5D MARK III with 50 mm f/1.2 performence

[jimy444]

the more i am using my cam the more i am liking the 50mm focal length,
i currently have the 50mm f/1.8, i am using it intensively indoors
my other prime the 135L f/2 is impressive, but unfortunately using it indoors in my current location is limiting me in my framing, i often end up only having head shots...
my question is for the 50mm f1.2 owners, is it worth paying 12 times the price of the 1.8?
i know that i really like this focal length for full body portraits,
would you advise me to do the upgrade knowing that most of my pictures are indoor pictures and that i do not have a flash
I have heard that the 50mm f/1.2 had focus peaking problems
my question is for 5dm III owners please, did you notice a difference when using the 50mm with the 5dmIII compared to the 5dmII?

i used to have the 1.4 but i really didn't like it, most of my images were out of focus and it was real pain to autofocus in the dark... don't know if i had a bad copy of it... but i was using it with the 7d...
any feedback please

 

[Viggo]

Not sure how to determine if a lens is 12 times better, but for me it's absolutely worth it. Twice as much light, weather sealed, fantastic bokeh, color and contrast. Hopeless .AF mounted on a 5d2, can't miss AF no matter what on the 1dx and also seriously much better on the 5d3. Build and handling are superb. Love it.

 

[nightbreath]

Here's an interesting thread about the 50L: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=10798

 

[hbengtsson]

You simply can't compare performance per dollar. Forget about the 1.8. The 50/1.2 is another lens in terms of build, character and performance. And it costs xxx dollars. If you want it, get it.

As for the AF perfomance on the mark 3 compared to mark 2. It is indeed better thanks to the heavily improved AF system on the mark 3. But it still misses sometimes and that is entirely because of the lens/AF motor design. I have not noticed any focus shift on mine. Manufactured in 2011. Canon will never ever confirm it, but I believe they may have improved the design or at least how they put it all together. I've heard many many similar stories. If you plan to buy one, look at the date-code and make sure you get a newer one... Just to be sure.

 

[sandymandy]

my other prime the 135L f/2 is impressive, but unfortunately using it indoors in my current location is limiting me in my framing, i often end up only having head shots...

I think thats the main purpose of owning a 135mm prime, isnt it? For headshots.

 

[RLPhoto]

You may want to read this.

http://ramonlperez.tumblr.com/post/34906285033/fast-prime-shoot-out-pt-2-50mm-1-2l-review

 

[drmikeinpdx]

I would suggest renting one. LensRentals.com has reduced prices this week.

I have found that my 5D III makes all my lenses perform better than they did before due to the more accurate and consistent autofocus compared to my 5D classic. Many of the bad lens reviews you find on the net are due to poor performance of the camera body used.

 

[Crapking]

If you can handle the thin DOF shooting at 1.2 - 2, there should be no buyer's remorse, but perfecting the distance to subject / focus point selection takes some practice. But I love this lens wide open at 10 - 15 feet. Closer distance to subject with wider apertures is a little tricky - depending on how little DOF you can tolerate.

 

[TexPhoto]

If you get one of the f1.2s, you have to go and buy a Rebel, so you can take photos of your lens and make it seem even bigger than it is. Same reason men trim their pub.. public facing home lawns, yea thats what I meant to say.

It's a great lens. If you can afford it, buy it. Renting is also a good idea, just to get that monkey off your back. I've had the 85mm f1.2, and sold it preferring my 50mm f1.4 Sigma, and the extra money in my pocket.

 

[skullyspice]

I just upgraded from a 40D to the 5D3 and noticed a huge difference in the 50 1.2 performance. I really love the lens and feel like I'm finally getting to see its potential. def worth the price.

 

[Stephen Melvin]

I think you'd be better served buying a flash or two. Lenses are fun to buy, but you already have a 50, and you really should get a flash with a moveable head.

 

[jimy444]

thanks all for your comments, thanks also for the poster who suggested some links.

most of the comments suggest that if budget is not an issue, i should be buying it.
most of the comments confirm that the lens works much better with the 5DIII

one more question please, can the 50 f1.2 be compared seriously with the sigma 50 f1.4?

 

[bdunbar79]

As has been beaten to death, the 50L is Canon's sharpest 50mm lens from f/1.2 to f/2. Narrower it is not. The 50 f/1.4 actually gets sharper from about f/2.8 and narrower.

However, sharpness is not everything. If you are going to be shooting a lot wider than f/2.8, then by all means get it. I don't think it is worth the price, but then again, if you are the consumer you know the price going into it.

