Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L II Mention [CR2]

[Maximilian]

I figure do a little time in the gym and eat your Wheaties...and use really really good glass.

To those wanting a smaller, lighter lens it's very often not about how to handle the big weight and having not done the workout but about beeing more descrete, stealthy, convenient and so on.

Ok..why is anyone needing to be discrete and stealthy??
WFT are you taking pictures of?!? :O

Okay, maybe the word "stealthy" was a little bit too much. And I now underline "convenient" much more.
But man... I don't know what dirty mind you have but if you are sitting together with some friends (party, wedding, etc.) have a good low light performing FF body and want to have some (available light) memories about it, I don't like to swank around with a big, chunky L-lens. I want to get focus fast (!!! So no STM), f1.4 is enough light, maybe even f2.0 and then get the pose/pic/situation and continue talking, having fun.
Same for street photography.

If this is what you think when you say "WFT are you taking pictures of?!?" then okay : : :



Edit: and not everybody has the will/money/enthusiasm to spend so much money for an 50/1.2 L II.
But a 50/1.8 STM is below their needs.

 

[Memdroid]

The 50L is hardly a big chunky lens.
And since the version II is going to be lighter and probably a tad smaller, I don't understand the fuss about its size and weight. Are we talking the 50 Art here?

 

[Maximilian]

The 50L is hardly a big chunky lens.
And since the version II is going to be lighter and probably a tad smaller, I don't understand the fuss about its size and weight. Are we talking the 50 Art here?

Comparison 50L vs. 50/1.4:
Weight: app. 100% heavier
Size: app. 50% bigger
Price: not to mention.

Of course not compareble to any white lens. But it's indeed bigger.

And until it's released anyting about the 50L II is rumor. Also size and weight.

 

[Memdroid]

The 50L is hardly a big chunky lens.
And since the version II is going to be lighter and probably a tad smaller, I don't understand the fuss about its size and weight. Are we talking the 50 Art here?

Comparison 50L vs. 50/1.4:
Weight: app. 100% heavier
Size: app. 50% bigger
Price: not to mention.

Of course not compareble to any white lens. But it's indeed bigger.

And until it's released anyting about the 50L II is rumor. Also size and weight.

Based on my experiences having owned both of these lenses, the size and weight is barely noticeable in practical use on a FF body.

 

[Maximilian]

Based on my experiences having owned both of these lenses, the size and weight is barely noticeable in practical use on a FF body.

Of course it's all about taste.
I've tried a 50L once and my experience was that it was noticeably bigger esp. combined with a 5D/6D shaped body. Nothing one couldn't handle or get used to, but noticeably.

And of course if someone would present me a 50L (or II) I wouldn't care about buying a 50/1.4 as second lens this focal lengh. But if I had to choose between a 50L II and a 50/1.4 II, with expected IQ and features, say both similar size as the predecessors, without IS, so no advantage there, I'd surely go for the 1.4.
But I really hope this 50L II will be stellar and surpass the Sigma Art so the (yet to come) 50/1.4 II therefore will be at a level (IQ, mechanicaly, AF performance) as I hope for. That's why I am interested in this rumor.

 

[dadgummit]

I figure do a little time in the gym and eat your Wheaties...and use really really good glass.

To those wanting a smaller, lighter lens it's very often not about how to handle the big weight and having not done the workout but about beeing more descrete, stealthy, convenient and so on.

This. +500. I'll use something 90-95% as good as the best in class if it's half as big, half as heavy and half the cost. I'll take the non-L 50 f/nooneknows IS USM for the win.
- A

+1000

I do a lot of mountaineering/alpine climbing photography, weight is everything! And I ain't got no time for tripods, give me IS AND a fast aperture!

Yup completely agree. The 70-200 2.8 IS II is the sharpest AF lens I have and I almost never have that heavy beast in the bag. Please give us the 50mm F?.? IS USM!!!!!

 

[ahsanford]

Okay, maybe the word "stealthy" was a little bit too much. And I now underline "convenient" much more.
But man... I don't know what dirty mind you have but if you are sitting together with some friends (party, wedding, etc.) have a good low light performing FF body and want to have some (available light) memories about it, I don't like to swank around with a big, chunky L-lens. I want to get focus fast (!!! So no STM), f1.4 is enough light, maybe even f2.0 and then get the pose/pic/situation and continue talking, having fun.
Same for street photography.

