This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
p.4 #1Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
PetKal wrote:
One of Canon's design objectives for 50mm f/1.0 was: "To compensate for distance-sensitive aberration changes and provide quality images at all distances, by deploying a floating element construction." (Canon source).
The problem with 50 f/1.0 has been an extraordinary degree of copy variation which can not be explained by lens aging and overuse, since generally those lenses have been well "safeguarded" by their owners. Some copies are sufficiently or even surprisingly sharp at f/1.0, quite a few are very soft wide open. However, most copies seem to be very sharp beyond f/2 or so.
My hunch is that the lens fell...Show more →
Anybody ever use the old 50 f/0.95, and if so, was it sharp?
One of Canon's design objectives for 50mm f/1.0 was: "To compensate for distance-sensitive aberration changes and provide quality images at all distances, by deploying a floating element construction." (Canon source).
The problem with 50 f/1.0 has been an extraordinary degree of copy variation which can not be explained by lens aging and overuse, since generally those lenses have been well "safeguarded" by their owners. Some copies are sufficiently or even surprisingly sharp at f/1.0, quite a few are very soft wide open. However, most copies seem to be very sharp beyond f/2 or so.
My hunch is that the lens fell...Show more →
Anybody ever use the old 50 f/0.95, and if so, was it sharp?
Feb 27, 2010 at 05:03 PM
brainiac
Offline
[X]
Details
p.4 #2Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
While the focus shift is a nuisance, the lens can produce a certain look when used skilfully. Here it is on a 450D, where it seems to produce a reasonable sense of reality:
http://cyberphotographer.com/450d/paul_lowrez.jpg
P.S. I should point out that focus on this image was at f2, and achieved by using Liveview AND depth of field preview.
http://cyberphotographer.com/450d/paul_lowrez.jpg
P.S. I should point out that focus on this image was at f2, and achieved by using Liveview AND depth of field preview.
Feb 27, 2010 at 05:11 PM
p.4 #3Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
brainiac wrote:
P.S. I should point out that focus on this image was at f2, and achieved by using Liveview AND depth of field preview.
Something I could never do on the street..
Earlier quote
While the focus shift is a nuisance, the lens can produce a certain look when used skilfully. Here it is on a 450D, where it seems to produce a reasonable sense of reality:Something I could never do on the street..
Feb 27, 2010 at 05:21 PM
p.4 #4Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
Own the 50mm f/1.2 L lens, and became alarmed at its softness in doing a close-up portrait of a little boy and his older sister.
This lens works better for me in doing landscape photography.
Meanwhile, I appreciate the informed discussion here of this lens.
This lens works better for me in doing landscape photography.
Meanwhile, I appreciate the informed discussion here of this lens.
Feb 27, 2010 at 05:22 PM
p.4 #5Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
What do you all think about the Zeiss ZE 50mm F/2 makro. I've been thinking about it for a while, but have been scared about the lack of AF. From reviews it sounds optically excellent though. I assume short distance manually focusing under good light should be ok, but am not sure how it would be at longer distances and bad light. Maybe the focus confirmation in the viewfinder may be precise enough for longer distances. Maybe I just need to try it and find out myself 
Like many of you here, it's frustrating not to have a decent/non-specialty 50mm 1.4 L from Canon.
Like many of you here, it's frustrating not to have a decent/non-specialty 50mm 1.4 L from Canon.Feb 27, 2010 at 05:43 PM
p.4 #6Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
brainiac wrote:
While the focus shift is a nuisance, the lens can produce a certain look when used skilfully. Here it is on a 450D, where it seems to produce a reasonable sense of reality:
[image snipped]
In my experience it is slightly better than the Rokkor 58 f1.2 and everyone goes mental over that in the alt forum. If you learn to work around the focus shift, it's one of the very best 50's out there.
Richard, that is pretty much exactly why I have the 50 1.2 Like you said, the focus shift is a nuisance and I wish it were sharper from f/1.2 to f/1.8, however the combination of pleasant bokeh and beautiful colors give the images a look which I can usually pick out even at lower resolutions.
Its a love/hate relationship with this lens...
While the focus shift is a nuisance, the lens can produce a certain look when used skilfully. Here it is on a 450D, where it seems to produce a reasonable sense of reality:
[image snipped]
In my experience it is slightly better than the Rokkor 58 f1.2 and everyone goes mental over that in the alt forum. If you learn to work around the focus shift, it's one of the very best 50's out there.
Richard, that is pretty much exactly why I have the 50 1.2 Like you said, the focus shift is a nuisance and I wish it were sharper from f/1.2 to f/1.8, however the combination of pleasant bokeh and beautiful colors give the images a look which I can usually pick out even at lower resolutions.
