Fabulous, Ed. Great use of B/W.
A lot of people add b/w to a shot to try to create poignancy. You've got an amazing and highly poignant portrait there and going to b/w just knocks it out of the park.
Here is a direct comparison of the 1.2L with the 1.4 from the standpoint of bokeh and overall look, rather than pixel peeping sharpness. Both were shot wide open, so this is intended as a demonstration of the capability offered by the L at full aperture, rather than comparing the two lenses at the same aperture.
Here is the overall scene using the 1.2: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/whole_1.2.jpg
Here it is using the 1.4, with modest differences observable in this web reduction: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/whole_1.4.jpg
Now here is the central subject, at 100%, f/1.2: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/center_1.2.jpg
And here it is with the 1.4: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/center_1.4.jpg
Yes, the 1.4 shows slightly greater sharpness, and the wider (though still very thin) DOF extends the regions of detail a bit. The 1.2L equals or betters this when stopped down fractionally to f/1.4.
Now here's the point of this comparison - a section of the background cropped from the scene, shown at 100%. First, the 50/1.2L: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/bokeh_1.2.jpg
Now the 50/1.4: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/bokeh_1.4.jpg
The 50/1.4 is an excellent lens, optically, but I think there are significant advantages to the new 1.2L, particularly for certain kinds of work.
My little "comparison test" is very far from a beautiful image, and hardly covers the way each lens will "draw" the scene in each situation that we encounter, but to me it is at least typical of what I see in real life use of these lenses (where I can't ordinarily duplicate the circumstances from one lens to the other).
Nice comparison, Jess. The colors on the 50L are more pleasing as well. You can clearly see some purple fringing on the arm of the statue from the 1.4 crop, where it is virtually eliminated in the 1.2 shot.
Edited by lord_malone on Jan 14, 2007 at 01:16 PM GMT
A couple of quick B&Ws with my 50L. Just goofing around.
Both shots were around f/10. We are having another winter storm here in the Texas Panhandle and have a dusting of snow and ice...it is about 15 degrees here.
Yep, other lenses could have done similarly...but I was testing my new copy of the 50L.
The lighting on the staue was typical gray, overcast and flat.....so I added some vignetting. The evening shot was at a park with my wife sitting on the steps to this outdoor stage area. The evening shot shows the nice star pattern that the 50L produces.
gary, excellent shots! i'm glad to see the 50L fare well at smaller apertures as i plan to use it for night, landscape, and shallow DOF shots. corner sharpness looks to be a non-issue -- unless, of course, your homemade vignetting is hiding something.
Photon, nice comparisons! How about some with both lenses at say f2 or f2.8. I seem to find myself shooting more at these apertures and the bokeh from the 50/1.4 gets particularly nasty and harsh when you retain more details.
If you get a chance, I'd really appreciate it since I am really on the fence with this lens!
I wanted a 50 to shoot today... looked at the 50/1.4... couldn't do it and decided to live with f2.5 and shoot the CM instead. I need a faster AF option in 50 that I like.
I'm noticing a pattern, between Ed Malone's shots, Gary's shots, and some earlier shots, it appears that the 50/1.2 controls flare extremely well. The shots with very bright points of light are very telling of the quality that might be expressed by this lens. I find this very positive.
Hi Erik...oddly enough, I think the first copy was just ever so slightly sharper...if you can believe it. Trouble was, the first copy did not focus consistently.
Hi James, So far testing looks very good and much improved in focus consistency...yeah, it seems to be doing fine so far. I am still evaluating....everytime I test a lens...I learn something.
For 10DFT, here is the full sized evening shot. You can look at the lens flare from this shot. No it is not perfect....but it does seem to do mostly fine. And I was mistaken on the shot being f/10, it was f/9. Click on "original" below the photo to see the full sized version. Processed with DPP, sharpening 5 and no noise reduction or anything else done.
mh2000 wrote:
Photon, nice comparisons! How about some with both lenses at say f2 or f2.8. I seem to find myself shooting more at these apertures and the bokeh from the 50/1.4 gets particularly nasty and harsh when you retain more details.
If you get a chance, I'd really appreciate it since I am really on the fence with this lens!
When I earlier did controlled comparisons of the two lenses, I didn't shoot any that would show bokeh. I can at least show you some of what the 1.2L does at f/2.
Here is a dog portrait I just did at f/2: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/dog_f2.jpg
Here's a section at 100%: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/dog_f2_detail.jpg
The character of the OOF rug looks fine to me.
Here's another shot at f/2: http://www.jlpx.com/FM_forum/doghead_f2.jpg
Still, the magic - for me - is in using it wide open.
CMOS wrote:
Fabulous, Ed. Great use of B/W.
A lot of people add b/w to a shot to try to create poignancy. You've got an amazing and highly poignant portrait there and going to b/w just knocks it out of the park.
Edited by CMOS on Jan 14, 2007 at 03:09 PM GMT
Thanks.
I stand by this lens. Optically, it's a winner. A bit overpriced? Sure. But it's everything I expected and more.
I looked forward to the new 50L lens from Canon, and sold my original 50L f/1s in anticipation. I wanted the new lens to work for me, but I am returning this second lens, for a different set of issues.
This lens focuses fine at f/1.2, but progressively begins to backfocus at f/1.4 and up until about f/3.5 to f/4 where the DOF begins to be large enough to encompass the focus error. This ONLY happens at distances of under 10-15 feet or so. At further distances, it does fine....and stopped down, as I have shown...it is a very sharp lens.
It does this same thing on both my 1Ds2 and Rebel XT350.
This oddly is the same thing that pcho in Australia reported and I think Madmaxx200 reported also.
My dealer has agreed to take this second lens back.
While I am reasonably certain that there are lenses out there that work correctly, and I think this will be a very good lens for Canon....I also think that there are bugs for now in this design that Canon needs to work through.
My second lens was a UU1100, 694XXX serial number.
So for me, I am out of the 50L business. I will try another one maybe in 6 months or sooner, hopefully after the issues settle.
Thanks to everyone for listening to and responding to my posts through this thread!
Thank you Gary. From the very beginning you have been bringing a lot to this thread. I wish everybody could be as thorough as you are in your testing (many just say: I like the lens and that what counts). I saved your post.
