yes.

Just another experience update... I'm also using mine for low light high school basketball, so far more or less exclusively at f/2. I couldn't be happier with it — so much so that now I can't shoot with my 85 f/1.8 anymore.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Nill Toulme wrote:
Just another experience update... I'm also using mine for low light high school basketball, so far more or less exclusively at f/2. I couldn't be happier with it — so much so that now I can't shoot with my 85 f/1.8 anymore.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Nill, I just looked through the Druid Hills HS Bball pics - outstanding work!
Do you work near one basket, using the 50 for action near you and the 200 for stuff on the other end of the court? Since I see some 200mm shots at f/2, you must have the 1.8L.

Thanks! Yes exactly. In that gym I was able to shoot ISO 1600 at one end, the usual 3200 at the other, in either case, as always, 1/400 at f/2.

But I've bought some strobes...

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

nill, we'd expect your 50L to work as advertised under those conditions.   the issue is at close focus and not at longer distances like sports.   william castleman said his copy was perfect because he was only shooting sports.   once he tested close up he noticed a problem.

either way, if it works well for your intended use then enjoy it and don't look back.

-erik

I try never to look back, but I often fail. ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

flatdraft wrote:
...the issue is at close focus and not at longer distances like sports. william castleman said his copy was perfect because he was only shooting sports. once he tested close up he noticed a problem.

either way, if it works well for your intended use then enjoy it and don't look back.

-erik
The problems at closer distances do affect my work. Unfortunately, I can't return the lens, so I'm stuck waiting for Canon to come up with a fix. In the mean time, I will try to use it for what it does well.

Nill Toulme wrote:
Just another experience update... I'm also using mine for low light high school basketball, so far more or less exclusively at f/2. I couldn't be happier with it — so much so that now I can't shoot with my 85 f/1.8 anymore.


Nill - glad to hear it. If I only planned on using the lens for my sports work, I'd have absolutely no problem keeping it. But I was in a position where I need to keep either the 50L or the 35L, and if I can't use the 50L in the same situations I use the 35L (low light event work, focusing on individuals) then I couldn't justify keeping the 50L. The 50/1.4 performance is okay for the sports work I do, so until Canon figures out what's up with the 50L I'm sure I will do fine and my clients won't notice the difference.

Photon wrote:
The problems at closer distances do affect my work. Unfortunately, I can't return the lens, so I'm stuck waiting for Canon to come up with a fix. In the mean time, I will try to use it for what it does well.

i could have survived with it on MF up close and AF for further action but ended up returning mine (all three of them) because PMA was so close.   i'm glad i did because now i can put my money toward a 16-35L mkII until the 50L gets sorted out.

it's frustrating that a lot of 50L owners here passed their return periods before discovering the close-up AF anomaly.   let's hope canon finds a solution before shooting season -- which i say sarcastically because it's always shooting season.

-erik

flatdraft wrote:

it's frustrating that a lot of 50L owners here passed their return periods before discovering the close-up AF anomaly. let's hope canon finds a solution before shooting season -- which i say sarcastically because it's always shooting season.

-erik
No kidding! For me, though, weddings definitely pick up in warmer weather, and I would love to be able to count on the lens for shots from 3 feet at whatever aperture I choose. I'd also love to have a 1DMk3 - right now! - but I don't know when I'll be able to afford it. So, give me a firmware solution for my Mk2, please!

Photon wrote:
I'd also love to have a 1DMk3 - right now!

heh, i'd love to have a 1Ds3 right now but am half tempted to get a 1D3 and call it a year.   whoever said that patience is a virtue never mentioned that waiting for new gear (or solutions for current gear) absolutely sucks!

-erik

Has anyone heard anything from Canon regarding a fix?

ed, nothing definitive yet.   i asked chuck westfall for an update last week and this was his response:

"Technical discussions about the EF50mm f/1.2L USM are continuing to occur between Canon USA and Canon Inc.. The matter is not resolved yet, but it is most certainly not being ignored. Unfortunately, I can't say much more about it until there is an official conclusion."

i understand the legal reasons behind chuck's somewhat vague commentary about this lens and am glad to hear that the wheels are turning.

ironically enough, by the time canon finds a fix for this lens i may not even want one anymore.   i might just get a 45 TS-E to use as my normal lens and call it a done deal.

-erik

Right on, man. Thanks for the update.

Cool. Good news.

hahr wrote:
...

"Technical discussions about the EF50mm f/1.2L USM are continuing to occur between Canon USA and Canon Inc.. The matter is not resolved yet, but it is most certainly not being ignored. Unfortunately, I can't say much more about it until there is an official conclusion."
...
-erik
Sounds promising to me. Thanks for keeping us informed.

>>i might just get a 45 TS-E to use as my normal lens and call it a done deal.

yes, my 45 TS-E and 50mm CM together slowed my jump into the 50L... two very fine normal lenses... though I wouldn't mind a faster 50 with AF... (which is why I am still following this thread)... not to mention that I still think my Summicron-R 50 and Super-Takumar 50/1.4 are probably still nicer than the 50L...

i'll keep communication going with chuck and inform everyone as soon as i learn anything new.

mh2000 wrote:
yes, my 45 TS-E and 50mm CM together slowed my jump into the 50L... two very fine normal lenses... though I wouldn't mind a faster 50 with AF... (which is why I am still following this thread)... not to mention that I still think my Summicron-R 50 and Super-Takumar 50/1.4 are probably still nicer than the 50L...

after going through my 50L shots i quickly realized that shallow DOF is useless without control.   the 45 TS-E may not have as shallow of DOF but at least the plane of focus can be controlled.   i still like the 35mm focal length on 36x24mm much more than 50mm so i very well might just skip the 50L after all.   or, at a minimum, i'd need all three in my bag (35L/45TS/50L) as they all do different things.

-erik

I too pretty much got the same response Erik did from Chuck which was why I haven't posted back either. I also know Chuck is not in the office at the moment and figured give him time for PMA and his other responsibilities. I may try to do an in-person visit as well since I am fairly close to C-USA's offices.

Sounds awesome. Hopelly you'll be able to get good answers from the man.

hahr wrote:
ed, nothing definitive yet.   i asked chuck westfall for an update last week and this was his response:

"Technical discussions about the EF50mm f/1.2L USM are continuing to occur between Canon USA and Canon Inc.. The matter is not resolved yet, but it is most certainly not being ignored. Unfortunately, I can't say much more about it until there is an official conclusion."

i understand the legal reasons behind chuck's somewhat vague commentary about this lens and am glad to hear that the wheels are turning.

-erik

Has there been any further news regarding the issues raised in this thread concerning the 50/1.2? Needless to say, I'm also encountering problems with focus in close-up portraiture using a selected peripheral AF point on my 1Ds2 across a range of apertures.

I've made a summary about all the issues so far here: http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2008/07/16/canon-ef-50mm-f12-l-defective-by-design/

This lens has been $1500 down the drain.