- Status
50 1.8 or 50 1.4 
CA on both 1.2 canon lenses at 1.2 along is HORRENDOUS and both suffer of low contrast and very soft output. This makes the cost not worth the benefits IMO. At f/1.4 the 50mm cleans up a little but to get acceptably sharp images you need to go down to f/1.8 or f/2. Any more open than that and the lenses just can't keep up with the sensor. The difference in the look of an image of the 1.4 vs 1.2 is minimal at best and won't really have the wow factor that you'd get with some of the truly exotic 50's out there that push things to f/0.95. That you WILL notice
....but good luck affording that. :
so save your money. As hyped as the f/1.2 lenses are the reality is that to make them shine at that aperture, canon would have to charge 3x more. Consider these lenses to be f/1.4 for all intents and purposes which can be pushed to 1.2 if you can live with the fall in quality. I never could.
CA on both 1.2 canon lenses at 1.2 along is HORRENDOUS and both suffer of low contrast and very soft output. This makes the cost not worth the benefits IMO. At f/1.4 the 50mm cleans up a little but to get acceptably sharp images you need to go down to f/1.8 or f/2. Any more open than that and the lenses just can't keep up with the sensor. The difference in the look of an image of the 1.4 vs 1.2 is minimal at best and won't really have the wow factor that you'd get with some of the truly exotic 50's out there that push things to f/0.95. That you WILL notice
....but good luck affording that. : so save your money. As hyped as the f/1.2 lenses are the reality is that to make them shine at that aperture, canon would have to charge 3x more. Consider these lenses to be f/1.4 for all intents and purposes which can be pushed to 1.2 if you can live with the fall in quality. I never could.
Upvote
0
psolberg said:50 1.8 or 50 1.4
CA on both 1.2 canon lenses at 1.2 along is HORRENDOUS and both suffer of low contrast and very soft output. This makes the cost not worth the benefits IMO. At f/1.4 the 50mm cleans up a little but to get acceptably sharp images you need to go down to f/1.8 or f/2. Any more open than that and the lenses just can't keep up with the sensor. The difference in the look of an image of the 1.4 vs 1.2 is minimal at best and won't really have the wow factor that you'd get with some of the truly exotic 50's out there that push things to f/0.95. That you WILL notice
so save your money. As hyped as the f/1.2 lenses are the reality is that to make them shine at that aperture, canon would have to charge 3x more. Consider these lenses to be f/1.4 for all intents and purposes which can be pushed to 1.2 if you can live with the fall in quality. I never could.
I'm sorry, I've read your post twice and I can't figure out what the hell you are talking about.
Anyways, if you use the 50 f/1.4, you can use it for both group and distant portrait as I like to call it. The 50 f/1.4 is really useful for a group shot of about more than say, 5 people. But for group wedding shots at the front of the church I used the 85. I used the 85 f/1.2L II for bride down the aisle and close up bride/groom portraits on a FULL FRAME. 50mm on APS-C would be good, at 80mm. I had 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.2, and 135 f/2 for primes. They can be used for everything. Furthermore, I had a 24-70L and 70-200L zoom lenses in the bag. Be creative.
Upvote
0
RKK said:
If you are unsure of focal length, another good tip is just put the 24-70 zoom on if you have it. I did shoot at 35mm but using the 24-70L zoom lens. 50 f/1.4 for groups of more than 5, scene shot, 85 for bride up the aisle and front of the church group shots, everything else I used as I saw fit, such as many shots in the church and reception. Be creative from 24 to 200mm!
Upvote
0
M
MarkWebbPhoto
Guest
I have just about every current AF Canon L prime between 24mm and 300mm. The 35mm f/1.4L and 85mm f/1.2L II are the best for weddings and stay on my cameras as much as possible. I have several friends who have sent their 50mm f/1.2L's back because the autofocus was so inconsistent and it was recommended to me to not purchase that lens so I'm going to pass that recommendation to you. At the moment I just use the 35mm prime and can crop it to around 50mm easily. If I need the extra focal length I just pull out my 85mm f/1.2L II and skip over the 50mm focal length (recommended if you are on full-frame).
I'm anxiously waiting for Canon to come out with a good 50mm lens. This is the weakest focal length in their line up if you ask me.