Its a love/hate relationship with this lens...
Feb 27, 2010 at 05:56 PM
p.4 #7Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
jamesf99 wrote:
P.S. I should point out that focus on this image was at f2, and achieved by using Liveview AND depth of field preview.Something I could never do on the street..
It's not a "street" lens; it really is a portrait lens. You'd be better off with the EF 35/1.4L or 24/1.4LII for street photography. I think a lot of dissatisfaction with the 50/1.2L stems from the fact that some people are buying it without really understanding that it is a special-purpose lens. And that's entirely understandable, given that the 50mm length has traditionally been regarded as the "standard" or "all purpose" focal length. People want a 50mm lens to do a lot of different things, and since the 50/1.2L is the only 50mm L lens in production, it makes sense that there would be some people who misunderstand that it isn't just an L version of an all-purpose lens.
The problem is further exacerbated by the fact that Canon's other 50mm offerings, the EF 50/1.4 USM, the 50/1.8 II, and the 50/2.5 macro, are reasonably sharp, but not all that stellar otherwise. The EF 50/1.4 doesn't have the large front element design of the Sigma 50/1.4 to reduce optical vignetting (and it lacks ring USM), and the 50/1.8 is a no-frills $100 lens without even USM. I hear good things about the 50/2.5, and it's a macro, but it's also a slow lens, being nearly 2 stops slower than the 50/1.4. So when it comes to 50mm EF primes, Canon's not really giving people a lot of choices. It shouldn't be so difficult to provide an EF lens that is sharp wide open, has a reasonably large aperture, and has decent build quality. The Sigma would be a much more popular lens if it had consistent QC and better aspherical design.
Edited on Feb 27, 2010 at 06:04 PM · View previous versions
brainiac wrote
Earlier quote
While the focus shift is a nuisance, the lens can produce a certain look when used skilfully. Here it is on a 450D, where it seems to produce a reasonable sense of reality:It's not a "street" lens; it really is a portrait lens. You'd be better off with the EF 35/1.4L or 24/1.4LII for street photography. I think a lot of dissatisfaction with the 50/1.2L stems from the fact that some people are buying it without really understanding that it is a special-purpose lens. And that's entirely understandable, given that the 50mm length has traditionally been regarded as the "standard" or "all purpose" focal length. People want a 50mm lens to do a lot of different things, and since the 50/1.2L is the only 50mm L lens in production, it makes sense that there would be some people who misunderstand that it isn't just an L version of an all-purpose lens.
The problem is further exacerbated by the fact that Canon's other 50mm offerings, the EF 50/1.4 USM, the 50/1.8 II, and the 50/2.5 macro, are reasonably sharp, but not all that stellar otherwise. The EF 50/1.4 doesn't have the large front element design of the Sigma 50/1.4 to reduce optical vignetting (and it lacks ring USM), and the 50/1.8 is a no-frills $100 lens without even USM. I hear good things about the 50/2.5, and it's a macro, but it's also a slow lens, being nearly 2 stops slower than the 50/1.4. So when it comes to 50mm EF primes, Canon's not really giving people a lot of choices. It shouldn't be so difficult to provide an EF lens that is sharp wide open, has a reasonably large aperture, and has decent build quality. The Sigma would be a much more popular lens if it had consistent QC and better aspherical design.
Edited on Feb 27, 2010 at 06:04 PM · View previous versions
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:02 PM
p.4 #8Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
Slightly off topic but the bokeh looks pretty harsh in that f/1.2 shot. Is that normal?
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:03 PM
p.4 #9Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
wickerprints wrote:
P.S. I should point out that focus on this image was at f2, and achieved by using Liveview AND depth of field preview.Something I could never do on the street..It's not a "street" lens; it really is a portrait lens. You'd be better off with the EF 35/1.4L or 24/1.4LII for street photography. I think a lot of dissatisfaction with the 50/1.2L stems from the fact that some people are buying it without really understanding that it is a special-purpose lens. And that's entirely understandable, given that the 50mm length has traditionally been regarded as the "standard" or "all purpose" focal length. People want a 50mm lens to do a lot of different things, and since the 50/1.2L is the only 50mm L lens in production, it makes sense...Show more →
Street shooting was my primary goal, hence, my unfortunate experience.
You're exactly right on people's expectations and those were mine. I wanted a fantastic "standard" FOV lens. I already owned the f/1.4, f/2.5 macro, and used to own a 50 f/1.8 Mark I about a billion years ago (not counting all my 50mm FD lenses too, ranging from f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.8).
