Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L

[KyleSTL]

Sorry for the pedantic comment, but the bokeh of the 1.8 is pentagonal (five-sided), not hexagonal (six-sided).

I do agree with the assessment that if Canon made a 1.4 with the build quality and wide-open image quality of the new 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm IS primes, the sales of the 1.2L would be greatly affected. I like my 1.8 v. I, but I'm always on the lookout for a deal on a used or broken 1.4 because of the wider aperture, better (not excellent, though) build quality, and USM (though not Ring-USM). Personally, I wouldn't consider the 1.2 for myself because of price alone, but the advantages over the 1.4 (build, weather sealing and Ring-USM) are obvious. The image quality and focus accuracy are debatable.

 

[RLPhoto]

Love the 50L, worth every penny.

 

[RS2021]

I have used the 50 1.2 for two years now and it is the only L lens that i have that seems outdated.
My TS-E 24mm II, 85mm 1.2 II and 135mm 2.0 are noticeably sharper and more reliable.

Even then it is on my camera half the time because i love the focal length and aperture.
All Leica 50mm lenses put the smackdown on the canon 50 1.2. That is why i am saving for the new Leica M with 50mm apo 50mm 2.0.

Please Canon update the 50mm to the level of your other better primes.

+1 ... agreed.

At least part of the draw for some users is the snob value of the L lens, don't get excited if this is not the reason you like the f1.2.

But to quote an earlier poster the only ones who complain "are those who can't afford it" ...without meaning anything personal, what a pathetic, snobbish thing to say... So something expensive, by default, HAS to be of high quality? is this the way to define oneself as being "better"?... If not, why would someone even vocalize such a thought? What does it say about you?

50L is a controversial L lens and for such a basic standard focal length, there should be no contention...it should be hailed as being stellar... this L lens has at best mixed reviews. If it works for you, great, but don't discount significant number of users who have owned it and passed on it.

In spite of some who would pay 4 times more for the L's red ring and are appologizers for lens... Canon will quietly update it faster than the usual cycle... they know they cannot have half the potential market even having second thoughts.

 

[Shermanstank]

One of my favorite L primes. I still shoot film both 35mm and medium format. The color rendition of this lens is spectacular. I really have no issues with misfocused shots since I always try to manually focus after recomposing the shot.


Love this beast



UNIONSQUAREMARKET#11 by TheShermansTank, on Flickr

 

[RS2021]

One of my favorite L primes. I still shoot film both 35mm and medium format. The color rendition of this lens is spectacular. I really have no issues with misfocused shots since I always try to manually focus after recomposing the shot.


Love this beast

Why did you edit the original post to remove the attached picture?

 

[Eli]

I love my 50L, my most favourite lens. When I had the 1.4 I'd never use it below f2.8, but with the 50L, shots you get with f1.2 are just magical and still retain a lot of contrast and colour, may take a few clicks of the shutter though. And not to mention the build quality feels amazing, the lens just feels "right" on my 5d mkiii, and weather sealed. I'm no professional photographer but all my lenses are weather sealed, I've been in situations where my gear has gotten quite wet and thankful for weather sealing.
The sharpness or "lack of" doesn't bother me either, I'm not printing large prints or using 100% crops of photos, and even if I was I'd just stop down to 2.8. Just because its an f1.2 doesn't mean you have to use it at 1.2 all the time, at 2.8 it's still an excellently sharp lens. But 1.2 is where the magic is, and that's why people buy the magical and appropriately named "King of BOKEH".

 

[Marek Truchlik]

I have tried all Canon 50mm lenses.
I hope upgraded version will be born soon.
I would love to add new extremely sharp L lens into my kit.

 

[RS2021]

Really great shots, Standard.

 

[rossbeckernz]

I have an FD50 f1.2L which I replaced the FD mount with an chipped EF mount & use it a lot on my 1D4 bodies.
It's a fabulous lens, very small, about the size of the EF50 f1.8. The FD 50L has a very long helicoid & so manual focusing is very precise.
Incidently I've also retrofitted an EF mount on a FD85 f1.2L which is also a fabulous lens. It's much bigger & heavier than the FD50L.

You can see photos of the conversion here (50L first then the 85L)
http://goo.gl/GVLnW
http://goo.gl/xsZzt

 

[JVLphoto]

But if you want to explore your creative potential with a single lens, the 50L is probably one of the better choices, seems to me.

I think you summed up my experience with the lens nicely. Being able to explore and play with Bokeh and depth of field to that degree is indeed a creative decision more than technical.

 

[JVLphoto]

All the photos except the bokeh photo are taken with the 50L. A little bias?

The bias is that it's a review on the Canon 50mm f/1.2 L lens. And while I felt it important to show some level of comparison (the differences between lenses is often a question I ask myself), it wasn't a comparative review itself. Obviously, owning the 50 1.4, I have a FAR greater catalogue of images taken with it.

 

[JVLphoto]

My only comment on the review itself is your bokeh comparison - why at f/7.1? I guess it's to show they are similar, but at f/2-4, they are very different...

True true, I wanted to show the difference the aperture blades make, nothing more, I mention it's not a comment in the overall quality of the background, but, starting at around 7.1 you can see the shapes they make, and that could be an issue for some.

 

[JVLphoto]

As for the review, I don't think much of it – neither accurate nor complete.

I don't know how my opinion can be inaccurate, incomplete for sure, story of my life - literally. Thanks for reading!