There are probably 3 major camps of people who want smaller and lighter lenses -- at any FL.

1) Street shooters. Uniquely for them, small + discreet is key. I think that means you are in Fuji/Olympus/Leica territory as chunky gripped bodies with big red-ringed lenses stick out way too much, but some folks love shooting street with SLRs. Weight is less of a big deal for these folks -- which is good, b/c they often choose large aperture glass.

2) Walkaround shooters. Guys like me who aren't pro photogs who just like to bring their rig everywhere. People who are more likely to bring their camera somewhere if it fits in a small bag. For these folks, it's about size and weight (esp. if it's a long walkabout, a fairground, a civic event, etc.). Being discreet isn't a big deal for these folks.

3) Hikers/backpackers. Size & weight are a big deal for them.

- A

 

[martti]

I took some shots of the most beautiful girl I've ever seen and the size of the room demanded 50mm, could not help it. I felt that my EF 50mm f/1.4 just was not good enough for HER! That for HER it should have been something extraordinary...the truth remains that optically the EF 50mm f/1.4 is quite good enough for A3 prints.
But I felt the URGE of getting the EF 50mm L. I have to get it. The price will come down when they introduce the version 2.0.
Except it will not. People will want the magic of the old EF 50mm L.
I have to have it..gotta gotta gotta.....

 

[jdramirez]

there are probably 3 major camps of people who want smaller and lighter lenses -- at any FL.

1) Street shooters. Uniquely for them, small + discreet is key. I think that means you are in Fuji/Olympus/Leica territory as chunky gripped bodies with big red-ringed lenses stick out way too much, but some folks love shooting street with SLRs. Weight is less of a big deal for these folks -- which is good, b/c they often choose large aperture glass.

2) Walkaround shooters. Guys like me who aren't pro photogs who just like to bring their rig everywhere. People who are more likely to bring their camera somewhere if it fits in a small bag. For these folks, it's about size and weight (esp. if it's a long walkabout, a fairground, a civic event, etc.). Being discreet isn't a big deal for these folks.

3) Hikers/backpackers. Size & weight are a big deal for them.

- A

I'm not in that group. I want unadulterated quality... Except for my 24-105... Where I really just don't care. I wonder why that is.

 

[ahsanford]

there are probably 3 major camps of people who want smaller and lighter lenses -- at any FL.

1) Street shooters. Uniquely for them, small + discreet is key. I think that means you are in Fuji/Olympus/Leica territory as chunky gripped bodies with big red-ringed lenses stick out way too much, but some folks love shooting street with SLRs. Weight is less of a big deal for these folks -- which is good, b/c they often choose large aperture glass.

2) Walkaround shooters. Guys like me who aren't pro photogs who just like to bring their rig everywhere. People who are more likely to bring their camera somewhere if it fits in a small bag. For these folks, it's about size and weight (esp. if it's a long walkabout, a fairground, a civic event, etc.). Being discreet isn't a big deal for these folks.

3) Hikers/backpackers. Size & weight are a big deal for them.

- A

I'm not in that group. I want unadulterated quality... Except for my 24-105... Where I really just don't care. I wonder why that is.

And that's exactly why Canon needs three 50s.

- A

 

[cayenne]

I figure do a little time in the gym and eat your Wheaties...and use really really good glass.

To those wanting a smaller, lighter lens it's very often not about how to handle the big weight and having not done the workout but about beeing more descrete, stealthy, convenient and so on.

Ok..why is anyone needing to be discrete and stealthy??
WFT are you taking pictures of?!? :O

It's probably asking too much on an internet forum, but can you not act like a gawking middle-schooler, pointing and laughing at someone, making a big "L" sign with your thumb and forefinger? "Eeewww, what a perv!" Seriously, man, grow the hell up.

Why would anyone need to be discrete and stealthy? Ask a street photographer, literally almost any street photographer in the entire world, and they'll tell you it helps. It also helps if you're traveling, or roaming through a not-so-safe neighborhood. It's nice not to be immediately marked as a target for theft, and it's nice when people don't notice you, so you can get candid shots and wait, unobserved, for the right moment.

Try walking around San Juan with a big white telephoto. Try Brixton or Gutte d'Or at night, if you're so sure of yourself.

