First look: Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM Image Quality

[privatebydesign]

TBH I think that when it comes to traditional portrait photography, so head & shoulders and tighter, the original 5D is one of the best cameras around. Also as at that FOV most (sensible) people want to be reasonably well stopped down the lack of AFMA isn't too much of an issue either.

That's because you didn't own the 1DS MkIII That has an absolutely beautiful low iso output especially for skin tones. At less than $1,000 on the used market they have to be the bargain of secondhand DSLR's.

 

[Sporgon]

That's because you didn't own the 1DS MkIII That has an absolutely beautiful low iso output especially for skin tones. At less than $1,000 on the used market they have to be the bargain of secondhand DSLR's.

I'm sure you're right ! I find it interesting that these cameras from a few generations back, 10 years or more so a lifetime in digital, are still so good when compared with the latest gear for portraiture yet when it comes to subtle colour fidelity in a landscape shot for instance, especially differentiating the most subtle tonal differences in greens, they are way behind.

 

[sdz]

Keep in mind that one thing hurting the EF mount is Canon has yet to release an EF-mount body with a stellar full frame sensor. Sure, the 5D4 hangs on to the edge of acceptable, but we all know where it stands in relation to some of the competition. If the 5DsR II or 5D5 is an EF camera, then we can all put down our umbrellas because the sky won't be falling. But I don't think that will happen.

DO you have 5D4 and consider it not stellar? Saying "to the edge of acceptable" is funny! (with the same logic EOS R would be below acceptable)

If we replace 'stellar' with 'best in class' then HDM's evaluation would make better sense. But a problem remains with his evaluation. An always relavant question to ask in these instances is: Which camera sold today by a top camera maker produces bad photos when used according to its intended purpose? 'Good photos' here means 'acceptable to a reasonable person' that knows photography. The R, with its banding problems, will likely produce good photos in most instances. The 5D IV produces good photos. Neither camera has a best in class sensor. Reasonable and knowledgeable photographers use the 5D IV.

 

[highdesertmesa]

...An always relavant question to ask in these instances is: Which camera sold today by a top camera maker produces bad photos when used according to its intended purpose?...

Exactly the wrong question to be asking.

Canon needs a D850-class sensor like the desert needs rain and to try and smooth it over with these kind of "no duh" arguments won't change that fact.

 

[sdz]

Exactly the wrong question to be asking.

Canon needs a D850-class sensor like the desert needs rain and to try and smooth it over with these kind of "no duh" arguments won't change that fact.

Why does Canon need these sensors? To make more money than it makes now? To stand atop the hill?

 

[highdesertmesa]

Why does Canon need these sensors? To make more money than it makes now? To stand atop the hill?

For the users. Rent a GFX, D850, or A7RIII for a few days and see for yourself.

 

[sdz]

For the users. Rent a GFX, D850, or A7RIII for a few days and see for yourself.

See the small difference in image quality between them?

 

[highdesertmesa]

See the small difference in image quality between them?

I would characterize the differences as significant, at least to the kind of images I produce. Canon still leads on color science, lens design, and user interface, so a class-leading Canon sensor in a 5D5 or 5DsRII (or coming high-res, pro R body) would be the holy grail for me and I think for a lot of other people, too.

The GFX/D850 are right at the point where new sensor improvements will have diminishing returns, but Canon isn't quite there yet. (I'm revisiting your "how good is good enough" statement.) Of course, at some point we will get a generational improvement with global shutters and organic sensor dynamic range, and we can reset expectations accordingly.

 

[Viggo]

I learned today the RF50 has 4 stops of vignetting wide open, that’s no good, in fact it might be a deal breaker... especially since AF coverage is one of the big reasons I’m buying the EOS R... was there really no way to keep it around 2,5 stops? Wow... and if the R shows banding when correcting 4 stops that means useless corners , no matter how sharp they are... bah...

 

[YuengLinger]

I learned today the RF50 has 4 stops of vignetting wide open, that’s no good, in fact it might be a deal breaker... especially since AF coverage is one of the big reasons I’m buying the EOS R... was there really no way to keep it around 2,5 stops? Wow... and if the R shows banding when correcting 4 stops that means useless corners , no matter how sharp they are... bah...