 

[jimy444]

As has been beaten to death, the 50L is Canon's sharpest 50mm lens from f/1.2 to f/2. Narrower it is not. The 50 f/1.4 actually gets sharper from about f/2.8 and narrower.

However, sharpness is not everything. If you are going to be shooting a lot wider than f/2.8, then by all means get it. I don't think it is worth the price, but then again, if you are the consumer you know the price going into it.

some people are mentioning the Zeiss 50mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar ZE Macro as a replacement for the 50mm 1.2 or the sigma 1.4, any feedbak please?

 

[RLPhoto]

As has been beaten to death, the 50L is Canon's sharpest 50mm lens from f/1.2 to f/2. Narrower it is not. The 50 f/1.4 actually gets sharper from about f/2.8 and narrower.

However, sharpness is not everything. If you are going to be shooting a lot wider than f/2.8, then by all means get it. I don't think it is worth the price, but then again, if you are the consumer you know the price going into it.

some people are mentioning the Zeiss 50mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar ZE Macro as a replacement for the 50mm 1.2 or the sigma 1.4, any feedbak please?

The Zeiss is the sharpest 50mm made but its only F/2 and the bokeh isn't as nice as the 50L.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=727&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=403&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=4

 

[Plato the Wise]

I have the 50L and the 5D III and it is a great combo.

I've never used the 50 1.4, but I have some other non L lenses and the color and contrast are much better on the L lenses. The color, contrast and bokeh on the 50L are very nice...as mentioned before sharpness isn't everything.

This lens is best suited for organic/portrait type work.

 

[Zlatko]

The Zeiss is the sharpest 50mm made but its only F/2 and the bokeh isn't as nice as the 50L.

The Zeiss looks great in The Digital Picture comparison. However, the "sharpest 50mm made" appears to be the current Leica 50mm f/1.4. That lens seems to outperform the best from Canon, Nikon, Sigma and Zeiss — though it costs a bundle and won't work on any DSLR. See the charts in the "Overall Comparison" section of the LensRentals "50mm Shootout" here:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout
And Leica may have surpassed even their own sharpest 50 with their new 50/2 ($7,200), not tested in the LensRentals shootout.

 

[Zlatko]

I have heard that the 50mm f/1.2 had focus peaking problems
my question is for 5dm III owners please, did you notice a difference when using the 50mm with the 5dmIII compared to the 5dmII?

i used to have the 1.4 but i really didn't like it, most of my images were out of focus and it was real pain to autofocus in the dark... don't know if i had a bad copy of it... but i was using it with the 7d...
any feedback please

The 50/1.2L is a sweet lens with a wonderful look. It does not have focus peaking problems (not sure what that is). Its only problem is backfocusing when stopped down to about f/2.8 - f/4 and shooting closeups. This is an inherent fault in many fast lenses that lack a floating element. That problem is easily avoided by shooting closeups with wider apertures (f/1.2 - f/2.5) or smaller aperture (f/5.0 and smaller). And again, it's only an issue for closeups and only at certain apertures, certainly not for full-body shots.

The 50/1.2L seems to focus more accurately on the 5DIII than on the 5DII. Actually, all lenses seem to focus better on the 5DIII than on the 5DII. Of course, accurate focus at very wide apertures (f/1.2 - f/2) still requires extra care.

The Canon 50/1.4 USM is not a bad lens, certainly very sharp stopped down, but my impression is its old autofocus motor design is not as precise as that in newer lenses.

 

[RLPhoto]

The Zeiss is the sharpest 50mm made but its only F/2 and the bokeh isn't as nice as the 50L.

The Zeiss looks great in The Digital Picture comparison. However, the "sharpest 50mm made" appears to be the current Leica 50mm f/1.4. That lens seems to outperform the best from Canon, Nikon, Sigma and Zeiss — though it costs a bundle and won't work on any DSLR. See the charts in the "Overall Comparison" section of the LensRentals "50mm Shootout" here:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout
And Leica may have surpassed even their own sharpest 50 with their new 50/2 ($7,200), not tested in the LensRentals shootout.

Well I assumed that most here would understand in the context of Canon EOS lenses. Afterall the OP didn't ask about leica equipment.

 

[Daniel Flather]

You buy the 50L for its bokeh and build quality. For head shots it's too short IMHO, but its bokeh is what you want. If you have to ask, then the 50/1.8 might be all you want.

My son, born November 14, 2012, 20 hours old, f1.2 @ 1/60, Canon 5D3, funky indoor hospital room lighting.