Boy, I have to say, it is disappointing to see the majority of these posts. It just reads like a 'I must bash it because I can't afford it' thread. No one has actually even seen a physical specimen, taken a shot with one or done a comparison to anything else and yet already it 'looks soft' based off a chart, anyone that buys it is clearly a fool with too much money being exploited by the man, it can't possibly be worth the money etc etc etc.
I have been following threads on what people would 'like' and high on the list was a redesigned 50mm L series prime. Lo and behold, out one comes. Is it expensive, yup, will you pay that price in a shop, not likely. Do you absolutley need it, nope. But it is an option (and those are nice to have last I checked) on top of a 50 f1.4, a 50f1.8 and a 50 f2.5 macro. And yet to read this post the provider of this nice array of lenses is just out to screw us all because they don't price the newest latest developed top of the line lens in the 50mm group for what, 500 bucks? Then the whining would be 'why doesn't it focus faster' or it isn't as sharp as the xyz or something else.
Ah no wonder envy is supposedly the Devil's favorite sin - it is just too easy to succumb it would seem. Inevitably I expect lots more 'I will be happy with my 1.8 for 1500 dollars less' and 'an extra stop for 1200 dollars is not worth it'. In some cases this may be true but the tone of the messages thus far are more 'I want it but can't afford it so since you can afford it I hope you choke on it so I am actually better than you cause I paid less or much less for something similar'.
How about passing judgement until we actually can 1) see some shots 2) see some real street prices 3) see if it is the fastest focusing lens in the lineup 4) has some great bokeh etc etc rather than just bashing the latest things for no apparent reason I can see. If you don't like prices, don't buy, if you don't need the speed, don't buy. Easy right? It isn't like a global conspiracy against anyone of us individually; it is a company developing a product trying to satisfy a niche and make money to continue developing new products going forward. That is all there is too it.
HeyLeeMR2 wrote:
I am very excited for this lens because I'm assuming it will have extremely reliable and accurate focusing. I don't shoot basketball or anything like that and would be using this for model work. The 50 1.4 is completely unreliable.
Me too. I concur with your thoughts on the 50mm f/1.4.
yellowducky wrote:
Boy, I have to say, it is disappointing to see the majority of these posts. It just reads like a 'I must bash it because I can't afford it' thread. No one has actually even seen a physical specimen, taken a shot with one or done a comparison to anything else and yet already it 'looks soft' based off a chart, anyone that buys it is clearly a fool with too much money being exploited by the man, it can't possibly be worth the money etc etc etc.
I have been following threads on what people would 'like' and high on the list was a redesigned 50mm L series prime. Lo and behold, out one comes. Is it expensive, yup, will you pay that price in a shop, not likely. Do you absolutley need it, nope. But it is an option (and those are nice to have last I checked) on top of a 50 f1.4, a 50f1.8 and a 50 f2.5 macro. And yet to read this post the provider of this nice array of lenses is just out to screw us all because they don't price the newest latest developed top of the line lens in the 50mm group for what, 500 bucks? Then the whining would be 'why doesn't it focus faster' or it isn't as sharp as the xyz or something else.
Ah no wonder envy is supposedly the Devil's favorite sin - it is just too easy to succumb it would seem. Inevitably I expect lots more 'I will be happy with my 1.8 for 1500 dollars less' and 'an extra stop for 1200 dollars is not worth it'. In some cases this may be true but the tone of the messages thus far are more 'I want it but can't afford it so since you can afford it I hope you choke on it so I am actually better than you cause I paid less or much less for something similar'.
How about passing judgement until we actually can 1) see some shots 2) see some real street prices 3) see if it is the fastest focusing lens in the lineup 4) has some great bokeh etc etc rather than just bashing the latest things for no apparent reason I can see. If you don't like prices, don't buy, if you don't need the speed, don't buy. Easy right? It isn't like a global conspiracy against anyone of us individually; it is a company developing a product trying to satisfy a niche and make money to continue developing new products going forward. That is all there is too it....Show more →
Ditto that. If the lense takes good shots, is as sharp wide open as the 85L (unlike the 50 f1.4 which doesn't really tighten up until about f2), and doesn't seem to have any glaring shortcomings I'd have to say that I'd buy one. Round out my L collection Then I'd have nothing else to worry about buying except for the BIG lenses... doh.
I would like to complete my L prime collection with 85L and 50L but the MTF chart of the 50/1.2 don't look any better than the 50/1.4 and wourse than the 85L
Pricing issues aside, I've been hoping for Canon to make a 50/1.2L lens for years. Unfortunately, the MTF chart posted on the Japanese site is remarkably poor. Considering that the FD 50/1.2 aspherical lens of yore was supposedly far superior to the 50/1.4 in optical quality, I was hoping for this EF 50/1.2L to clearly improve upon the 50/1.4, especially in the corners. However, from the published MTF chart, this is far from the case. In fact, the 50/1.2L looks to be *worse* than the 50/1.4. Yes, it will have other desirable features (more accurate AF, superior build quality, weather sealing, larger aperture), but where's the optical quality?
