Aberdeen Photo wrote:
This should be an interesting comparison. While the 80mm Planar outresolves any film put on the back of a blad, the 50 f/stop 1.4 does not outreslove the sensor in a 5 or 1 series body. Having said that it is a good little lens with better contrast and saturation than my 24-70 or either of the f 1.8s.
What is going to be interesting to me, is the comparison of the 1.4, not only in saturation, but blur, the blur of the 1.4 is just ok for me. So will the new lens be more like the comparison between the 85L and 85 f 18, much diff look and blur, or more like the 200Ls, the 2.8 and 1.8. The 2.8 will never be a 1.8 , but the overall look of the images past f 4 gets pretty darn close.
Agree. The f1.4 and new f1.2 are a great comparison. This is what people want to see. Is it worth the extra price to step up to the L. For some the build and weather sealing are reasons enough.
As I said before, my f1.4 is very sharp and usable @ f1.4 so I don't have any problems using it. And it's small size (and cheap price) means I always have it with me
The f1.0 and f1.2 is an OK comparison, but we all know the f1.0 is more of a "L" snob type lens for collectors. I know mine isn't very useful @ f1.0, is large, heavy and too expensive for me to carry around. Since mine was given to me and has more of a sentimental value my feelings may vary to others.
Please take a moment to read the below review at the below link. It does mention the sensor resolution issue. There is another review that I am in the process of finding that goes more in depth about it.
Agree. The f1.4 and new f1.2 are a great comparison. This is what people want to see. Is it worth the extra price to step up to the L. For some the build and weather sealing are reasons enough.
As I said before, my f1.4 is very sharp and usable @ f1.4 so I don't have any problems using it. And it's small size (and cheap price) means I always have it with me
The f1.0 and f1.2 is an OK comparison, but we all know the f1.0 is more of a "L" snob type lens for collectors. I know mine isn't very useful @ f1.0, is large, heavy and too expensive for me to carry around. Since mine was given to me and has more of a sentimental value my feelings may vary to others.
I'm not a collector and my f/1.0 over the last three weeks has never left my camera. It has opened up new way for me to see the night and its lights without tripods and long exposures.
Aberdeen Photo wrote:
This should be an interesting comparison. While the 80mm Planar outresolves any film put on the back of a blad, the 50 f/stop 1.4 does not outreslove the sensor in a 5 or 1 series body. Having said that it is a good little lens with better contrast and saturation than my 24-70 or either of the f 1.8s.
What is going to be interesting to me, is the comparison of the 1.4, not only in saturation, but blur, the blur of the 1.4 is just ok for me. So will the new lens be more like the comparison between the 85L and 85 f 18, much diff look and blur, or more like the 200Ls, the 2.8 and 1.8. The 2.8 will never be a 1.8 , but the overall look of the images past f 4 gets pretty darn close.
I dislike two minor issues of my 1.4 lens: barrel distortion especially with close subjects (like a PC screen), and the cold looking colors in my RAW pictures (compared to 24-105L. Possibly this actuallly depends on the different kind of lightning I typically have when using these lenses). I sure hope 1.2 turns out to be clearly better in these respects. At least it should have negligible distortion - it is an L prime with normal focal length!
I expect that the 50 1.2L/1.4 images would have same type of difference than 85 1.2L/1.8 images. At least the overall construction of those lenses has corrensponding differences, whereas 200Ls are both L lenses, even though in vastly different sizes.
That's all well and good for you John. But for the average person without money to burn (including myself) many feel the f1.0 is for those who seeking a status symbol.
How many real professional photographers own this lens? I bet not many.
So you take your 5D and 50 f1.0 around with you taking photos. How many people have a $5,000 body and one lens outfits for a hobby?
This day and age there are a lot of wealthy people spending outrages amounts of money for these toys to play around with and tinker on their computers. There is nothing wrong with that but like I said for the average person the f1.0 is not a consideration.
Who is going to care about how these two lenses perform @ f1.2? Ok, maybe you. And that's fine.
fotografur wrote:
That's all well and good for you John. But for the average person without money to burn (including myself) many feel the f1.0 is for those who seeking a status symbol.
How many real professional photographers own this lens? I bet not many.
So you take your 5D and 50 f1.0 around with you taking photos. How many people have a $5,000 body and one lens outfits for a hobby?
This day and age there are a lot of wealthy people spending outrages amounts of money for these toys to play around with and tinker on their computers. There is nothing wrong with that but like I said for the average person the f1.0 is not a consideration.
Who is going to care about how these two lenses perform @ f1.2? Ok, maybe you. And that's fine.
