Do all of canons 50 mm lens suck?

[birdman]

My 20+ year old 50/1.8 Mark I is not too bad at all--even wide open. The bokeh is what a lot of people complain about on the 1.8--and the build quality.

I met a gentleman that owns the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2-- the 50mm is his favorite by far. Focuses faster, more useful FL, nearly as sharp (according to him)

They will replace this soon I think. Go for 35/1.4 and 85/1.8. Forget 50mm

 

[AnselA]

Here is a vote for the wonderful 50mm f/ 1.4. Very sharp, nicely saturated colors and great bokeh. I have had it for several years and love it.

 

[Random Orbits]

My 20+ year old 50/1.8 Mark I is not too bad at all--even wide open. The bokeh is what a lot of people complain about on the 1.8--and the build quality.

I met a gentleman that owns the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2-- the 50mm is his favorite by far. Focuses faster, more useful FL, nearly as sharp (according to him)

They will replace this soon I think. Go for 35/1.4 and 85/1.8. Forget 50mm

35/1.4 is going to be replaced before the 50s according to the rumor mill.

 

[krjc]

Bought a 1.4 about three years ago, when I was just getting back into photography and I was extremely disappointed and therefore hardly ever used it. Then about 3 months ago I came to the realization that it needed an adjustment. Got it back about two months ago and have been loving it ever since. Its not perfect but I have taken some of my best photos with it.

 

[Thorne]

The 50/1.4 was my first lens, and I'm on my third copy now. (First one ruined during a traffic impact, the second by novice-abuse, which was really painful, since the second one was the best sample of all three of mine to date.) I have loved and adored it/them for all eight years of my serious photography, but I won't buy another when (not "if," WHEN) the AF craps out. I am desperately hoping that a new non-L 50 will show up in this new wave of "primes with IS."

Though in the meantime, I'm trying to wheedle my current employer into buying me a 1.2 L to give that a try. You guys' posts have encouraged me to get my hopes up!

 

[jseliger]

Though in the meantime, I'm trying to wheedle my current employer into buying me a 1.2 L to give that a try. You guys' posts have encouraged me to get my hopes up!

Thorne: Why not get the Sigma 50mm f / 1.4?

 

[DJL329]

Yes, they all have their drawbacks, even the Sigma, but an EF 50mm f/1.4 II (with ring USM and no dang IS*!) would be a winner for most folks who want a fast 50mm.

========================

* No need for IS on a fast prime of < 100mm. All it would do is increase size, weight and cost.

 

[EvilTed]

Jseliger.

Do you wear Levis or Wranglers?

'nough said m8

ET

 

[Thorne]

Though in the meantime, I'm trying to wheedle my current employer into buying me a 1.2 L to give that a try. You guys' posts have encouraged me to get my hopes up!

Thorne: Why not get the Sigma 50mm f / 1.4?

Cause I hear the AF ain't great? And because if my employer's gonna buy me a new 50, I might as well go for the gold...! ;-)

 

[RLPhoto]

One of my first 50mm shot ever done digitally for professional use. Rebel XSI W/ 50 1.4. Gosh, that camera body had such good skin tones out of the camera. Almost as good as my 5Dc.

 

[picturesbyme]

I tried the Canon 1.8, 1.4, and the Sigma 1.4.
Liked the two 1.4s, but I think that unless you have some special needs that a limitation on a certain lens makes impossible to do any/all "good" lens will do... and while I have doubts about the 50 1.8 myself the 1.4 even with its "issues" is a good lens...

NSFW
This lady http://alisaverner.com/about/ shoots a lot with the 50 1.4. I think she's pretty good at what she's doing and another good example that expensive equipment doesn't substitute a good photographer...

 

[Radiating]

I think it's more than just all of the Canon 50mm's that suck. I would go as far as to say that virtually all the 50mm lenses available for Canon or Nikon aren't very good, at least above f/2.8. The performance of the Canon 50mm: f/1.2, 1.4, & 1.8, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Nikon 50mm, 1.4D, 1.8G, & 1.8D and Zeiss 50mm 1.4 are all fairly bad above f/2.8.

The Voigtlander Nokton 50mm 1.4, Zeiss 50mm f/2.0 Makro, & Nikon 50mm 1.4G are decent at f/2.0 though, but leave a lot to be desired compared to what we're used to with top lenses at f/2.0.

The whole 50mm fast lens range seems to just be bad.

 

[Frankie T Fotografia]

I'm surprised none of you have complained about the color fringing on the 50mm f1.2 L lens. The color fringing on this lens is so bad that it's still visible stopped down to f4.

 

[Marsu42]

I think it's more than just all of the Canon 50mm's that suck. The whole 50mm fast lens range seems to just be bad.

Maybe "bad" is to strong a word, but "have issues" might be something many people could agree upon. And I just understand Canon: Instead of patenting every strange lens possible, why don't they just release a modern 50/1.4L without any issues (micro-usm, focus breathing) and a 1500$ price tag? They'll sell loads, I'm sure of it.

 

[Physicx]

Ive owned the 1.4 and the 1.8. I loved the look of the 1.4 at 1.4. unfortunately it is very soft and the images are not usable at 1.4. Also I have have 2 copies of that lens. Both gives purple fringling in low light at night. I didnt like the colour reproduction either.

The 1.8 is cheap but the bokeh is not as good. and it is noisy.

I have now got rid of them both and bought a sigma 1.4. it is the best lens by far. sharp images, incredible bokeh. yes canon needs a new lens.

 

[RLPhoto]

I'm surprised none of you have complained about the color fringing on the 50mm f1.2 L lens. The color fringing on this lens is so bad that it's still visible stopped down to f4.

Never been a problem on my copy. Date code 2011. The 50mm 1.2L is the best 50mm out there for SLRs. There is no aspheric 50mm's with the complete feature set of this lens. It's Great!!!