This is troubling news.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

TBH I think that when it comes to traditional portrait photography, so head & shoulders and tighter, the original 5D is one of the best cameras around. Also as at that FOV most (sensible) people want to be reasonably well stopped down the lack of AFMA isn't too much of an issue either.

Never used the original 5D so can’t speak for it, but out of all the cameras I’ve used since 2010 when I got serious, I like the 5DSR rendition the best. Shots taken with the 100 or 85 - when exposed correctly, the images are almost perfect out of camera, very little if any PP needed on my part. The skin tones, OOC colors, and rendering make it my favorite camera for that use. In fact, if it wasn’t for the lack of speed, I’d probably be using it as my main camera...

 

[Viggo]

And/or the EF 50 f1.2 was not a sharp lens especially wide open, much CA is present which the RF seems not to have. Go to wonder about vignetting, the RF should be better there as well.

It’s worse with vignetting, the RF has FOUR stops... I was so disappointed ...

 

[Sporgon]

Never used the original 5D so can’t speak for it, but out of all the cameras I’ve used since 2010 when I got serious, I like the 5DSR rendition the best. Shots taken with the 100 or 85 - when exposed correctly, the images are almost perfect out of camera, very little if any PP needed on my part. The skin tones, OOC colors, and rendering make it my favorite camera for that use. In fact, if it wasn’t for the lack of speed, I’d probably be using it as my main camera...

Yes, the 5Ds/sr is superb. My main camera now. Finally banished the nostalgic ghostly yearning of MF or even LF film.

 

[Viggo]

Why does Rockwell get some vignetting and TDP gets 4(!) stops?

Ken had some uncorrected and some corrected, this is the uncorrected.

Is the TDP shot just severely underexposed?

 

[Viggo]

Was supposed have 5 or 6 stops how could Canon claim that if it only has 4 and with Vingetting? What is the truth about the lens?

Not quite sure I got what you meant?

 

[SaP34US]

What is the image quality from lens? Does have vingetting and how serious is it? Not very many people have used it yet.

 

[Viggo]

What is the image quality from lens? Does have vingetting and how serious is it? Not very many people have used it yet.

TDP has some intiltal tests of performance among others, vignetting and found FOUR stops. Ken Rockwell also has a test of image quality etc. Did I not mention that in the previous post?

It’s REALLY sharp, but what good is f1.2 when the corners are f5.

 

[MartinF.]

It will be interesting to see if an updated EF 50 1.2L ever comes out, along with the 24-70 f/2.8L IS. If either doesn't show up for EF, it'll be time to switch over.

That is exactly also my dilemma. I am saving up to a 24-70 f/2.8 mkII, but when will EF mount/ EOS DSLR be a dead end? Probably not the first 5 to 10 years, but I guess it will be sometime in the future, and that is quite frustrating.

 

[Viggo]

I had a go with the RF50 yesterday and my god what a lens! I’m buying for sure! The IQ at 1.2 is almost not rivaled by anything larger than f2.0 in any lens ever. It’s amazing.

And I did not notice a lot of vignetting at all, so I don’t know how TDP got theirs to show four stops. I say it’s very close to the 85 f1.4 L.

And the lack of aberrations even in the extreeeeme cornes is crazy. It’s sharper at 1.2 by quite some bit than my 35 L II... AF is instant and so certain. It made my 85 L IS seem like a toy. Also much lighter than I expected.

 

[snappy604]

I had a go with the RF50 yesterday and my god what a lens! I’m buying for sure! The IQ at 1.2 is almost not rivaled by anything larger than f2.0 in any lens ever. It’s amazing.

And I did not notice a lot of vignetting at all, so I don’t know how TDP got theirs to show four stops. I say it’s very close to the 85 f1.4 L.

And the lack of aberrations even in the extreeeeme cornes is crazy. It’s sharper at 1.2 by quite some bit than my 35 L II... AF is instant and so certain. It made my 85 L IS seem like a toy. Also much lighter than I expected.

Samples! I'm sure there are cats nearby