I dunno about the laughing and pointing part..not sure where you're coming from on that (never mentioned anything like that?)....

But I try to NOT be in dangerous neighborhoods with myself at all, much less with $$ equipment, car or jewelry.

That's just common sense....

And really do thieves in general really know the difference between a $100 lens and a $2K one just because one has a red ring around it??

Doubtful IMHO...

 

[cayenne]

Okay, maybe the word "stealthy" was a little bit too much. And I now underline "convenient" much more.
But man... I don't know what dirty mind you have but if you are sitting together with some friends (party, wedding, etc.) have a good low light performing FF body and want to have some (available light) memories about it, I don't like to swank around with a big, chunky L-lens. I want to get focus fast (!!! So no STM), f1.4 is enough light, maybe even f2.0 and then get the pose/pic/situation and continue talking, having fun.
Same for street photography.

There are probably 3 major camps of people who want smaller and lighter lenses -- at any FL.

1) Street shooters. Uniquely for them, small + discreet is key. I think that means you are in Fuji/Olympus/Leica territory as chunky gripped bodies with big red-ringed lenses stick out way too much, but some folks love shooting street with SLRs. Weight is less of a big deal for these folks -- which is good, b/c they often choose large aperture glass.

2) Walkaround shooters. Guys like me who aren't pro photogs who just like to bring their rig everywhere. People who are more likely to bring their camera somewhere if it fits in a small bag. For these folks, it's about size and weight (esp. if it's a long walkabout, a fairground, a civic event, etc.). Being discreet isn't a big deal for these folks.

3) Hikers/backpackers. Size & weight are a big deal for them.

- A

I'm curious...where do ya'll live where people actually pay attention to you with a camera this much???

Hell, I live in New Orleans....you could be dressed in a Bozo the clown outfit with 3 5D3's, L lenses and maybe a Red Scarlett under your arm...and no one is going to give you more than a cursory glance due to the colorful outfit you're wearing as it catches the sunlight.

I mean, I carry my camera around, in the street, to fests, etc...honking big white 70-200m 2.8...and only rarely get someone that notices and talks to me, and it is always another photographer wanting to talk photograph/equipment...

No one else gives the time of day when I'm out with camera...so, wondering where ya'll live where everyone is so nosy?

:-\

 

[ahsanford]

I'm curious...where do ya'll live where people actually pay attention to you with a camera this much???

Hell, I live in New Orleans....you could be dressed in a Bozo the clown outfit with 3 5D3's, L lenses and maybe a Red Scarlett under your arm...and no one is going to give you more than a cursory glance due to the colorful outfit you're wearing as it catches the sunlight.

I mean, I carry my camera around, in the street, to fests, etc...honking big white 70-200m 2.8...and only rarely get someone that notices and talks to me, and it is always another photographer wanting to talk photograph/equipment...

No one else gives the time of day when I'm out with camera...so, wondering where ya'll live where everyone is so nosy?

:-\

I'd ask the street shooters (I'm not one). But people tend to notice you when you take pictures of them and they don't know who you are.

You know. That.

But I personally don't care about sticking out as a photographer. I don't shoot street. That's a different animal entirely to me.

- A

 

[Sarpedon]

I figure do a little time in the gym and eat your Wheaties...and use really really good glass.

To those wanting a smaller, lighter lens it's very often not about how to handle the big weight and having not done the workout but about beeing more descrete, stealthy, convenient and so on.

Ok..why is anyone needing to be discrete and stealthy??
WFT are you taking pictures of?!? :O

It's probably asking too much on an internet forum, but can you not act like a gawking middle-schooler, pointing and laughing at someone, making a big "L" sign with your thumb and forefinger? "Eeewww, what a perv!" Seriously, man, grow the hell up.

Why would anyone need to be discrete and stealthy? Ask a street photographer, literally almost any street photographer in the entire world, and they'll tell you it helps. It also helps if you're traveling, or roaming through a not-so-safe neighborhood. It's nice not to be immediately marked as a target for theft, and it's nice when people don't notice you, so you can get candid shots and wait, unobserved, for the right moment.

Try walking around San Juan with a big white telephoto. Try Brixton or Gutte d'Or at night, if you're so sure of yourself.

I dunno about the laughing and pointing part..not sure where you're coming from on that (never mentioned anything like that?)....

