Grandin wrote:
Fun post Here are my recommendations...
I've owned Canon EF 50/1.8 I/II, 50/1.4, Rokkor 58/1.2 as well as Sigma 50/2.8, 50/1.4. Presently own Canon EF 50/1.2
And I've owned Canon EF 85/1.8, 85/1.2 II, Rokkor 85/1.7. Presently own Samyang 85/1.4.
The 50's:
While Canon EF 50/1.8 I is a bit better built than the "the plastic piece of crap" (version II), its still not that nice to manually focus (nada feel in the focus ring). And the bokeh is harsh.
The Canon EF 50/1.4 has better build but still not great for manual focus (I don't like the focus ring). Also the Sigma is a lot better wide open (less dreamy and more contrast). The only thing the Canon has got going for it is better autofocus (I've had a couple and of all my 50's the EF 50/1.4 has been the most accurate).
I can definately relate to the need of something more automatic and I do recommend the Sigma 50/1.4, especially since your wife most often uses manual focus anyway (the Sigma has a nice manual focus ring) and it has great bokeh. I was happy with mine but re-aquired the EF 50/1.2 because I missed f/1.2 sometimes.
~~~ I voted to buy the Sigma and keep the Rokkor if you can (and if its a stretch, let go of the Rokkor). ~~~
The 80's:
Can relate here too. The Canon EF 85/1.8 has such blazingly fast and accurate autofocus (I've owned a couple, all have been good) - its nice to have that ability when you need it. And to use the Samyang/Rokinon under more controlled conditions. I might re-aquire the EF 85/1.8.
Loved the Canon EF 85/1.2 II but it felt like a giant ball of steel and glass and I was almost scared using it (what if I dropped it). I was definately hesitant using it, but I am one of those n3rds who wants to keep my gear in mint condition. I get bummed out if I get a scratch on a lens hood ...Show more →
Thanks for this thorough summary. It sounds like we are going through very similar decisions and coming to very similar conclusions.
cogitech wrote:
Thanks to you, I slept on the couch last night. After reading this I slapped her and told her "get your own god-damned gear". It didn't have the desired effect. (Should I have waited until we were making love )
Well the MkI goes for closer to $200 these days, has no warranty, is buzzy as hell, has a bad focus ring, and harsh bokeh. I'm not so sure that's a much better value than the Sigma, which is superior in basically every way and costs $500, with a 5 year warranty.
I have to try to disregard Sigma-bias. I know they have had issues in the past, but I try to remain objective and take it on a lens-by-lens basis.
I agree. This is more a case of trying to be practical, by getting as many of the features and functions that both my wife and myself desire packed into a lens line-up that doesn't fill 6 camera bags.
Now you tell me! Maybe you should be the one to apologize to my wife. ...Show more →
!
Paul, it was supposed to be you that got the slapping around. ;-P
If you want a Mk1 EF 50/1.8, they are only $200 if you are silly and buy off ebay or elsewhere. I've had 2, both gotten for well under $75. You can get them for basically free if you put in the time and effort. The best place to find them is buried in a package or from a seller who is unaware of the Mk1 value. I've passed over several I could have had this way, mainly because I already had one, and churning them for a few bucks ($50-75) wasn't worth the trouble.
The samyang 35 will be an amazing accomplishment if it's really f/1.2, btw. Even 1.4 would be impressive.
voigtlander 58f1.4? EF version with auto dia; not actually available yet but soon. It draws a bit softer than the zeiss and is a bit less expensive than the zeiss or sigma. cogitech wrote:
Way too expensive (and I'm generally not a big Zeiss fan).
you2 wrote:
voigtlander 58f1.4? EF version with auto dia; not actually available yet but soon. It draws a bit softer than the zeiss and is a bit less expensive than the zeiss or sigma.
Yes, this one was mentioned a bit later in the thread. I'll have to keep it in mind. I'm going to try the Sigma and if it doesn't work out then the Voigtlander will likely be my next choice.
cogitech wrote:
Thanks Makten. Yes, I think we do share the same/similar taste. Please elaborate on "you should be aware that the drawing doesn't "fit" the 50 mm view in the same way." Do you mean the difference between 58mm and 50mm, or that this smooth drawing style doesn't quite work the same way at 50mm as it does at 85mm?
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. But go ahead and buy it, you might love it.
Your experience with the Rokkor 58 has clearly been much better than mine was. Maybe I had a bad copy. On the other hand, I've got good copies of the Sigma and the 50L. Both get bad mouthed a lot but mine are great. The EF 50 1.4 that I had was just about as bad as it gets. Others have reported decent results. I've had three EF 50 1.8 Mk I copies and two of them were good. Bokeh isn't great but IQ was pretty good and it doesn't feel like the "plastic piece of crap" that the MK II does. I did very little MF with any of them so no strong opinion about their strengths on that factor. Sounds like Leica is off the table but the Summicron 50 is an excellent lens. If AF is the main goal, go with the Sigma even if you have to get 3 or 4 to find a good one.
As for 85's, I had an EF 1.8 but didn't really give it a fair chance before I sold it. The first 85L MK II I had was used and had a focus problem. Sent it back. Second one was new and it had good IQ and was pretty good AF wise. Notice I didn't say great. Sold it after I got into MF because as stated above, it was huge and heavy and a lot of money tied up in a lens that has a reputation for being delicate. (Drop it and you'll be sorry). Planar 85, the Leicas, and hmm, I think I have an okay FD 85 are what I like now. Again, if AF is the goal, I think the EF 1.8 is the choice unless, of course, you can dig up a Contax N 85.
^ the Nikon 85.1/8 HC and later AI manual focus variants are excellent. The Nikon is as sharp as my excellent Canon 85/1.8, but the colors and bokeh (not to mention MF ability), are so much better...
pdmphoto wrote:
^ the Nikon 85.1/8 HC and later AI manual focus variants are excellent. The Nikon is as sharp as my excellent Canon 85/1.8, but the colors and bokeh (not to mention MF ability), are so much better...
Note there are no AI variants of this lens, the AI version is the mediocre 85/2.
The confusion sets in because the last version of the 85/1.8 is a K version with similar cosmetics to an AI lens and the last production run of K's were sold with the AI conversion kit already installed. However an AI-Converted lens is not fully AI as it only has the aperture-ring changes, not the mount changes.
If you dig deeper, you will find that many were Nikon factory conveted to AI before sale. I have a few of them, plus a HC and a K. The factory made AI's are fully AI, mount and all (the aperture and focus rings don't matter, only the mount) - but not AIS.
Here are my recommendations...
) 
!