's thinking by spending a ton of money on the 50L that he's getting better gear and or IQ, only to find out
>later, he's not.
I totally second that. If he hasn't already the 50mm 1.4, I would suggest to try the 50 1.2, but with the 50mm 1.4
I think there will be no "wow"-effect with a 50mm 1.2.
@V_Raptor
I agree with you. If I would earn my money with it, the weathersealing would be a killerfeature, but I don't.
I just said that you get a less sharper lense from f1.4 to f2.5, what should be the aperture-range why I would
spend a grand more. On my 85 1.8 the update to the f1.2 was a immense difference, upon a already fantastic
85mm lense. I could pray on the 50 1.2, too, for the nice bokeh and build... but at the end. I don't think it's
worth it. The 50mm f1.0 is an even more fascinating lense everyone wants to hold in his hands... but this is
even less sharp. At the moment I don't have any 50mm lense left, because the range is too boring for me.
That's a punch in a face of classic artists, but I'm more addicted to 35mm.
I think Canon should make a 50mm 1.2 II with the specs of the 85mm 1.2 and everyony will hold still a moment,
bend down to their knees and buy it again.
Upvote
0
Some great points made, which has pretty much made my decision....
I think I will stick with the 1.4 for now and see what happens with the 50 range in the next 12 months. Although, I am now tempted by the 35L again, as from all the reviews I read its way better than the 50L so this introduces another question... Is the 35L a worthwhile investment when I have the 24-70II, I would only be shooting it at 1.4-1.8 if I had one so I guess its down to if its good enough to make me wanna use it over the 24-70II for bokeh shots.
Does anyone else find that when you have money to buy gear you just cant find the right gear? lol
I think I will stick with the 1.4 for now and see what happens with the 50 range in the next 12 months. Although, I am now tempted by the 35L again, as from all the reviews I read its way better than the 50L so this introduces another question... Is the 35L a worthwhile investment when I have the 24-70II, I would only be shooting it at 1.4-1.8 if I had one so I guess its down to if its good enough to make me wanna use it over the 24-70II for bokeh shots.
Does anyone else find that when you have money to buy gear you just cant find the right gear? lol
Upvote
0
Just been looking at the Sigma 35 and it does look rather impressive and very sharp, and a good price! hmm..
Upvote
0
iSy said:
Yes, I wanted Canon to make a cheap 35 1.4 non L without IS and also a mid priced updataed 50 1.4 non L but neither of these materialized. The Sigma has been on my radar for a while. Just waiting for Canon to do something.
35 is the new 50 my friend, especially if you have a crop body
Upvote
0
Nothing new to add. I've done it and kept the 1.4 around for a while. Yes, the 1.4 can be sharper in the f/2 to f/4 area. I still never used it again even though it is and remains a very fine lens optically.
Both have flaws so you pick your poison - and there really isn't an alternative out there that wouldn't have a flaw. Until there is something even better the 50L remains my go to lens. Anyone who likes good "bokeh" and any kind of people photography should look at this as an option. Where it occasionally may fall short with respect to sharpness under certain circumstances (a bit blown out of proportion in my opinion) it kills when it comes to colors and contrast. It's the perfect complement to my 135L. YMMV.
Both have flaws so you pick your poison - and there really isn't an alternative out there that wouldn't have a flaw. Until there is something even better the 50L remains my go to lens. Anyone who likes good "bokeh" and any kind of people photography should look at this as an option. Where it occasionally may fall short with respect to sharpness under certain circumstances (a bit blown out of proportion in my opinion) it kills when it comes to colors and contrast. It's the perfect complement to my 135L. YMMV.
Upvote
0
After a few hours of internet research I have decided to get the Sigma 35 f1.4 DG HSM :O
I may sell my 50 1.4 as I do feel with the 35 & 24-70II it wont see much use if the S35 is as good as what I am reading as I only really need one fast lens as the rest is covered between to the two 2.8 zooms.
I may look at a 50 if Canon decide to upgrade the L or the 1.4 although I have say looking at a fair amount of wedding photographers work, inc. my own I am finding that 35 / 85 & 135 is the main focal range and I feel the 70-200 covers the tele ends well enough whilst the 24-70II covers the wide with the S35 to give me the bokeh I cant see I will need it?
Thanks again for all the comments though, its been a interesting find and I for one never thought I would consider a non-canon lens, fingers crossed the QC has improved
I may sell my 50 1.4 as I do feel with the 35 & 24-70II it wont see much use if the S35 is as good as what I am reading as I only really need one fast lens as the rest is covered between to the two 2.8 zooms.
I may look at a 50 if Canon decide to upgrade the L or the 1.4 although I have say looking at a fair amount of wedding photographers work, inc. my own I am finding that 35 / 85 & 135 is the main focal range and I feel the 70-200 covers the tele ends well enough whilst the 24-70II covers the wide with the S35 to give me the bokeh I cant see I will need it?
Thanks again for all the comments though, its been a interesting find and I for one never thought I would consider a non-canon lens, fingers crossed the QC has improved
Upvote
0
iSy said:
Exactly what I did after I waited months for a new 50 1.4 from Canon. I first bought the 50 1.2L and it was a nice lens, heavy, weather sealed, just felt right, but the shots weren't satisfying below 2.0. The old 50 1.4 which I owned before won't come back into my bag cause its just such an old piece of plastic and also not the greatest performance at 1.4, at least not even close to what the new Sigma 35mm 1.4 can produce. So, I sold the 50L again and bought the Sigma 35 1.4 and if you get a decent copy with no focus problems then this is what should be the standard for 1.4! Incredibly sharp.
Upvote
0
First samples from Sigma 35 f1.4 DG HSM
All unedited RAW files..
5D3 - f1.4 - 1/100 - ISO 200 - Handheld focus on closest eye (My 2.5yr old daughter watching TV)
5D3 - f1.4 - 1/100 - ISO 200 - Handheld focus on eyes (My 2.5yr old daughter in kitchen)
I am very impressed, the focus and sharpness is spot on, and I would say I had a good 85% hit rate and when shooting at f1.4 I am more then happy with that.
Comments welcome.
All unedited RAW files..
5D3 - f1.4 - 1/100 - ISO 200 - Handheld focus on closest eye (My 2.5yr old daughter watching TV)
5D3 - f1.4 - 1/100 - ISO 200 - Handheld focus on eyes (My 2.5yr old daughter in kitchen)
I am very impressed, the focus and sharpness is spot on, and I would say I had a good 85% hit rate and when shooting at f1.4 I am more then happy with that.
Comments welcome.
Upvote
0
All of these lenses have good resale value. Just buy and use (or rent) if you aren't sure. If you buy one and it doesn't work out... just sell it and get something else. If you are replacing an existing focal length (e.g., 50 f/1.4 vs 50L), keep your original lens until you KNOW you will be happy with the new one.
Case in point... I got the 85L. It is an amazing lens. But, a year later, I am looking for something more video-friendly. Fortunately, I still have my 85mm f/1.8 to cover me until I find something better. Shameless plug: my 85L is up on ebay right now... ;-)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/140981188345
Case in point... I got the 85L. It is an amazing lens. But, a year later, I am looking for something more video-friendly. Fortunately, I still have my 85mm f/1.8 to cover me until I find something better. Shameless plug: my 85L is up on ebay right now... ;-)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/140981188345
Upvote
0
- Status