Also, if the 35mm f/1.4L gets updated with less CA and weather proofing (why does this lens not have this in the first place?) then I'd say the 35mm f/1.4L II is going to be as close to a perfect prime lens as you can get. Image quality is already amazing.
I've been wanting to pull out all of my primes and do a comparison at night time, maybe that can be my next blog entry. Till then here are some samples:
85mm f/1.2L II at f/2.0 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h3401c75e#h3401c75e
35mm f/1.4L at f/2.5 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h2027ab87#h2027ab87
I'm anxiously waiting for Canon to come out with a good 50mm lens. This is the weakest focal length in their line up if you ask me.
Also, if the 35mm f/1.4L gets updated with less CA and weather proofing (why does this lens not have this in the first place?) then I'd say the 35mm f/1.4L II is going to be as close to a perfect prime lens as you can get. Image quality is already amazing.
I've been wanting to pull out all of my primes and do a comparison at night time, maybe that can be my next blog entry. Till then here are some samples:
85mm f/1.2L II at f/2.0 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h3401c75e#h3401c75e
35mm f/1.4L at f/2.5 http://markwebbphoto.com/weddingportfolio/h2027ab87#h2027ab87
Upvote
0
RLPhoto
Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
MarkWebbPhoto said:
50L is a awesome lens. Am I the only one here who got a good copy? I prefer it over the 35mm for its classic focal length. I suppose ive always been a fan of Henri cartier bressons subtle painting like perspective of the 50mm. No tricks, just a normal view.
Upvote
0
When it comes to wedding, you often only have one chance to get "that shot." I have found the 50L a little too unreliable in this regard and the 85L (yes, I am aware this kens is not the topic of discussion) way too slow.
The 35L is actually very quick. I find they lock focus beautifully and the resultant image, especially if you are shooting at wide apertures, tends to be more pleasing than the 50L.
There is, as others have mentioned, the issue of 35L being a little wide (though taking into account the central angle of view of the human eye, the average equivalent focal length equates to not much more, at 43mm). In which case, I'd settle for the 50 1.4. Weddings aren't the most brutal of locations - you are more likely to get a bit of cake on your camera than an incoming blizzard storm front or flying gravel from motorcyclists, so the 50 1.4 can hold up in the majority of cases. Yes the USM has a habit of dying, but you will likely have other lenses with you - if you are really concerned and set on the 50mm focal length as an essential, pick up a 50 1.8 II as backup.
I'd suggest buying all five lenses mentioned. Just to account for that rare Antarctic wedding come car rally.
The 35L is actually very quick. I find they lock focus beautifully and the resultant image, especially if you are shooting at wide apertures, tends to be more pleasing than the 50L.
There is, as others have mentioned, the issue of 35L being a little wide (though taking into account the central angle of view of the human eye, the average equivalent focal length equates to not much more, at 43mm). In which case, I'd settle for the 50 1.4. Weddings aren't the most brutal of locations - you are more likely to get a bit of cake on your camera than an incoming blizzard storm front or flying gravel from motorcyclists, so the 50 1.4 can hold up in the majority of cases. Yes the USM has a habit of dying, but you will likely have other lenses with you - if you are really concerned and set on the 50mm focal length as an essential, pick up a 50 1.8 II as backup.
I'd suggest buying all five lenses mentioned. Just to account for that rare Antarctic wedding come car rally.
Upvote
0
S
SandyP
Guest
I use the 35L and the 50L for almost the entire wedding, on my 5D3. And did so also, on my old 5D2. They are close together in terms of focal length, but they are very different lenses that let you do very different things. Two of my favorite weddings from last year were shot 90% on only the 50L, it was incredible. The 85L is awesome, but I feel like I'm too far away with it, even on full frame, to really feel IN the action. For portraits of course, it's incredible in certain situations.
Upvote
0
M
MarkWebbPhoto
Guest
Sorry for getting off topic a bit but...
The 35L is quick enough to use AI Servo tracking even with the slow 5D2, I only use the 85L on single shot with the 5D2. However, if you pair the 85L with a 1D4 you can get great shots under the basket. Most of my favorite basketball photos last year were with the 85L on the 1D4, especially when I was in a dark high school gym.