I'm not looking for an f/1.2 lens that's cuttingly sharp in the corners wide open. But is it that hard to make a 50/1.2 that's sharp in the corners when stopped down? If it's not, then why does this lens completely fall apart in the corners? And if it is, then how come Canon was able to do it over 30 years ago with their 50/1.2 FD lens that was much smaller?
Perhaps the published MTF chart is in error, or perhaps there is something more to the story. I fully appreciate that there are many optical qualities of a lens that can not be determined from the MTF chart alone, but so far, from a resolution perspective, this looks supremely disappointing.
Edited by AppleCanon on Aug 24, 2006 at 12:55 AM GMT
95% of people buying Canon cameras won't even know these lenses exist so I would love to know how they will be alienated.
We are right back at it, unbelieveable! I thought this was an objective and reasonable forum but once again we are right back with 'the prices are too high' and basic logic of 'my ford mustang goes 0-60 same as a ferrari 360 at 1/10th the cost so clearly the ferrari is overprice and not worth it'. Yea, right. And in this case we have not even seen the ferrari or tested it to know.
This is a SPECIALTY item. The number of buyers of prime lenses is very limited, let alone fast prime lenses. So to recover the cost of developing, testing, distributing and still having some money left over to develop the next niche product this kind of item will always be expensive. It costs millions to develop and get one of these lenses to market. And the target market (which clearly is not a lot of the negative nancies here already bashing this thing it seems) is small. So the price will be high. The fact that it is high though is a reflection of the above facts.
Even if the price was 500 dollars, 95% of Canon users would still not even know this product exists and the volume would not triple to offset the drastically reduced price (let alone the assumed drastically reduced quality putting us back in the 'why can't it do this' or 'too soft' or 'too slow to focus'). I for one hope this thing is fantastic - having a top notch if expensive option is very nice for those who need it.
If this thing is very fast focusing, great bokeh, great sharpness, great contrast and basically the best lens in the lineup of primes I get the feeling it will still be getting bashed here for some reason or other. But if that is indeed the case, I think there will be many happy mugs out there snapping away given many have been dying for just such a thing to come along. But there is no point looking at what might be the mtf chart and then basically crapping on the product when we have not even used it and are still unsure if it is even the right chart.
I for one will wait to see how it performs and whether or not it fits into my needs. I probably 'skip the middle' and go with my 24 f1.4L and get a 85 f1.2L is my hunch.
But I really do appreciate that it is available and I don't doubt that for some it will be a very nice addition to their lineup.
Edited by yellowducky on Aug 23, 2006 at 11:18 PM GMT
What seems strange to me is that Canon released a consumer grade body, but 2 "L" lenses.
I rekon that there is a Pro grade body on the way to complement these 2 lenses, expecally the 50mm L! I would really like to see a EOS 3D, But I still think that we will see a EOS 1Ds2n or 1Ds3 in the next few weeks.
Although many qualities can't be expressed in an MTF chart, resolving power can be. And according to the MTF chart published by Canon Japan, there's almost no resolution at all in the corners at the frequency of any currently available FF sensor, let alone ones that may be forthcoming. That's a shame.
Incidentally, I have a Contax/Zeiss 50/1.4 and while I like the focusing mechanism much better than that of Canon's 50/1.4, it's not really a sharper lens. All spherical 50/1.4 designs for SLR cameras are worthless in the corners at wide apertures. I was hoping that the 50/1.2L would be an improvement in this regard...
i dont get it.. people are saying $600 bucks for 1.4, $1500 for 1.2 , hence not worth it?
but everyone conveniently seems to forget, that there is just as large a price differential for a lot of other canon primes... look at the 85 1.8 and 85 1.2. or the 300 mm F4 and F2.8..
its nothing new.. dont really see what all the fuss is about.
lets not forget, theres not many manufacturers that are making such fast lenses... certainly nikon dont have an equivalent in production now..
As expected......MSRP is 80% of the 85L price.
The FD's maintained the same ratio.
However they make it, the proof of the lens is in its performance. And the new 50L will perform, no doubts about it in my mind.
Putting my money where my mouth is, the 50L will be the first ever lens I'll preorder before any reviews and test results become available.
Canon certainly earns my loyalty with new products like this. After all it is not because of camera gadgetry that many have chosen Canon.
Yeah, I dumped my old EF 50 f/1.4 a few weeks ago as if I knew something was in the making.
Then I'd have nothing else to worry about buying except for the BIG lenses... doh.
. Looks awesome though!