 

[JVLphoto]

Sorry for the pedantic comment, but the bokeh of the 1.8 is pentagonal (five-sided), not hexagonal (six-sided).

No, thanks! I can't make the edit myself though, so I'll just sound more like a tool. :-X

One of my long time curiosities with the lens was will I upgrade from my 1.4? After 2 weeks with the 1.2 the answer is no - but I did *like* using it more than I do my 1.4, and maybe that counts for something?

 

[Dylan777]

All the photos except the bokeh photo are taken with the 50L. A little bias? But after owning the 1.8 Mrk 1, 1.4, and the 1.2L, I know the bias for the 1.2.

The only people who bash the 1.2L are the people who can't afford it.

+1...never own 1.8. But I did owned 1.4 and sold it. Bought the 50L, I mainly use this lens at 1.4.....Bokeh is super

 

[JonAustin]

In the listing of Canon 50mm primes, the review fails to mention the f/2.5 compact macro. Sure it's a macro and slower than the others, but it's still a 50mm prime, and IMHO sharper and better built than the f/1.8.

I hope that Canon releases a new f/1.4 with true ring USM sometime soon.

 

[vscd]

Well there seem to be mixed opinions about this lens. I got one some time ago and sold it again... it was a nice lens for some special pics, but I didn't thought the price would benefit the results (f 1.2 is 36,11% more light than f1.4, only). The 85 f1.2 is magic all over it's range, but the 50mm 1.2 is rather poor. It's better than the 50mm 1.0, really... but no match to the Canonball or newer lenses from canon without "L"-designation (but sadly nearly the same pricetag).

There are drawbacks on the 85mm 1.2, f.e. you need power on the mount to manually focus the lens, no wheater sealing for the "L"-Lens, slow AF and the extending front isn't nice, eighter.

On the other Hand you pay nearly the same price for Carl Zeiss 50mm Lenses with *manual* focus but to say "you are jealous" if you can't afford one, is childish. I use a lens to make pictures and I can assure you there are a lot of lenses out there for small budget but with great specs. There is no need to pay hundreds of dollars for the red rings just because of fluorit glasses or metal case if you can't see the results. I guess quite a few use the 50mm 1.2 on cropped sensors, only. So, the weak points are missing in the picture and hey, a 50mm lense is one of the simplest lens-calculations out there. I think Canon will bring a new 50mm 1.4 formula which will excell the old 50mm 1.2, easily. I think the disapearing of the old 50mm 1.4 is even anounced, yet.

It's like everything, f.e. like a sportscar: you can pay 20000$ in extra for the 10 Horsepower S-Edition... but you could spend the money on a bike and get the same results but with a brighter smile on your face ;D

 

[JVLphoto]

In the listing of Canon 50mm primes, the review fails to mention the f/2.5 compact macro. Sure it's a macro and slower than the others, but it's still a 50mm prime, and IMHO sharper and better built than the f/1.8.

I hope that Canon releases a new f/1.4 with true ring USM sometime soon.

True, I guess I was too sweeping with my statements in listing the lineup. I considered the lens, but omitted it knowing that it's not really in the same lens category. I try to keep the reviews from being too complicated (listing a MF Macro lens etc etc) but, not trying to be misleading.

I'd love for you to post more examples of your experience here if you'd like!

 

[JVLphoto]

Well there seem to be mixed opinions about this lens...

There are drawbacks on the 85mm 1.2, f.e. you need power on the mount to manually focus the lens, no wheater sealing for the "L"-Lens, slow AF and the extending front isn't nice, eighter.

On the other Hand you pay nearly the same price for Carl Zeiss 50mm Lenses with *manual* focus but to say "you are jealous" if you can't afford one, is childish. I use a lens to make pictures and I can assure you there are a lot of lenses out there for small budget but with great specs. There is no need to pay hundreds of dollars for the red rings just because of fluorit glasses or metal case if you can't see the results. I guess quite a few use the 50mm 1.2 on cropped sensors, only. So, the weak points are missing in the picture and hey, a 50mm lense is one of the simplest lens-calculations out there. I think Canon will bring a new 50mm 1.4 formuala which easily will excell the old 50mm 1.2, easily.

I agree with everything you said. I have an 85 1.2 review still in draft with similar sentiments.

 

[vscd]

@JVLPhoto
If you like the 85mm 1.2 (and I love mine), you probably find this page interesting: http://www.gletscherbruch.de/foto/85er/objektiv.html. It's german, but you can translate it. It's some rare pictures of the Canon 85mm L 1.2 II from inside The effort taken to move the heavy glaslenses is immense... on the 6th picture from the top you see some reflexes in the glass.... those reflexes are 72 (!) balls to hold one of the lenses because of it's own weight.

Maybe the 50mm 1.2 has some complex parts, too, and the price is reasonable... but someone has really to pay 4 times the price for the last 1/3 stop he's never gonna use. The famous 50mm f1.0 is known to be much more worse and nearly unusable full open, but to dazzle around people pay $6000 and more on ebay. And I must admit, just to have one... luckily I have to pay my gear by myself. This is out of scope

Edit: One good point on bright Canon-lenses is the posibility to close the aperture by 1/3 EV steps, mostly. Often the open aperture form 3rd PartyLenses (maybe a lense with max [email protected]) is followed by f2, then some half steps and from f4 on full steps etc...