Sam Bennett wrote:
You guys are funny. Dismissing the 50/1.2 with it's 5 times higher price because it's not 5 times sharper than the 50/1.4 wide-open is like dismissing the 1D MKII because it doesn't have image quality 5 times better than the XT.
We're funny now Because we dissagree whith you
Sam Bennett wrote:
... like dismissing the 1D MKII because it doesn't have image quality 5 times better than the XT.
He who generalizes is generally wrong.
I won't buy any lens based on what is shown here but...... Show me some good results. The shots you've shown (in your own words) are not focusing accurately and don't look any sharper then what my f1.4 can do.
fotografur wrote:
Yes. I'm missing your point. I want a sharp and accurately focusing lens and I have one in the 50f1.4. I don't want a $1600 lens baby :0)
Okay, fine. I'm tired of repeating myself and I imagine many of you are tired of hearing it, so I'll just gracefully back out of this thread now.
Sam your shots have convinced me that the 50L has potential, great color punch and contrast. Maybe I had a dog but my 50 f/1.4 was miserable focusing on both stills and action, hunting all over the place The 85 f/1.8 that I traded it in for as a replacement focused 10x better than the 50 f/14.
If Castleman's copy is only equal to the 50 f/1.4 but yours is equal to the 85 f/1.8 at A1 Servo tracking, it seems there must be a fairly wide degree of inconsistency from copy-to-copy.
I hear of many more folks using the 85 f/1.8 than the 50 f/1.4 for fast focusing action shooting. Sam showed us that the 50L keeps up comparable to the 85 f/1.8. Seems like a decent improvement in that repsect - action/sports shooting - over the 50 f/1.4.
Phil Bonner wrote:
I hear of many more folks using the 85 f/1.8 than the 50 f/1.4 for fast focusing action shooting. Sam showed us that the 50L keeps up comparable to the 85 f/1.8. Seems like a decent improvement in that repsect - action/sports shooting - over the 50 f/1.4.
Mmm... not quite what I've said. The 85/1.8 is undeniably faster, although less accurate. However - it's not an apple to apples comparison. When I'm shooting with the 85/1.8 I'm typically shooting pretty tight:
Canon 85/1.8 @ f/2.2, 1/250th, ISO 800 with 580EX gelled to Tungsten
When I'm shooting with the 50/1.2L (the reason I bought it) is to shoot more full-length stuff:
Canon 50/1.2 @ f/2.0, 1/250th, ISO 800 with 580EX gelled to Tungsten
So, for the task I wanted to use the 50/1.2L for, it's keeping up well and the images are generally much sharper than the 85/1.8 at equivalent apertures, but... it's not a completely fair comparison in terms of focus speed since at those distances the lens doesn't have to work as hard. At what point the 50/1.2L starts to fail due to focus speed, I don't know yet. I suspect it will take a few more events to figure that out.
I'll find that out if I pick my copy up, since I still use 35mm quite a bit. My XTi is more of a backup camera for shots I dont want to bother film with.
So William- just to be correct you are saying sharpness from f2.8 and smaller the sharpness is visually about the same between the L lens and the 1.4? I can live with that if so, but if the 1.4 is going to be sharper at smaller apertures, then I might not get the 50L. I was hoping for a Leica equivalent in this 50L lens.
I just got back after shooting 200+ RAW shots (available light) with my new 50mm F1.2. This is a sharp, hi-contrast lens. In comparison with my 50mm F1.4 the 50L looks much better seeming to be "over the quality hump" by F1.8 as compared with my F1.4 which must be set a stop slower. Contrast seems to be much improved with the faster stops.
If these impressions continue to hold up I believe that the 50L will compare favorably with the 35L (as well it might since it would seem eaiser to design and costs much more). 100% crops are superb. These impressions are valid only for the range of F1.4 to 2.5 (which where I intend to use the lens). Likely the F1.4 will be fine at F2.5/2.8 and above.
The images on the first pages of this thread by Stephen Pell with the 50L look as good as any 85L image. That's what I'm hoping for. Guess I'll have to wait and SEE some more quality reviews before making up my mind.
I've almost completed my testing comparing the L lens and the f1.4.
To me, the L lens only score in the bokeh department. In terms of sharpness, the L lens is FAR BEHIND the f1.4. I'm really shocked at the results but after several retests, the conclusion reamins the same.
weekh wrote:
I've almost completed my testing comparing the L lens and the f1.4.
To me, the L lens only score in the bokeh department. In terms of sharpness, the L lens is FAR BEHIND the f1.4. I'm really shocked at the results but after several retests, the conclusion reamins the same.
weekh wrote:
I've almost completed my testing comparing the L lens and the f1.4.
To me, the L lens only score in the bokeh department. In terms of sharpness, the L lens is FAR BEHIND the f1.4. I'm really shocked at the results but after several retests, the conclusion reamins the same.
http://www.lens-scape.com/article/50mm-12vs14/50mm12vs14.htm
Thanks for that test weekh. Well, I think something is not quite right in Canon Land, if that is what we have to expect from all the copies of this lens. Other than a little less light fall off, I can't see anything that is improved I don't even see anything in the bokeh test - although I could think of a better way to test for that, no offence weekh. The sharpness is nothing short of silly and could easily be bested by a cheap kit lens. I think we should be hearing a recall soon, if this is what we have to expect from this lens. If it's sample variation, then shame on Canon for the poor QC on a very expensive lens. Not exactly the way I would release an expensive new product. It smacks of the recent Leica ordeal.
Fast L lens may not necessary be better. The previous f1.0 L lens is only good for its fast aperture and bokeh. Sharpness and other properties have nothing to sing about.
Suggestions to improve the test are welcome. Just received the lens about 24 hours ago. Looking forward to use the lens for actual shooting.
Because we dissagree whith you