But I try to NOT be in dangerous neighborhoods with myself at all, much less with $$ equipment, car or jewelry.

That's just common sense....

And really do thieves in general really know the difference between a $100 lens and a $2K one just because one has a red ring around it??

Doubtful IMHO...

"...but can you not act like a gawking middle-schooler..."

You see that underlined word there? It means you're reading a simile.

As to the rest, again: street photography. And you'd be surprised about thieves, especially in Europe.

 

[Memdroid]

What kind of street photography are you guys doing?
I do a lot of street photography, and the "big" old 50L is my primary lens I do that with and I never ever take pictures without talking to people before, during or after the shot and I always show the picture I took of them.
Street photography is about socializing and absolutely not about taking sneaky pictures. You are no paparazzi. You have to interact with the subjects, joke around, hear their stories, get to know them a little and be a part of it. I never had a problem scaring off, angering or making people uneasy with anybody lugging around my $4k+ gear in the lesser safe neighborhoods of major cities, in Europe, South America and recently in Johannesburg for that matter. I think it depends on how you carry yourself.

 

[martti]

Memroid, where could I see some samples of your pictures?
I fully agree with your credo. People are people, not animals in the wild.

 

[privatebydesign]

Street photography is about socializing and absolutely not about taking sneaky pictures. You are no paparazzi. You have to interact with the subjects, joke around, hear their stories, get to know them a little and be a part of it.

No, for you street photography is about socializing, for many others it isn't. For many the thought of interacting with the subject completely destroys any authenticity to their work, and to others being in peoples faces is what the genre is about. 'Street photography' can be pretty much anything to anybody and covers the broadest range of self imposed criteria and techniques.

 

[Sarpedon]

Street photography is about socializing and absolutely not about taking sneaky pictures. You are no paparazzi. You have to interact with the subjects, joke around, hear their stories, get to know them a little and be a part of it.

No, for you street photography is about socializing, for many others it isn't. For many the thought of interacting with the subject completely destroys any authenticity to their work, and to others being in peoples faces is what the genre is about. 'Street photography' can be pretty much anything to anybody and covers the broadest range of self imposed criteria and techniques.

Agreed. I think, as with lens size, that this is a "different strokes" argument. I've seen lots of great street photography by folks who take Memdroid's approach - to my eye, it tends to yield a more jovial and celebratory kind of image, which I like very much - but it's not the only approach. Henri Cartier-Bresson, for instance, went to great lengths to be discreet, taping up or even hiding his camera because he had the philosophy that privatebydesign describes. They're both valid approaches.

And FWIW, I prefer the 40 pancake on a 6D for my street photography (I lean toward the HCB method), but I use the 50L, too, especially at night. The 1.2 is a large lens but it's not huge--to me. I think the original argument about size came about because some folks were saying there was no reason for someone looking for a 50 to get anything besides the 50 Art, which is huge--again, to me, and I'm not fond of that lens for other reasons as well.

 

[martti]

In France you can get in serious legal trouble taking pictures of people in the streets without their consent.
You take a picture in a public place, you might have to have twenty or more attestations signed.
That's why the French photographers nowadays go abroad to do 'street'.

 

[ahsanford]

Street photography is about socializing and absolutely not about taking sneaky pictures. You are no paparazzi. You have to interact with the subjects, joke around, hear their stories, get to know them a little and be a part of it.

No, for you street photography is about socializing, for many others it isn't. For many the thought of interacting with the subject completely destroys any authenticity to their work, and to others being in peoples faces is what the genre is about. 'Street photography' can be pretty much anything to anybody and covers the broadest range of self imposed criteria and techniques.

+1

I am not saying I do this (because it terrifies me), but many folks do align to that sensibility. Some folks want to drift through another place/culture and play the 'prime directive' card -- simply buzz through, observe, capture moments, and disappear without a trace. They are not creepers, paparazzi or ill-intentioned -- they just wish to capture life in another way.

Again, I'm not arguing one way or the other for the soul of street photography, but for those who espouse that manner of shooting, it's easy to understand why one would go mirrorless/rangefinder/discreet with their kit.

Curious: did Cartier-Bresson, Vivian Maier and others chat up their subjects or did they just drift through like a spy? (Not trying to wind anyone up with that question -- I'm honestly curious.)

- A