Battle of the 50mm's - 1.8, 1.4 and 1.2L

  • Thread starter Thread starter scottsdaleriots
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a "Soligor" 500 f 8 mirror and a "Cambron" 500 f8 (non-mirror) - both are t mount, one has a thin T to pentax M42 adapter (which goes into a M42 to canon ef with af beep when in focus circuit) while the other has a thicker T to canon EF which is much stronger for the 500mm lens's weight (but I can switch them. One thing about pentax mount and t mount lenses - certain sizes like 40 f 6.3, 500 f 8, etc. had ONE manufacturer that would change the silkscreened bands with the numbers - depth of field and distance, and the name ring in the front - by the vendor (Vivitar, Soligor, Cambron, Spiratone, Kenko, etc; 20,to 30 different names but only 1 manufacturer (like tamron, Tokina, Olympus, Cosina, Kiron, Ozone Optical, Komine, Makinon, Asanuma, Bauer, Perkin Elmer, Chinon, Hoya, Polar and more so the name isn't important - the bigger manufacturers like Nikon, Canon, Asahi (Pentax) Mamiya, Tomioka (Yashica), Minolta etc. had their own factories), the mirrors pretty much the same but some of the main camera makers did not do mirrors - they bought someone else's too. Not sure if Nikon ever made a mirror or it was outside manufacturer but likely - they were not as big as canon (only Mamiya was as big because they made every type of camera: from press graphic, through 8 x 10, 4 x 5, 6 x 7, 6 x 45, 35mm, 16mm, 8mm - everything buy 126) - Nikon probably didn't have the bucks to make mirror lenses

One difference is a mirror has a fixed aperture - F 8 while the long lens is F - to F 22 so you can ne a bit creative and in very good light go for more depth of field (note that when you add a "tele-extender to go 2 x 500 or 3 x 500 it also muktiplies the f stop by the same factor, stealing your light), another is that the generic lenses are mostly pre-sets - you set the apertur eyou want and focus wide open then turning the aperture ring to the desired aperture (it locks you out of smaller apertures)

any long lens like this should be on a tripod but the mirror is so much smaller and lighter you can use it hand held (I recommend you find a tree or something to lean against to help steady your arms). I've gotten great images out of both (one trick is with the pentax adapter I can add a 2x or 3x adapter for much more reach) - I;m a reach fanatic because you are out of range of the target - can take real candids

Nowadays you can get this range with the smaller semi-slr "superzooms" - up to 36 x zoom usually gets you at least 500mm equivalent, likely with similar sharpness on a digital camera (the Canon Sx 40 HS with 35x zoom gets 24 - 840 equivalent with Image Stabilization (dp review claims 4.5 fstops) and 12 MP,l has a digic 5 and HS noise reduction, (the lens is 150.5mm real longest so its very compact), good aperture range (f 2.7 to f 8 at wide angle, F 5.8 to F 8 at the 840mm equiv max ---- probably a better alternative for the casual shooter
 
Upvote 0
"Through the cracks"...very nice and great composition. The depth of field is greater in the first shot since it is focused on a point farther away (the trees reflected in the water) than in the second shot (the stones and water surface).
 
Upvote 0
serendipidy said:
"Through the cracks"...very nice and great composition. The depth of field is greater in the first shot since it is focused on a point farther away (the trees reflected in the water) than in the second shot (the stones and water surface).

Thanks, I was actually only showing the second picture, with the focus on the rock instead of the tree reflection for illustrative purposes.
 
Upvote 0
mememe said:
RLPhoto said:
Believe. 8)

But this is at 1.2 isnt it? It can be good there but when stopping down the focus moves. (you can see this in the photozone tests where he focusses on the milimeter-chart and stops down. Focus moves away and at some point its even possible that the point that was sharp at wide open isnt in the DOF when stopped down)

And thats i guess why so many 1.4 (and even 1.2) canons are a bit "soft" (not 100% in focus) at 1.4. Cause they have to make a compromise for focus accuracy stopped down and wiede open. If wide open hits it 100% even in close distance, stopping down will go bad.

