Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
- Thread starter candc
- Start date
Jessica Claire has a blog post with some good photos made with this lens:
http://www.jessicaclaire.net/index.cfm/postID/263/Wedding-with-DJ-Brittany-Rod
http://www.jessicaclaire.net/index.cfm/postID/263/Wedding-with-DJ-Brittany-Rod
Upvote
0
Indeed ... if they were too many than it'd be too much awesomeness for us to take. ;Dmrsfotografie said:Rienzphotoz said:You guys are all jealous of Ken's awesomeness... people like him are one in a billion ;D
...fortunately ;D
Upvote
0
It kinda makes you want that lens, doesn´t it ... Maybe I should have spent $4k on this one instead of the Otus (which I haven´t received yet) ... Maybe one of the expected 2014 lenses from Canon is a version II ...zlatko said:
Upvote
0
candc said:
Duller, perhaps, and yes, he sometimes makes good points; and he sometimes provides useful information (e.g. yesterday he linked to a remarkable deal on the 28mm IS at Adorama that was not mentioned here as far as I can tell) but his presentation of those points is terrible - unless you like badly written, unedited stream-of-consciousness stuff that constantly repeats itself and contradicts itself from one article to the next (FF is better, no it's not; don't shoot raw, shoot raw; I never use a tripod, these were shot with a tripod; etc., etc.). Leaving content aside, he badly needs an editor. That said, given how popular his site is he doesn't have much incentive to do anything about it....
Upvote
0
surapon
80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
neuroanatomist said:sdsr said:
What photographer wouldn't find this appealing?!?
+ 100 for me too, Dear Teacher, Mr. neuroanatomist .
I must play this games with my Brother in-law, Dr. Govit, He is the Biggest Nikon Fan too.
Have a great weekend, Sir.
Surapon
Upvote
0
Pi said:
Pi - Ok I'll bite.
We seem to agree that many digital cameras are insensitive to light arriving from large apertures. I know this to be a fact with my 5D2 and 1D4 and all the f/1.2 and f/1.4 lenses I've tested. I invite you to test this if you disagree.
Nevertheless, you have a persistent belief that apertures wider than about f/1.4 decrease the depth of field even though very little additional light reaches the photodiode.
I would like to understand how a camera's photodiode can simultaneously detect and not detect light. It is a very clever trick.
Upvote
0
Of course they do. You can see it. Compare a photo taken at f/1 with a photo taken at f/1.4. The one at f/1 has less depth of field.noisejammer said:
Upvote
0
noisejammer said:Pi - Ok I'll bite.
We seem to agree that many digital cameras are insensitive to light arriving from large apertures. I know this to be a fact with my 5D2 and 1D4 and all the f/1.2 and f/1.4 lenses I've tested. I invite you to test this if you disagree.
Nevertheless, you have a persistent belief that apertures wider than about f/1.4 decrease the depth of field even though very little additional light reaches the photodiode.
I would like to understand how a camera's photodiode can simultaneously detect and not detect light. It is a very clever trick.
Yes, it is. It detects a part of it.
I do not have a belief, I have evidence because I have tested it.
KR has tested it, too; You can even see clear difference between f/1.0 and f/1.2:
One can speculate a lot about how exactly light gets lost, and why you lose only a fraction of the light coming from the most oblique rays. There are certain physics principles which could explain this.
Upvote
0
They are about the same weight, but the Zeiss Otus is about 2 inches longer. Despite the price similarity, these lenses are rather different overall. The Canon lens is long discontinued, while the Zeiss is just coming on the market. This means that repair of the Canon lens may not be easily available. The Zeiss will have class-leading superlative sharpness, while the Canon was not known as a very sharp lens (known more for its dreamy quality). The Canon has autofocus (albeit slow), while the Zeiss is manual focus. The Zeiss is 55mm and f/1.4, while the Canon is 50mm and f/1.0. The Canon lens was $2,500 for many years when new and has gone up in price because of rarity, while the Zeiss is coming on the market at $4,000.MLfan3 said:
Upvote
0
I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND ANYONE BUY THIS LENS FOR ANY PRICE, NO MATTER HOW TEMPTING.
In my opinion, this lens's price is way over inflated, due to it's fragile internal electronics.
I have this lens. I bought it used some years ago, still in great shape. Now, it's nothing more than a really expensive curiosity stuffed at the back of my drawer. As it's been said, it focuses electronically at a glacial speed, even in manual mode. The USM gave up without warning on me after 2 years owning it and an authorized canon repair center could do nothing for me, even after contacting Canon Europe, as spare parts are unavailable. They also said Japan wouldn't have parts for the lens. I even contacted Canon US to no avail. The motor is not compatible with any other lens like the 1.2 50 or 85. So, now I have a useless, non-working lens. If I could at least manually focus the lens, I wouldn't have minded nearly so much. I've since bought a 1.2 50 which is far better.
In my opinion, this lens's price is way over inflated, due to it's fragile internal electronics.
I have this lens. I bought it used some years ago, still in great shape. Now, it's nothing more than a really expensive curiosity stuffed at the back of my drawer. As it's been said, it focuses electronically at a glacial speed, even in manual mode. The USM gave up without warning on me after 2 years owning it and an authorized canon repair center could do nothing for me, even after contacting Canon Europe, as spare parts are unavailable. They also said Japan wouldn't have parts for the lens. I even contacted Canon US to no avail. The motor is not compatible with any other lens like the 1.2 50 or 85. So, now I have a useless, non-working lens. If I could at least manually focus the lens, I wouldn't have minded nearly so much. I've since bought a 1.2 50 which is far better.
Upvote
0
jason_wen said:
That is useful info that readers don't get from KR. He is predicting a big price rise for this lens (which is possible), but it may nevertheless be very impractical to use this lens long term. Canon's 50/1.2 is effectively the replacement for the 50/1.0 and, despite the smaller aperture, is a more practical alternative — faster AF and currently repairable.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
