Sharona wrote:
... I'm looking at the 35L at some point in time to go with my MkIV. Is that generally considered a good all-around focal length for the 1.3 crop? ...
It is by me... I have the Zeiss 35 f2, and it's very nice on the 1D IV as well as the 5D II. If Canon ever releases an EF 35 f1.4L II, I'll be all over that. I had the current 35L once and sold it; it didn't wow me.
"David Baldwin wrote:
Frankly I find the 50mm f1.8 Mk2s build quality impossible to accept, at any price.
It's probably the lens with the best "value" [price for performance] that Canon makes! "
Maybe, but only because the price is so very, very low, not that the build and performance is so very, very high! The Nikon equivalent is so much better.
Your 50L looks good. I've been thinking about parting with some lenses and picking this one up, but so much bad press about it makes me hesitate. Likely to keep using the 1.4 version for now...
You know what, I'd perhaps just be practical about this. While the focus ring on the f/1.4 could be a bit better and the build is not L build and contrast is low at f/1.4... the lens is, overall, a really fine performer. It is capable of producing really stellar results despite all of the concerns you (and I) mention.
I'd just get a decent copy of this lens and move on and use it to make photographs. Frankly, there isn't a truly "perfect" 50mm prime in the general sense. Any one of them has some features that some will regard as less than optimal, and this includes the third-party lenses as well as those from Canon. Even the supposedly mythical L version isn't ideal for all uses. In fact, there is no lens that is wholly without flaws. At a certain point (and having gone through 3 or 4 50mm lens already in your search) it might be that you could accept a lens that is merely really good.
Dan
atroester wrote:
Here's my situation. I've had and sold the Canon 50 1.8 II and the 50 1.4. I sold the 50 1.8 II with a body (buyer needed a lens) and I had upgraded to the 50 1.4. However, the build quality on the 50 1.4 was just disappointing for the price difference -- I bought the lens brand new -- the focus ring was unacceptably gritty for manual focusing and it just didn't feel up to the quality of the other non-L primes.
Now, I'm without a 50mm lens for my 5Dmk2 and I find I'm missing that length a bit. As I've been 'burned' by the 50 1.4, I really don't want to get another copy. Should I just pick up another 50 1.8 II and call it good? I've never held/used the 50 1.8 I version -- is it worth the extra money for a nice used copy? Are there other brands of 50mm lenses I should be thinking about?
It seems like with Canon, it's either a dirt-cheap 1.8, a marginally better-made 1.4, and then a huge jump to the 50L 1.2. ...Show more →
My issue was mostly with build -- the 50 1.4's 'gritty' focus ring was so loud and coarse it bled into my omnidirectional stereo audio for the shot -- now that's bad. I got the 50L; I wanted to get a 50mm to last me for the next 10 years, and this is definitely it.
My 1.4 is just too good to sell for what I could get.