I once made the mistake of making a microadjust for near conditions on my 1.4 canon wide open and then taking (important) Pictures of people 2m away stopped down to f4... Focus started most times somewhere a little bit behind the ears...

I sold that microadjustment camera cause it makes me crazy trying to get the perfect result and there are so many things to keep in mind for not making it perfectly wrong :)

Actually F/1.6 and Nope, Still haven't seen the shift and i've used lots of 50mm's.
 
Upvote 0
I have the 50 1.2L, 50 1.4, and 50 1.8 II (nifty fifty) and I haven't noticed any focus problems on my 1.2L. I bought it refurbished by Canon, on the refurb site and it hasn't disappointed me at all. I tested it out on a 5D Mark III at indoor basketball and focus hit pretty much everytime. The camera/lens combo seems okay to me. Stopped down outside I like the 1.4 colors better, but that's nothing that can't be fixed in Camera Raw or LR.
 
Upvote 0
Andy_Hodapp said:
0y8U9.jpg


aiTj1.jpg


The last photo shows the CA that sometime happens with the 1.8 and shows how you can't shoot at anything other then 1.8 if there is anything out of focus in the background.

Those 50 1.8 photos are very nice, but I think the above 2 examples shows how much better they could have been if the busy background was creamier (a la 1.2). 5 blades just aren't going to deliver that, which is why I am still hoping Canon releases 50 f/1.8 Mk III with rounded 9 blades. (Listening, Canon?)
 
Upvote 0
scottsdaleriots said:
I know there's probably a thread or two about each of these lenses, but I want someon'e first hand experience. I don't have a FF camera (I'm unpatiently waiting for the 5D mk III) so I know this lens won't be as good on my 7D, but I've heard so many good things about shooting with a 50mm. I just have difficulty deciding on which to get (budget is a factor of course, I'm a student).

People have said that the 50mm 1.8 is good for it's build quality and price. I read from a lot of people is that their 50mm 1.8 lens will break because of it's inferier build quality (compared to the 1.4 and 1.2). That puts me off. I don't want to buy a lens only to have it break or the glass falls out 2-3yrs later.
So I'm trying to decide between the 1.4 and the 1.2L. At the moment, the 1.2L is winning mainly because it's an L lens which means, better build quality, superior optics, I've heard (slightly) better/higer IQ, DOF, bokeh, etc. And that awesome red ring on the end.

I'm a bokeh girl, I freaken LOVE beautiful smooth bokeh and high contrast a\nd saturation. I would love to get the 1.2L but I've read a LOT of reviews/comments from owners talking about the "back focussing" issue. Can someone who owns a 50 1.2L or someone who's tested one please elaborate a bit more about the issue? I've also read that 1/3 shots will be in focus, and that it is difficult for the 1.2L to properly focus in low light/dark surroundings, that the 1.4 outperforms it in that regard.

When I come to buy the lens I'll definitely ask to test and try out the 1.2L and the 1.4 lenses. But then again there are those in the small minority who say they have had minimal or no "back focussing" issues at all and that then absolutely adore the 1.2L lens and highly recommend it. I love live music/concert photography and would probably buy a 50mm lens before getting a 24-70 (I'm still waiting for it to come out with IS!) and believe it (50mm 1.2L) would take great photos. But I really need help deciding and reading hundreds and hundreds of reviews won't really help me, I need other people's input and first hand experience with these lenses. I can't justify spending almost $AU2000 for an L lens only to return it. Is the back focussing issue more of a 'photographer' error/problem or is it the lens'camera's fault? And can you actually fix the back focussing problem? apologise for rambling, I just really want to understand what this back focussing issue is and why some people don't seem to have a problem with it and a large majority do.