College with lots of light (1D4, 85mm, f/2.2, 1/1600 sec, ISO 2000 )
http://markwebbphoto.com/photojournalism2012/h21ec8f42#h21ec8f42
Darkest high school gym in town (1D4, 85mm, f/1.8, ISO 4000, 1/800 sec, pushed 1 stop)
http://markwebbphoto.com/p225432823/h3ecfc41f#h3ecfc41f
I doubt you'll be shooting many sports with the 35L but I have had relatively good luck tracking the bride coming down the isle with this lens. This lens is great and it really doesn't need an update except for the weather sealing and new coating to reduce CA. The 85L should see more updates for those of us who shoot action because there is so much glass in the lens which slows it down. Not sure what is up with the 50L's AF, I'll wait for 50L II which I hope is as good as the 85L II. With the 50L's bad AF reputation, I would think that Canon would update this lens first. Kudos to those who get good AI servo results with the 50L, anyone mind sharing some??
The 35L is quick enough to use AI Servo tracking even with the slow 5D2, I only use the 85L on single shot with the 5D2. However, if you pair the 85L with a 1D4 you can get great shots under the basket. Most of my favorite basketball photos last year were with the 85L on the 1D4, especially when I was in a dark high school gym.
College with lots of light (1D4, 85mm, f/2.2, 1/1600 sec, ISO 2000 )
http://markwebbphoto.com/photojournalism2012/h21ec8f42#h21ec8f42
Darkest high school gym in town (1D4, 85mm, f/1.8, ISO 4000, 1/800 sec, pushed 1 stop)
http://markwebbphoto.com/p225432823/h3ecfc41f#h3ecfc41f
I doubt you'll be shooting many sports with the 35L but I have had relatively good luck tracking the bride coming down the isle with this lens. This lens is great and it really doesn't need an update except for the weather sealing and new coating to reduce CA. The 85L should see more updates for those of us who shoot action because there is so much glass in the lens which slows it down. Not sure what is up with the 50L's AF, I'll wait for 50L II which I hope is as good as the 85L II. With the 50L's bad AF reputation, I would think that Canon would update this lens first. Kudos to those who get good AI servo results with the 50L, anyone mind sharing some??
Upvote
0
I have not gotten good AF stability with my 50L. It is frustrating, because I've shot sports with the 85 f/1.2L II and a 1D4 and still had a great keeper rate. I don't understand this lens. It has problems that both the 35L and 85L don't have.
Upvote
0
RLPhoto said:
The normal view you get isn't about the 50 fov, it's about the compression you get at 50mm. But yeah, I love it too!
I think the 50 L is a great 50, but then again, I agree with what's being said, the Canon 50's suck (compared to 35 and 85)...
MY dream 50 is the same color and contrast and size+build of the current 50 L, but with the 24 L II AF, and the 35 wide open sharpness and way less CA. And get rid of the fact it's useless sharp at mfd, but great at 4 feet and beyond.
Upvote
0
RLPhoto
Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
Viggo said:
I disagree, I like all the canon 50mm's. I've used them all before and all have there strengths and weaknesses. The 50L is my favorite 50mm of all time currently and i've used tons of different 50mms on 35mm and medium format 80mm's.
Upvote
0
As a full time wedding shooter I normally shoot with zooms because I can get the shots fast. I love the look of a 1.2 wide open so I purchased the Canon 50 1.2. During the reception I am now getting some great stuff with it. I keep zoom on one body and the 50 on a second body. Maybe someday I can work toward shooting the reception with a pair of primes like the 35 and the 85. I think I will always stick to zooms for the ceremony.
I'd pay $5,000+ to get a 35-85 f1.4 zoom!
I'd pay $5,000+ to get a 35-85 f1.4 zoom!
Upvote
0
T
tt
Guest
Cosk said:
What look do you want? What kind of compression? Then what kind of f stop/bokeh?
Jasmine Star does a nice visual comparison between the 50 and the 35mm -
http://www.jasminestarblog.com/index.cfm?postID=990&review-canon-35mm-1-4
The 50mm 1.2 might get a bad rep on its focus because how many do adjustment, and also take into account what they want to focus on may not be what it sees as nearest thing to focus on.
At 1.2 - like the 85mm, the actual in focus depth is in the millimeters dependent on how far you're focusing out at. I'd imagine on a full frame like the 5D Mark II you could also use the EgS focusing screen to help
Upvote
0
- Status
