Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM

about | support

This is an excerpt from my initial impressions posted on POTN. Rather than retype all that mumbo jumbo here, I just quoted myself...

"Though I shouldn't have to explain, I'll outline my reasons for wanting this lens. One, I love the focal range on the 1.3x crop. The 35L worked beautifully for me on the 1.6x bodies, but I found it to be just a tad too wide for my taste when I made the leap to FF and then eventually to the 1D series. Besides, I pretty much have the wide end covered with the 16-35L. In a nutshell, I just wanted a fast prime that filled the gap in my line-up, that was somewhat close to "normal" FOV range, but could also deliver as portrait lens. I know full well that I could have easily settled for the cheaper 1.8 and 1.4 versions at a fraction of the cost, but I wanted L quality. I wanted a lens that is built to last and could withstand punishment if the need were ever to arise. I wanted a lens that I didn't have to worry about crapping out on me at a critical moment. I wanted it to be as fast as possible, considering that I plan to do plenty of shooting in very challenging lighting situations that I can't or will not use a flash for. But most of all, I wanted a lens that would cook me pancakes in the morning. Canon delivered. Those who are still riding the fence on whether or not it's a worthy investment, you have to ask yourself if you really need this or want this? What do you want from this lens the current 50 1.8 or 1.4 can't offer you? Are you willing to pay the premium cost to have those advantages? From what I can gather, people would be all over this lens if the price were right! But it's not, and therein lies the dilemma.

First off, I didn't experience any of the reported issues with back-focusing, front-focusing, sideways-focusing, upside-down focusing, etc... When I place my selected focus point on the designated point of the subject, the camera still finds its target and locks on. I ran it through the back-focusing quick check and found that there were no problems. If there was a focusing issue, it was due to my own error. There was an instance when I switched the lens to MF to shoot a WB card and forgot to place the AF/MF selector switch back to AF. I quickly realized this and corrected my rookie mistake. Bottom line, no issues with back-focusing.

I found the AF speed to be fast. Not faster than the speed of light like some expected, but more than adequate for me. Compared to my old 85L, the AF speed is noticeably quicker and I really don't understand what all the fuss is about with that. The USM is pushing a little more weight in glass than its 50 1.4 and 1.8 siblings, so comparing the AF speed to either of those should be considered a plus, not a minus IMO.

Background blur is comparable to any of the primes in the Holy Trinity, and is exactly what you would expect from a super fast L prime with a circular aperture. "Smooth", "Creamy" and "Buttery" are the adjectives that immediately come to mind. Consistent color and contrast throughout the aperture range, sharp images, no visible vignetting, and pretty good CA control pretty much sums up the optical quality of the glass. The CA that I've seen is no worse or better than what I was seeing with my old 85L that everyone seems to hold in the highest regard. To scrutinize this lens for that inherent lens flaw is just absurd."

To sum everything up, this is a damn fine lens. If you can justify spending your hard earn dollars on this lens, go for it. I consider it a godsend for the 1.6x users looking for a 85L quality portrait lens. If not, the 50 1.4 and 1.8 versions are by no means lacking in optical quality, and will suffice for 95% of the 50mm shooters out there. This lens fills the niche between my bread and butter 16-35L and 70-200L IS lenses nicely. Great for general photography, low light shooting and portraits. This lens is aimed at the serious amateur with deep pockets (not me) or the serious-as-sh!t pros with deep pockets (not me). This lens deserves to be regarded in the same respect as the Holy Trinity of Canon primes which include the 35L, 85L, 135L. Overall, I think Canon has a winner on their hands. If the price dropped down to the point that would attract "mere mortals" (me), I'm sure there would be nothing but praises being sung about this lens.

None - I'm happy with it.

I'm very happy with the real world shots that this lenses produces. It has much better AF in low light then the 50 /1.4, doesn't hunt for the subject, very accurate. I do think this lense may do the real world shot better then it tests on charts, box sides etc. Finally a 50mm that can make those magic shots. Highly Recommended!

May miss focus at very short range (extensively discussed) Definitely into "diminishing returns" area of cost.

Iam very pleased with this lens. Like others I have compared with my 50f1.4 finding that the 50f1.2 is sharper than the 1.4 in the f range equal to and below 2 which is were I most need it. Above f2 I cant really tell any difference in center sharpness but the 50L still has an advantage in color/contrast imo.
I plan to use the lens for portraits. Since it is a little wider than the 85L, I can get full body shots or family sized groups easier in typical sized locations. Its exactly what I wanted but many will find its cost hard to justify since it is such a niche product.

Price, moderate AF speed.