Get the 1.2L, you won't be sorry you did. I borrowed my friends 1.4 for a month. I was still on the fence. Went into the store and tried a couple of 1.2's. Never looked back, they don't compare in my opinion. It's a sweet lens.
I do suggest not buying one online though. The only pain in the ass is there are sharpness discrepancies between lenses, so you should try a few out and use a focus chart and see which is sharper by zooming in. It took me 4 until I was happy.
When you find that one though, it's creamy Bokeh madness!!!!
 
Upvote 0
bdunbar79 said:
Here's my rules of the 50mm lens:

1. If you need to shoot f/1.2 to f/2, get the 50L
2. If you shoot stopped down a ton, get the 1.4. It's sharper stopped down.
3. If you don't care, get the nifty fifty.
4. If you are a 50mm nut like myself and RLPhoto, get all 3 :)

LOL. And if you are really a crazy 50mm nut, add the Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 with EdMika adapter like me.


DZ3C3796 by drjlo1, on Flickr


DZ3C3795 by drjlo1, on Flickr
 
Upvote 0
While we are on the subject, I've been dying to know how the older 50mm f1.0 L fairs on the new 5D mk3 body. Also does canon have vignette and CA corrections built in for this monster? I know that the focus on my 1.2L is pretty damn good on the mk3 (I have read all about the problems) and I'm wondering if some of the demons of the older 1.0 L might be mitigated by the new 5D (or 1Dx for that matter).
 
Upvote 0
@!ex said:
While we are on the subject, I've been dying to know how the older 50mm f1.0 L fairs on the new 5D mk3 body. Also does canon have vignette and CA corrections built in for this monster? I know that the focus on my 1.2L is pretty damn good on the mk3 (I have read all about the problems) and I'm wondering if some of the demons of the older 1.0 L might be mitigated by the new 5D (or 1Dx for that matter).

The 50 F/1L was a terrible lens. It was never very sharp at any aperture and stupendously expensive.

Since no one bought it, its price has stayed at the same ridiculous level ever since its introduction.
 
Upvote 0
@!ex said:
While we are on the subject, I've been dying to know how the older 50mm f1.0 L fairs on the new 5D mk3 body. Also does canon have vignette and CA corrections built in for this monster? I know that the focus on my 1.2L is pretty damn good on the mk3 (I have read all about the problems) and I'm wondering if some of the demons of the older 1.0 L might be mitigated by the new 5D (or 1Dx for that matter).

LR4 is awesome for sorting out CA just drag the slider till its gone uit works wonders on my 600f.45 FD which gets quite a bit of CA wide open with alot of contrast
 
Upvote 0
For @lex: I like your wide open portrait shots! They are inspirational really!

What it comes to the rest of fifties, it's weird, my 50/1.0L actually outperforms my 50/1.4 and quite noticeably at that. My sample wide open is slightly better than 50/1.4 wide open, and at F/1.4 there is no comparison. Maybe my 50/1.4 is out of whack? But then again, I'm not the only one who is saying this, and if I recall correctly, this is also the expected behavior of the nominal designs (unless looking close to the boundaries of the image). I have not used 50/1.2L yet, so I can't say anything about it.

Additionally, I think the AF hit rate is better with 1.0L compared to 1.4, provided that only a slow moving or stationary target is photographed. 1.0L has relatively slow AF, but that's understandable given the circumstances. 1.0L does have a learning curve. The reason why I have both of them is that I can move relatively carelessly with 50/1.4 outside in the -25 C temperatures, whereas I certainly wouldn't take the 50/1.0L there!

I'd be interested to know also whether there is vignetting correction coming up for this one in 5D3.
 
Upvote 0
Jon Gilchrist said:
drjlo said:
LOL. And if you are really a crazy 50mm nut, add the Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 with EdMika adapter like me.


DZ3C3796 by drjlo1, on Flickr


DZ3C3795 by drjlo1, on Flickr

I have one of these and *LOVE* it. I've got two more sitting here waiting to be converted.

manual focus I presuppose. Does the conversion give you focus confirm beep?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.