I've seen a lot of discussion lately about the Canon 50/1.2 vs. 50/1.4 (and to a lesser degree the 50/1.8). Technical and build quality considerations aside, one of the most common sentiments I see expressed is that the 50/1.2 has a "magical" quality of rendering images that the 50/1.4 and and 50/1.8 don't have.
I'm curious about this myself. I've used all three of these lenses myself at various times. Sometimes I think I see this quality with the 50/1.2, and other times I don't (or more accurately I see it with the 50/1.4 too).
I thought it would be interesting to invite people to post pictures they've taken with each lens, without metadata, processed the way they would normally be processed, and the rest of us can try to guess which lens was used. If the 50/1.2 does indeed have a recognizable rendering quality, shouldn't we be able to see it? I, for one, would like to know if I can see it in other side-by-side pictures since I can't always see it in my own.
Note that I'm doing this in the spirit of curiosity and not to challenge anyone's opinion or judgment about these lenses.
I'll kick things off with a few examples of my own:
That's the trouble with the canon 50mm lens, it always seems to attract these tiny little people that smile at you - very disconcerting and why I'm loathe to use one.
A note about this challenge: I think that only photos that were taken wide open using these lenses should be used, since there's no reason to buy a 50mm f/1.2L if you're not going to use it wide open.
Thank you so much for starting this thread, as I have been wanting to venture into the 50mm focal length. I've stayed away from a 50 purchase because I admit I am a pixel peeping sharpness fanatic that has been very happy with the 35L and 85L. I've even considered the unthinkable...purchasing a Sigma, but I have been concerned about the reported focus inconsistencies.
With that said, badlydrawnboy, whatever you used for #1 consider me a buyer! My hope is that you took it with the 1.4, but my gut says you probably took it with the 50L because it has been rendered sharp with smooth bokeh. I also love #4. As you so eloquently put, I often am more influenced by the subject, lighting, and overall feeling, but I do believe the lens helps!
I also agree that it would be nice if the images uploaded to this thread were between f/1.2-2.0, as wide open, or close to, is the only reason to choose this over the nifty fifty.
Looking forward to seeing how this thread progresses!
I'll give a few more people a chance to guess before I answer. But I can tell you that all of the images I uploaded are between f/1.2 and f/2.0. I rarely shoot above f/2.8 with the 50.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
That's the trouble with the canon 50mm lens, it always seems to attract these tiny little people that smile at you - very disconcerting and why I'm loathe to use one.
It's certainly not simple at close distance with such a cute little subject, but #2 and #4 look like what I'm accustomed to with the 1.2L.
I've owned all three, but the 1.8 was pretty atrocious, and I didn't have the 1.4 long enough or at the same time as the 1.2 to be able to say with certainty how its qualities compare. I just know for soft edge roll-off, the 1.2L is the best I've used. It's not the sharpest Canon 50mm -- that would probably be my 50/2.5 macro.
I was still writing when you posted your hint above! So, I'd say the third shot is the 1.4 shot at f/2 -- it definitely looks crisp with little vignetting. Oh! Now I'm confused -- maybe they are all 1.2L!
Really, to be fair, the different lenses should be shot wide open at the same distance, lighting, and subject. And not just one situation -- many, to be able to get a feel for how the lenses react. Close them down too, to see how the aperture affects the IQ -- but all the same parameters.
basselmudarris wrote:
A note about this challenge: I think that only photos that were taken wide open using these lenses should be used, since there's no reason to buy a 50mm f/1.2L if you're not going to use it wide open.
Not true. I use the L all the time at 1.4 or 1.8 for improved sharpness and contrast.
