A friend of mine recently aquired the iconic EF 50mm f/1.0L here in Australia.

I was lucky enough to have it for about 18hrs to shoot with and try it out. Having owned the 50 1.2 I was quite struck with how fine the DOF was compared even to the f/1.2. The bokeh as well ( in my shots anyways) was very different to the creamy 1.2....it was, for want of a better word...linear. Thats not a great description, but anyways....you get the idea

I tried to get a bit of a mix of shots with it, but i'd love to have it again sometime.There aren't any masterpieces in the set, but I know a lot of people are curious about this lens, I thought i'd post.....Unfortunately due to circumstances I wasn't able to get any super low light ones and I just ran out of time.

Did I find the lens soft?.....I don't think it is soft as such, but rather its a very difficult lens to shoot wide open and be spot on...I can see where this interpretation comes from,but not sure if it's accurate.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/schoolbookdepository/sets/72157628254667947/with/6445474009/

Thanks for sharing this. I agree the bokeh seems a little rough not smooth.

Thanks for the images! The bokeh from the f/1.2 version seems to be indeed smoother. I thought first that it had to do with the shape of the aperture but I assume that you shot those images at wide open, correct? So, the shape of the aperture should be just round then. Furthermore, that lens doesn't look soft considering that it was shot at f/1.0; it is just its characteristics. If somehow possible, if you could "borrow" that lens again, if you could do a direct comparison of the same target under the same lighting conditions of the two lenses at aperture settings between wide open and f/2.8 or so, it would be helpful .

Joshua

Thank you! Great.

very nice pictures!
The lens looks pretty sharp to me from ur samples..

Lurker here, coming out of the shadows after reading for years. No time like the present! How wonderful to have a friend who shares his toys. I need more friends like that.

I like the images more than I've liked most from this lens, though I agree about the bokeh. Here, and in other images I've seen, it looks a little streaky rather than creamy. I like the shots though. If this is your family, they are lovely and you are lucky both to have such friends and family.

Very nice pictures.
Amazing lens, I really don't understand why this 50mm f1 no long in production.

This comparison of a large number of 50s is something more people should read:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/996387

50L1.0 set: http://www.flickr.com/photos/alfarm/sets/72157623245044213/show/

Drool!!

No worries guys. If I get another chance to take some more I'll bump the thread.Thanks for taking a look.

mttran wrote:
50L1.0 set: http://www.flickr.com/photos/alfarm/sets/72157623245044213/show/

Fabulous images/portraits! Did you shoot these, Michael? Joshua (AGeoJO) and I will be there next February! This will be his 3rd visit and my 2nd. Are you going to be there again next year?

I will need to use my 85L II more next time. I used the 70-200L II way too much this year. Most of these were shot with the 70-200L II except for the wide-angles with my 14-24G:

http://yinyang.zenfolio.com/p784201228

bobbytan wrote:
Did you shoot these, Michael?

Bobby, i don't even have/see this lens yet Just posted someone 50L1.0 works from flickr

Jonathan Huynh wrote:
Very nice pictures.
Amazing lens, I really don't understand why this 50mm f1 no long in production.

Very simple: it was twice the price and twice the weight of the f/1.2 for no real gain. It was a more complex design which suffered - predictably - from very low contrast wide open, conferring a dreamy sort of look to the pictures. It also has poor resistance to flare.

The rear element on this lens is also very exposed and would require extreme care when changing lenses.

I'm not bagging the lens - it would take an enormous amount of skill and precision to make it - but I suspect it was designed more as an exercise than a practical tool and I can totally understand Canon's decision to obsolete it. It was a much more complex design than any of Canon's current line up.

I'd take a bet the f/1.2 is just the FD version with AF added.

The lens is just part of it, the important thing is, did it come with the BOX?

troy12n wrote:
The lens is just part of it, the important thing is, did it come with the BOX?


That made my day!

me no likey...prickly bokeh.

the bokeh is like brokeh.

RobertLynn wrote:
the bokeh is like brokeh.
lol

J.D. wrote:
The rear element on this lens is also very exposed and would require extreme care when changing lenses.
The 85 1.2 has the same inherent risk but other than the minor caveat of protecting the glass, it's nothing major.

J.D. wrote:
...
I'd take a bet the f/1.2 is just the FD version with AF added.

How much would you like to wager?
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/nfd/data/50-100/nfd_50_12.html
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/ef/data/standard/ef_50_f1.2l_usm.html