Disappointed with 50 f/1.2 sharpness @ f/1.2

[Birger.Niss]

Learned friends,
One week ago I bought the Canon 50 mm f/1.2 for my new 5D Mark III, specifically for the very shallow DOF at f/1.2.
I am however disappointed with the sharpness of the lens at f/1.2. At f/2.8 its excellent.
I enclose two 100 % crops showing some text at f/1.2 and at f/2.8. The two images were taken at an angle of about 30 degrees, thus making the test independent of AFMA settings - it is clear that there is a focus shift, but that is not what I am complaining about.
I trust that you will agree that the f/1.2 image is a lot fuzzier than the f/2.8 image. My question to you experts is whether such a difference in sharpness is to be expected or if I should return my glas? Your help is highly appreciated

 

[Pi]

Unless you really need to use this lens that way, testing it at very close distances is a waste of efforts.

 

[Birger.Niss]

Unless you really need to use this lens that way, testing it at very close distances is a waste of efforts.

Hi Pi, I shot the images at approx. 0.5 m distance, which in my mind is not very close. Please note that the enclosed images are 100 % crops.

 

[iSy]

Interesting results, consider I have just posted today about upgrading my 1.4 to the 1.2 and I was concerned about sharpness as my 1.4 is actually pretty sharp.

I have done similar tests with my 1.4 and I would say its sharper at 1.4 then your 1.2 shot, the greens and pinks are not so pronounced.

 

[Birger.Niss]

Interesting results, consider I have just posted today about upgrading my 1.4 to the 1.2 and I was concerned about sharpness as my 1.4 is actually pretty sharp.

I have done similar tests with my 1.4 and I would say its sharper at 1.4 then your 1.2 shot, the greens and pinks are not so pronounced.

Hi iSy, I could well be that my 1.2 at f/1.4 is as sharp as yours at f/1.4, but then your incentive to go for a 1.2 might vanish

 

[RLPhoto]

Wow, That's pretty unsharp. My 50L doesn't look near as bad as yours.

 

[Birger.Niss]

Wow, That's pretty unsharp. My 50L doesn't look near as bad as yours.

How does your lens compare at f/1.2 and f/2.8, RLPhoto?

 

[RLPhoto]

Wow, That's pretty unsharp. My 50L doesn't look near as bad as yours.

How does your lens compare at f/1.2 and f/2.8, RLPhoto?

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

 

[vscd]

@BirgerNiss

That's normal for this lense. The 50mm 1.0 is even worse. http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=14970.msg272132#msg272132

 

[pdirestajr]

I may be mistaken, but I don't think this lens is intended to be used to photograph text at an aperture of f/1.2.

 

[Birger.Niss]

I may be mistaken, but I don't think this lens is intended to be used to photograph text at an aperture of f/1.2.

I think you are quite right But text shows very well my point.

 

[florianbieler.de]

The 1.2L is not the sharpest tool in the shed from 1.2 to 2.0, but that's common knowledge I'd say.

 

[Random Orbits]

Unless you really need to use this lens that way, testing it at very close distances is a waste of efforts.

Hi Pi, I shot the images at approx. 0.5 m distance, which in my mind is not very close. Please note that the enclosed images are 100 % crops.

MFD for the lens is about 18 in, so you are close to the MFD. Take a few steps back and take a pic, it will look better.

The other issue is that the resolution at f/1.2 is about 2/3 of what it is at f/2.8, so yes, it WILL be fuzzier at f/1.2 than at f/2.8. Take a look at the test Lens Rentals did (link below).

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout

What you did was to use the 50L how it was not designed to be used. The real question is how does it look in real world usage as a portrait lens wide open.

 

[Pi]

Unless you really need to use this lens that way, testing it at very close distances is a waste of efforts.

Hi Pi, I shot the images at approx. 0.5 m distance, which in my mind is not very close. Please note that the enclosed images are 100 % crops.

See this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1294152

I cannot imagine a situation where you would need to use the 50L near the MFD wide open but you know better.

 

[Birger.Niss]

Thanks a lot to you all - I really appreciate your input.
My worry was that my copy is worse than could expected. You have put my mind at ease

 

[vscd]

So, to sum it up... you could also use a 50mm 1.8 and patch it to L

just kidding

 

[ScottFielding]

I love my 50 1.2 and is great for portraits of my kids. It is obviously nowhere near as sharp as my 135 f2 but love both these lenses.

I have just taken these shots at 30 degrees and 50cm away and 100% cropped. They are in quite low light, but will hopefully put your mind further at ease, f2.8 and f1.2:





Cheers,

Scott

 

[Birger.Niss]

I love my 50 1.2 and is great for portraits of my kids. It is nowhere near as sharp as my 135 f2 but love both these lenses.

I have just taken these shots at 30 degrees and 50cm away and 100% cropped. They are in quite low light, but will hopefully put your mind further at ease, f2.8 and f1.2:





Cheers,

Scott

Thanks a lot Scott, your results are identical to mine. Now a can sleep like a child
And to you, vscd - hehe Great invention, good economy!

 

[AJ]

Another comparison
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=403&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=403&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=5

 

[LOALTD]

This lens is soft, soft, soft. 50mm is my favorite focal length and I do not own one. It’s *slightly* sharper than the f/1.4 at very big apertures if you pixel-peep…as soon as you stop down, the f/1.4 is sharper. It’s razor sharp compared to the old 50mm f/1.0 though…

The 85mm f/1.2...on the other hand...