Practical use of the ef 50mm 1.2L

[mackguyver]

This is the clearest demo I've found of focus shift on the 50mm 1.2. Shows various apertures at 2', 3', 6', and 10' distances.

http://www.aravind.ca/Reviews?Canon50_f12/focus_shift

And...I've had a change of heart. Good encouragement here, along with doses of reality. Thanks. I'm going to refuse the delivery next week. Simply too much trouble to try and master at this point. I will live with the lenses I have until Canon either fixes the focus shift with a new design or Sigma demonstrates they've fixed their AF inconsistency with a firmware update or whatever it takes.

I understand your concerns based on Internet sources, but I would at least give the lens a try. You can always return it. Or if you want essentially the same lens without as much focus shift and not as soft, but with other issues (slow AF driven by wire, shallower DOF, exposed glass on mount), give the 85L II a try. These are both specialty portrait lenses that aren't easy to use, but not impossible, either. The results when shot between f/1.2 and f/2 are stunning, however.

 

[Sarpedon]

I want to second Mackguyver here. This isn't the easiest lens in the world to use, but since it's already on the way, I'd strongly encourage you to give it a shot and then return it if you don't like it.

I've had a lot of lenses in the 10 years I've shot Canon cameras. I've liked a lot of them and loved a few, but this is the one I love most.

I also think, as the link from aravind shows, that the focus shift issue is a bit overblown. It exists, sure, but you're far more likely to have shots out of focus through user error and/or the natural difficulties of shooting with such a thin depth of field; you'll find those same problems with other wide-aperture primes. This lens is difficult, but it really does reward practice and patience.

 

[mwh1964]

Great buy. I had the lens and regret I sold to get a few bucks out of it. Shoot it at 1.2 always. That is what you paid for.

 

[YuengLinger]

I've had great luck, often at max aperture, with the 85mm 1.2, the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art, and the ef 50mm 1.4. Nailing focus with an outer point on an eye, often very near MFD, but generally from about 4' - 6'. I'd rarely want the very shallow depth of field for full body portraits.

(I don't understand the many people who claim that the 50mm 1.2 is ONLY a problem at 4' - 8' away from the subject, as that is the distance for portraits with 50mm lenses for many photographers.)

But the more samples I looked at, and the more I understood of the focus shift, the more I realized that 1.2 on the 50mm 1.2 was just a little too soft for my style, and stopping down introduces challenges that don't seem very fun right now.

I've tried the Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art, liked it, but had bad luck with erratic AF.

I will just get by with the FL's I have now and hope that Canon does come out with a 50 that is truly comparable in IQ to the 85mm 1.2 (but with faster AF!) and has a floating element or whatever is needed to significantly reduce the focus shift.

 

[mackguyver]

I've had great luck, often at max aperture, with the 85mm 1.2, the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art, and the ef 50mm 1.4. Nailing focus with an outer point on an eye, often very near MFD, but generally from about 4' - 6'. I'd rarely want the very shallow depth of field for full body portraits.

(I don't understand the many people who claim that the 50mm 1.2 is ONLY a problem at 4' - 8' away from the subject, as that is the distance for portraits with 50mm lenses for many photographers.)

But the more samples I looked at, and the more I understood of the focus shift, the more I realized that 1.2 on the 50mm 1.2 was just a little too soft for my style, and stopping down introduces challenges that don't seem very fun right now.

I've tried the Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art, liked it, but had bad luck with erratic AF.

I will just get by with the FL's I have now and hope that Canon does come out with a 50 that is truly comparable in IQ to the 85mm 1.2 (but with faster AF!) and has a floating element or whatever is needed to significantly reduce the focus shift.

If you need sharp, then yes, this lens isn't for you. That's not to say it's a soft lens but compared to the 24-70 f/2.8 II or lenses like that, yes it's softer. I view it as a portrait lens and if you look at it that way (and use it that way), it's a pretty amazing lens. It works well for general purpose shots, too, but wouldn't be my first choice if I was looking for the sharpest possible photos.

 

[geekpower]

i've observed that focus shift is a thing with this lens, but it's not a big enough deal to really worry about. in my informal tests, when shooting a meter away, focus appears to shift away from the camera by about 3-4mm at most, which is usually not enough to put the subject out of focus.

on the other hand, with the dof being as shallow as it is, setting the AFMA is very important. mine needed an adjustment of -10, which made a difference of a few cm shooting 3m away, which is enough to cause trouble when shooting wide open. simple enough to do though. i bought focal to double check my manual settings and it's results were very close.

i really enjoy this lens a lot. being able to obliterate ugly backgrounds really makes the subject pop. i even enjoy it stopped down, which isn't what it's really meant for, but the colour rendition is good, and while it's not the sharpest, it's not as soft as people say either.