Erik, with your four bad copies, are you referring to focus shift at close range (design compromise) or something related to bad QC, ie different problems with each copy?

rfkiii wrote:

Hi Roy, just sent you a PM with my name and email.

Can you explain the nature of the data and/or computations needed in a firmware fix for spherical aberrations ie focus shift (the type usually dealt with by a floating element)? .

Hi rfkii,

I added you to the petition, thanks.

If I understand, the lens has a look up table which it uses to turn the lens in response to the camera doing the computation. Camera reads the phase shift of the incoming blurry image, camera sends lens a signal of how far away to focus and aperture setting, lens looks up how far to turn per the signal, and turns focus and sets aperture. I think it's just a matter of editing the look up table to turn a different amount for the different aperture. There is a lot of speculation on my part here, you are right, the lens may not have capacity to respond differently depending on aperture.

Roy Pertchik wrote:
I compiled a list of names and e-mail addresses submitted to me by FM'ers for a petition to Canon to do something. I got about 50 or so volunteers and sent an e-mail to Chuck via another website where he participates. I sent it about a month or so ago, but i have gotten no reply. Does anybody have an e-mail address I should ust to submit this petition? You can PM me. Also, if you want me to add your name and e-mail address to the list, PM me as well.

PM with Chuck's email sent.

Hi Roy,

I sent Chuck Westfall a direct email on the 50L too (since I believe the more customer complaint Canon sees, the more pressure they feel). I won't reprint Chuck's response verbatim since I'd like for him to respond to my absentee 5D mkII email.

Basically, he said he has tried his best to convey to Japan some of Canon's customers' concerns and frustrations. Note the use of the word: some. He suggested that I contact the Service Department since it is they who have the perogative to handle such complaints as they see fit.

Since I returned the lens, I do not know what level of standing I would have at the Service Department. Once, when I presented the Service Department with a problem regarding the dim output of my 5D's viewfinder information bar in bright sunlight, they couldn't fix it, declared it "within spec" and suggested that if I were still dissatified with the brightness level I should contact Customer Service to "register a complaint".

So, I sent Canon USA Customer Service a message through the website regarding the 50L, the 5D mk??, and my dim viewfinder info bar.

rfkiii wrote:
So, I sent Canon USA Customer Service a message through the website regarding the 50L, the 5D mk??, and my dim viewfinder info bar.

I did the same after getting a similar reply from Chuck last year. Got a reply back from customer service that there aren't any known issues with the lens and that I should send it to factory service for evaluation. Well it had already been there and back with a note of "in spec". At least I consider myself lucky that they didn't mess it up.

Hi rfkiii, and all,

Chuck has not responded to my e-mail containing 50 FM signers of a petition for info on the 50 L focus shift issue. Shameful.

Roy Pertchik wrote:
Hi rfkiii, and all,

Chuck has not responded to my e-mail containing 50 FM signers of a petition for info on the 50 L focus shift issue. Shameful.

Roy, how about forwarding the same e-mail to his boss, cc. to the boss once removed as well, with a request to free up some of Westfall's time so that he may compose a reply.

Sure! Can you provide names and e-mail addresses of said boss and uber-boss?

Roy Pertchik wrote:
Sure! Can you provide names and e-mail addresses of said boss and uber-boss?
I'll try calling them tomorrow. Hopefully their org chart is not 'confidential".
If that was Canon Canada, I could do it off the cuff.

Google helps......all info posted by Canon USA for public edification........surely cheaper than long distance phone calls too.
Yoroku Adachi....Pres &CEO
William Reed,....Sen. VP Corp. Communications.

Now, Reed may not be Westfall's direct superior, however I'd expect him to be in his line management.

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.

Interesting summary. Thank you.

Thanks for that summary kkdd.

No one, or corporation, is perfect, and a business decision was obviously made in this case, but the more pressure one receives to be better is welcome by those that WANT to be better.

I agree westvleteren. Nobody is perfect, but I would expect Canon to have pulled the lens from the market until they solve the problems, and, also keep existing users updated. But none of this is happening. Many have invested hard earned money in Canon by buying this lens, and now sit with a defective product which you can't use well.

Evidently, I am one of the fortunate few who has a 50/1.2 that is not a "defective product." When I carefully test my 50/1.2, it exhibits focus shift (inherent, it seems, for fast 50s), but only at close ranges, and the depth of field never shifts beyond the focus point. In real world shooting, the focus shift is indiscernible. Otherwise, focus is accurate and relatively fast (perhaps slightly slower than my 24-105, but much faster than my 85/1.2 II), although the 50/1.2 is more sluggish and prone to hunting in low light than I expected. (This is on a 1Ds II.) In terms of sharpness, my 50/1.2 is about 1/2 stop less sharp than my 85/1.2 until about f/2-f/2.8. In other words, my 50/1.2 is about as sharp at f/1.6 as my 85/1.2 is at f/1.2. Beginning about f/2, those two lenses are, for all practical purposes, equally sharp. Setting sharpness aside, the image quality between my 85/1.2 and my 50/1.2 is very, very similar -- and that's a very good thing. So, overall, I am quite happy with my 50/1.2 -- the focus shift does not affect me, and while I slightly prefer the IQ of my 85, I more greatly prefer the angle of view of my 50.

