Hi I'm stuck deciding if I should upgrade my 50mm 1.8 to a 1.2 or go with the 1.4, I've done some research and read that the Sigma 50mm 1.4 is a better lens than the Canon 1.4. If you have had any of these lens any advice would be great to help me make my decision.
Help. 50mm 1.2 ?
- Thread starter RoaVision
- Start date
I've owned both and it really depends on your needs. the 50 1.4 is a great lens, but isn't really sharp and contrasty until f/2. The 1.2 is contrasty at 1.2, and sharp by 1.4 or so, but the 1.4 is actually sharper beyond f/4. The 1.2 resists flare much better if you plan to shoot into the sun or shoot a lot of backlit stuff. The AF is better on the 1.2 but not was fast as other USM lenses, but it is more durable than the micro-USM on the 1.4. Distortion and CA are pretty close, but the 1.2 has a lot of LoCA between f/1.2 and 2.8. The build quality of the 1.2 is MUCH better if toughness is a concern. The bokeh on the 1.2 is quite a bit better too, and at 1.2 it's pretty amazing. Is it that much better than the 1.4? Dollar for dollar, no, but if you use it a lot and those differences are meaningful, yes.
Okay, now I wish I hadn't sold my copy of 1.2 :'(
Okay, now I wish I hadn't sold my copy of 1.2 :'(
Upvote
0
surapon
80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
RoaVision said:
Dear Mr. RoaVision.
Per the Link below, If Open Wide at F = 1.4, Yes The Sigma 50 mm F/ 1.4 is sharper than Canon EF 50 MM. F/ 1.4.
But From my eyes ( Old Eyes), When I adjust ( in the Program Below) At Above F = 2.0, Both lens are Great Sharp and Equal Sharp in my Eyes.
Yes, That Why I make decision to buy Sigma 50 mm. F/ 1.4 ( Cost me $ 50 More Dollars than Canon 50 mm F/ 1.4)---Just for the Wide open F. Stop. Sorry, I do not get Canon 50 MM F/ 1.2 L because I already have EF 85 MM , F/ 1.2 L MK II
Just My Idea, and My Poor Eyes.
Surapon
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=473&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
Surapon
PS.
Dear Friends.
Yesterday, I went to the local Camera shop, an try Canon EF 50 mm. F/ 1.2 L, and I fell in love with that big Babe. BUT, When I come home and open the Internet , to compare with my Sigma 50 mm F/ 1. 4 Again---Set up both lens at F= 1.4-----What wrong with my eyes---I see on the chart that Sigma Lens at F = 1.4 is sharper than Canon 1.2 L at same F= 1.4------ Please tell me that My eyes/ Old Eyes is not good any more.
Thanks.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=403&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=473&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
Upvote
0
I've used the Sigma for a few years and have been really happy. I just got the 1.2 on Friday and so far it's so close to the Sigma that I'm not sure what I spent the extra money on. I plan to do a full comparison in the near future though. Here are two shots taken wide open. The Sigma is a bit shorter than 50mm, but not as much as these images would suggest. I believe I was a little further back with the Sigma.
My initial impression is that the Canon is definitely better. I'm not convinced that it's 4x the price better.
Both are definitely a step up from the Canon 1.4 when shooting wide open.
EDIT: replacing attachments with larger versions:
SIGMA:
My initial impression is that the Canon is definitely better. I'm not convinced that it's 4x the price better.
Both are definitely a step up from the Canon 1.4 when shooting wide open.
EDIT: replacing attachments with larger versions:
SIGMA:
Attachments
Upvote
0
surapon
80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
bchernicoff said:
Dear Sir, Mr. bchernicoff
Please take a shots and Compare Between Sigma 50 mm F/ 1.4 and The EF 50 mm F/ 1.2 L for us to see and Compare. Special at F = 1.4 both of the Lenses, Yes, Sir, I want to know/ to see For the REAL Shots from you, Not from the Lab.
Thanks you, Sir.
Surapon
Upvote
0
RoaVision said:
I rented the Canon 50 f/1.2 a month ago...mostly for a video shoot, but I played with it for stills too.
It has moved to the top of my list of lenses to get next.
I'm about to pick up a rental of the canon 85mm f/1.2 today for shooting Voodoo Fest in New Orleans this weekend. I'm guessing this will become my #2 lens to get on the list next.
But that 50 is wonderful....I'd recommend it.
cayenne
Upvote
0
My 50mm f1.2 is one of my most beloved primes. It is great for both shallow depth of field and low light shots. Depending a bit on circumstances color rendering on this lens can be especially nice.
But there is a dependency regarding autofocus capability:
You will need a camera body with really good autofocus such as a 5D Mark III or a 1D-series body to make best use of this lens. Even if you shoot with something like a 7D you will have to work for good f1.2 shots with this lens. AFMA doesn't eliminate this difference.
May I ask the OP what camera body do you use?
But there is a dependency regarding autofocus capability:
You will need a camera body with really good autofocus such as a 5D Mark III or a 1D-series body to make best use of this lens. Even if you shoot with something like a 7D you will have to work for good f1.2 shots with this lens. AFMA doesn't eliminate this difference.
May I ask the OP what camera body do you use?
Upvote
0
Standard said:
Agree. I used three copies, they needed different MA (the current one needs none). They all focus very well on my 5D2, no complaints at all. I can focus well even with the outer AF points, unless it is really dark.
To the OP - the 50L is an excellent lens. Sharp enough wide open, with some loss of contrast with backlit scenes wide open (well, avoid them), excellent color rendering, great potential for good bokeh.
Upvote
0
Pi said:
My 5D2 AF with the 50L was hit or miss (mostly miss) at the outer points. Center point AF was good. With 5D3, AF with non-center points is almost as good as the center column.
Upvote
0
I'm in the same boat as the OP. I am rebuilding my set of primes (non-L's) and I'm taking a good look at the 1.2L.
I have a strong desire to get a good 50mm soon and it's an agony to wait for the 50mm f1.8?/1.4? IS USM, which has a CR1 rating:
http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/10/a-new-50-coming-soon-cr1/
I want to see first how the new 50mm will be, before making a decision between that and the 1.2L. $1700 + tax
(even minus the rebate of $180) is a boat load of money.
If you could hold on a little bit more, maybe you could save at least 800-900 bucks. But that's still months away.
For now I'll try to get most out of my new 35mm IS (if I can).
I have a strong desire to get a good 50mm soon and it's an agony to wait for the 50mm f1.8?/1.4? IS USM, which has a CR1 rating:
http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/10/a-new-50-coming-soon-cr1/
I want to see first how the new 50mm will be, before making a decision between that and the 1.2L. $1700 + tax
(even minus the rebate of $180) is a boat load of money.
If you could hold on a little bit more, maybe you could save at least 800-900 bucks. But that's still months away.
For now I'll try to get most out of my new 35mm IS (if I can).
Upvote
0
Triggyman said:
The 50L is available now from the major vendors for $1,439 (you have to put it in your cart to see that price). After the rebate and 4% BH credit, the effective price is $1,201!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