After head to head testing against my 50/1.4, a bit of real world shooting, and comparison with my other L primes (24, 35, 85Mk2, 135), I'm ready to consider this lens a trusted part of my Canon arsenal. I've checked it out with the 1Ds and 1DMk2. Here are my basic findings:

Using the center AF point and a high contrast target at about 1.5 meters (~5 feet), the focus was dead on. Wide open, the images were sharp at center and pretty far toward the corners. Using an off-center focusing point, the focus was not as accurate. That could be a concern for vertical portraits, but in practice I found that the inaccuracy in AF was not as great as the difficulty of keeping an exactly stable distance to the subject when doing a hand held, close range portrait. In other words, don't rock if you expect to keep the paper thin DOF on the eyes at f/1.2! Working with this lens in that manner is much like using the 85L.

Autofocus is not quite as fast as the 50/1.4, though more consistent, and even quiter. It is about the same speed as the 35L, definitely faster than the 85LMk2, noticeably slower than the 85/1.8.

One minor nit about the AF: I find that at distances of 2 feet and under, the lens back-focuses slightly on either body. Minor, because when I'm that close, I'm going to stop down and/or use manual focus. At portrait distances, AF is acccurate and adequately fast for that use.

There is vignetting at f/1.2, which I consider no shortcoming at that aperture. The exposure in the central part of the frame is close to a half stop greater than that with the 50/1.4 wide open. That is, if (as some have complained) the 50L is not quite a true f/1.2 (I'm not equipped to measure the f/ ratio, as opposed to light transmission), it is at least faster than the 1.4 lens by an appropriate margin.

From an aesthetic standpoint, I love what I'm seeing in out-of-focus backgrounds. Bokeh is not a quantitative measure of "how blurry are the OOF areas", or "how perfectly round are the OOF highlights". Rather, it's a judgment about how prettily things are rendered. To borrow a phrase from Michael Reichmann, I like the way this lens "draws", both in focus and out. It is definitely priced on the high end of its worth, but since I only get fussier about images as I get older, I think I will be glad that I have it, especially when I can forget what I paid for it!

Price (But if you clos your eyes it doesn't hurt as much)

VERY sharp from f1.2 to f11, however it suffers a bit at f16. (Probably due to diffraction) works very nicely on the 1DS MKii.

Price is pretty steep but i believe in getting what you paid for...

on a 1:3 sensor it's a 65mm lens (kinda like no man's land). I'd rather continue to use my 35mm 1.4, though I prefer the 50mm's compactness (about half the length of the 35mm 1.4. The cost is the real stumbling block, unless there's a winning lottery ticket in my future.

1. Disappointment with no floating design 2. Moderate focus speed 3. Extremely expensive compare to 50mm f/1.4 4. Disproportion in Dolloar vs. Performance = poor value 5. Less sexy than 50mm f/1.0 ( sorry but cant resist)

My first impression on the lens when I got it from CPS is:
The glass it used was much less than I expected. Compare to 85mm f/1.2 it uses much less glass. Canon managed an excellent job to draws much of light only with relatively less glass. From engineering point of view it reduces the material and as well as the weight of the lens even though I still think its relatively heavy with 6group and 8 elements glass at 580g.

PROS:

The pros about this lens are its excellent resistance to purple fringing. I did some test and confirm it did an excellent job against purple fringing and flare. Secondly, this lens is an optically fast lens; however the focus speed is just moderate to me.

The lens is excellent optically, it's usable wide open at low light condition but still require to step down a bit to get sharper picture.

The weather and dust proof would greatly benefit journalist needs to carry around in various weather conditions in 1 series camera.

CONS:

No floating system design.
I am quite disappointed about Canon didn’t consider apply such technique in its 50mm lens. Even though it’s as fast as 85mm 1.2 but the bokeh in 85mm 1.2 will outperform at same aperture. So if you are looking for the specialized bokeh lens, you could have better choice.

The focusing speed is slightly faster than my 85mm 1.2 II L. However, the focusing speed is just moderate. Compare to 50mm 1.4 the focusing speed is similar at same aperture. I would expect much better performance at its price.

The dolloar vs. performation evaluation was poor due to it’s cost was 4x times than the 50mm 1.4 lens but its optical speed is just less than half stop faster, focusing speed is similar to 50mm 1.4 as well. For a 50mm lens, I would consider this lens has a very poor value.

Conclusion: As I stated above with all my pros and cons comments about this lens and I gave it a overall rating of 6/10. Would I recommend this lens ? My answer is yes but only if the money doesn’t come out from your pocket.

William S