By the way, I was one of those who corresponded last year with Chuck Westfall about the 50/1.2, and received the same response as has been reported. I followed up this year with various Canon service centers to see if there was any truth to the rumor that there has been a silent fix to the 50/1.2 (mine is an early model). If there has been a silent fix, the service centers are not disclosing it.

Galibier, one way of finding out if the focus is good, is taking pictures in RAW and then opening them in ZoomBrowserEx. Once you have opened the CR2 file, you can select "View - Show Auto Focus POints" from the menu. You can then see where the camera auto focused, and then look if the focus in the picture is really there. For this test you should also take pictures in manual mode and manually select a specific focus point to auto focus on.
Try it on near and distant subjects, all at f1.2 for max dept of field so you will immediately notice if the focus is off. Use a tripod and remote control. You could put a ruler on a wall, and take a picture of it from a 45 degree angle, auto focusing on a number in the middle and see what you get. Before taking each shot, make sure you turn the focus ring all the way so that nothing is in focus and when you press the shutter button, the camera is then forced to focus the lens. Immediately after the first shot, take a second and third without changing anything, and compare those 3 shots.

Meh. Put me down as "happy with mine."

It is amazing that this lens brings so many contradictory opinions. Interestingly its rating on FM is 8.3 (less than many cheap zooms). I had great hopes for this lens last year and I am disappointed that it did not match 85 f/1.2 L or 35 f/1.4 L as far as quality of design is concerned

There definitely seem to be umm, "variances" out there... But to be honest, mine has worked well for me. It focuses on what I want and delivers images that are very sharp, contrasty and have saturated colors. The bokeh is excellent.

I don't know about all this "danger zone" stuff. I've pushed the lens into this "zone" and didn't see any issue. But then with f/1.2 lenses I either tend to shoot at/near wide open - or stopped down a good ways to the sweet spot. But f/2-2.8 is quite common.

In the interest of full disclosure, I got the lens used and the previous owner had sent it to be calilbrated by Canon in January of 2008 - it's a UV07xx date code. Used on a 1D2N.

There's talk about there being a "silent fix" via software on calibrated lenses or those with a UV07xx or later date code. There also seems to be a bunch of lenses exhibiting backfocus out-of-the-box, requiring calibration (common Canon QA issue). Two different issues technically, but perhaps related in the user experience and reports or just confused.

So what can I say? *I* love *my* copy. Maybe it's my lens. Maybe it's my technique. Who knows. What I can say is that I don't spend my days shooting brick walls, rulers, batteries and test charts and viewing the resulting images at 100% for hours. That makes for very boring photos. But I do know when a lens nails focus and delivers a sharp image.

I'm very pleased with my lens also.

I too am having a love affair with mine....

Jon

http://www.flickr.com/photos/harleypugs/

I got mine a couple days ago, new from Adorama its a UW06 date code. So far it seems great, although I haven't done any extensive testing.

I was curious and took a picture of a static object, with the camera in a static position. I started at f/1.2 and ran through to f/5. Sharpness is good at f/1.2 and doesn't change appreciably though the aperture range. So that's good enough for me.

The last four posts (mine included) show people very happy with their 50L. This thread got awfully quiet since...

Nothing stirs the pot like a conspiracy theory.

Keep in mind that even people like William Castleman *thought* they had a good lens, right up until he went and did some specific tests. http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/50mm_1.2L/backfocus/backfocus.htm

The same is true for Bryan Carnathan from The-Digital-Picture.com
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.2-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Now I'm not saying everyone that claims they are satisfied with their lens has a defective one. Who knows they are maybe exceptions or in the case of newer lenses even silently fixed. But it wouldn't surprise me if some of the people claiming to have a good copy actually have a bad one that just doesn't give them problems for what they are using it for. For example, Castleman was shooting sports with his and was satisfied, but he confirmed later that his lens was backfocusing.

^ A valid point, kkdd. It could very well be the way the lens is used by people both in technique and/or subject matter.

I only have 41 pics (out of quite a lot more) online, shot with the 50L - but they cover a variety of situations from macro to far and have to say, so far no complaints:

http://litpixel.com/ee/list.php?search_row=lens&keyword=Canon+EF+50mm+f%2F1.2L+USM&ee_lang=eng&u=1120

FWIW, I might add that I rarely use the center AF point. As with any bright prime, and in general - I select the AF point according to subject placement in the frame. I use Single Shot AF.