I think it depends on where an "average" person put their priorites. By the way I didn't pay 5,000 dollars for the 5D and I have more than one lens. I like to keep using any lens I get for at least a month just to get and idea what it can and can not do and what I can and can not do with it.
As for how the two lenses will preform, I find it interesting theres is more interest in that issue such issue in the "Alternate systems group" than here.
johnastovall wrote:
I think it depends on where an "average" person put their priorites. By the way I didn't pay 5,000 dollars for the 5D and I have more than one lens. I like to keep using any lens I get for at least a month just to get and idea what it can and can not do and what I can and can not do with it.
As for how the two lenses will preform, I find it interesting theres is more interest in that issue such issue in the "Alternate systems group" than here.
Yakim Peled wrote:
>> Since mine was given to me and has more of a sentimental value my feelings may vary to others.
We are not living in the same world, that's for sure.... :-(
Yakim, there are hundreds of different "worlds" in North America. One world that might appear rather visible here on FM are folks with good professions who have sufficient disposable income to 'splurge" on toys and tools.
You do not get to see denizens of many other worlds because they generally make do with a $70 P&S camera if that, because of lacking either interest in photography or neccessary wherewithal.
Yakim Peled wrote:
>> Since mine was given to me and has more of a sentimental value my feelings may vary to others.
We are not living in the same world, that's for sure.... :-(
Things are not always as they appear.
I am not wealthy by any means. If I was I would be spending all kinds of money on camera gear becuase that is what I love and have had this hobby since I was 12 yrs. old. I'm 44.
I currenly own a 30D and a 10-22esf, 50 f1.4 and the 50L. The L was left to me by a very dear friend who past away. He distributed his belongings to those he loved around him.
DiamondCutter wrote:
Is this the thread about the 50/1,2 or the 50/1,0 or the 50/1,4?
...
Yes.
One aspect of the nascent 50 f/1.2 fame will be its ability to kick other standard EF prime gluteus, be it a soft fat one like the f1.0, or a soft rickety 50 f/1.4.
Sprout Crumble wrote:
Why and based on what evidence? They're both non-IS wide-aperture 50mm lenses. Hardly apples and oranges. Its entirely possible the 1.4 will be just as good.
Too much credit is given for a better build and a red ring.
My first sentence said: The laundry list of ways that the 1.2 is (theoretically) better than the 1.4 is not at issue here...
My point is that this is a thread about a $1600, newest technology, L Series lens. If the existing 1.4 truly ends up to be a good benchmark for comparison, that's a pretty pathetic statement for the 1.2. For 5 times the money, I damn well expect it had better run circles around my 1.4. But for 5 times LESS money, I'm absolutely thrilled with my 1.4.
This is better than expected.....I've just ordered the 50 f/1.2 lens from a reputable dealer at $1,399 US, with the delivery 1st half of October.....I had asked them to confirm that with their Canon retail rep....apparently the date stands.
handheld wrote:
This is better than expected.....I've just ordered the 50 f/1.2 lens from a reputable dealer at $1,399 US, with the delivery 1st half of October.....I had asked them to confirm that with their Canon retail rep....apparently the date stands.
Who? We usually post the linkto deals like this. If it's legit.
handheld wrote:
This is better than expected.....I've just ordered the 50 f/1.2 lens from a reputable dealer at $1,399 US, with the delivery 1st half of October.....I had asked them to confirm that with their Canon retail rep....apparently the date stands.
Wow!! $1399....
Hmmmnnnn....... This could present an obstacle to my future long-lens plan. I will still wait a bit though.
Hmmmnnnn....... This could present an obstacle to my future long-lens plan. I will still wait a bit though.
Easy Tommy , I think they might have made a slight mistake (or B&H did ?) in that introductory price......there is a significant pricing and delivery date inconsistency from one retailer to another......Canon USA/Canada themselves could be the source of ambivalences.
However, when Pet-Kal wants his lens he charges after it like a bull in the fluorite shop.
- I hold the 85 up as resistance!!
Realistically, I'm patient, but I really do want to see how this baby performs. If it performs as I suspect that it will, I'm pretty sure that I'll own one some time in the next several months.
Hopefully, they'll find a price with which I can agree.
handheld wrote:
Easy Tommy , I think they might have made a slight mistake (or B&H did ?) in that introductory price......there is a significant pricing and delivery date inconsistency from one retailer to another......Canon USA/Canada themselves could be the source of ambivalences.
Well, I have pre-ordered this lens more than one week ago with an equal price than 70-200 F4L IS, so there definitely is price ambivalence at the moment, also in Europe.