Canon could make a statement and clear this up, saving many of us from the associated headaches this lens causes. It's uses should be clear after all, no one in their right mind tries to use a MPE lens for sports.
jamesf99 wrote
brainiac wrote
Earlier quote
While the focus shift is a nuisance, the lens can produce a certain look when used skilfully. Here it is on a 450D, where it seems to produce a reasonable sense of reality:Street shooting was my primary goal, hence, my unfortunate experience.
You're exactly right on people's expectations and those were mine. I wanted a fantastic "standard" FOV lens. I already owned the f/1.4, f/2.5 macro, and used to own a 50 f/1.8 Mark I about a billion years ago (not counting all my 50mm FD lenses too, ranging from f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.8).
Canon could make a statement and clear this up, saving many of us from the associated headaches this lens causes. It's uses should be clear after all, no one in their right mind tries to use a MPE lens for sports.
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:11 PM
p.4 #10Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
I absolutely love my 85LmkII. The bokeh is wonderful yet it dead on at all apertures. I wonder why they cannot carbon copy this "bokeh machine" but in a 50mm FL.
Upclose using even f/2.8 with a full frame will give it the one eye sharp look. Increasing the dof by stopping down still creates a shift. I have absolutely no issues in spending money on a 50L however the characteristics of the focus shift is rather hard to deal with since I do then to work in the danger zone of 5feet.
I hope they make a 50L mkii with no focus shift with similar bokeh. This would sell like hotcakes. Canon truly has no love in the 50mm FL. The Canon 50 f/1.4 has the fragile micro AF motor that dies, Canon 50 f/1.8 is buzzy and typically soft wideopen with nervous bokeh, Sigma's 50 AF just doesnt work more often than not and the beloved 50L simply is a broken design.
I know there are some decent copies of the 50L with minimal focus shift. Those are hard to come by.
Upclose using even f/2.8 with a full frame will give it the one eye sharp look. Increasing the dof by stopping down still creates a shift. I have absolutely no issues in spending money on a 50L however the characteristics of the focus shift is rather hard to deal with since I do then to work in the danger zone of 5feet.
I hope they make a 50L mkii with no focus shift with similar bokeh. This would sell like hotcakes. Canon truly has no love in the 50mm FL. The Canon 50 f/1.4 has the fragile micro AF motor that dies, Canon 50 f/1.8 is buzzy and typically soft wideopen with nervous bokeh, Sigma's 50 AF just doesnt work more often than not and the beloved 50L simply is a broken design.
I know there are some decent copies of the 50L with minimal focus shift. Those are hard to come by.
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:12 PM
p.4 #11Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
50L f/1.2 lens seems ungainly and limited for street photography, even without its documented limitations. The 35mm f/1.4 L lens or the 16-35mm f/2.8 L lens serve much better for doing street photography.
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:23 PM
p.4 #12Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
jamesf99 wrote:
... no one in their right mind tries to use a MPE lens for sports.
I have some rather annoying ants that appear to be holding a gymnastics competition in my backyard, who may beg to differ.
... no one in their right mind tries to use a MPE lens for sports.
I have some rather annoying ants that appear to be holding a gymnastics competition in my backyard, who may beg to differ.
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:30 PM
p.4 #13Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
anotherview wrote:
50L f/1.2 lens seems ungainly and limited for street photography, even without its documented limitations. The 35mm f/1.4 L lens or the 16-35mm f/2.8 L lens serve much better for doing street photography.
The EF 35 f/2 isn't bad either. It's tiny but noisy.
If you must use an slr and af for street I'd like to be as unobtrusive s possible in some situations.
Guess were screwed here too.
Or use a rangefinder.
Edited on Feb 27, 2010 at 06:39 PM · View previous versions
50L f/1.2 lens seems ungainly and limited for street photography, even without its documented limitations. The 35mm f/1.4 L lens or the 16-35mm f/2.8 L lens serve much better for doing street photography.
The EF 35 f/2 isn't bad either. It's tiny but noisy.
If you must use an slr and af for street I'd like to be as unobtrusive s possible in some situations.
Guess were screwed here too.
Or use a rangefinder.
Edited on Feb 27, 2010 at 06:39 PM · View previous versions
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:38 PM
p.4 #14Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
n0b0 wrote:
Slightly off topic but the bokeh looks pretty harsh in that f/1.2 shot. Is that normal?
harsh is a understatement...for the price I would expect better performance and no front or back focus issues at all....but I think these are basic photography DOF issues anyway..
Slightly off topic but the bokeh looks pretty harsh in that f/1.2 shot. Is that normal?
harsh is a understatement...for the price I would expect better performance and no front or back focus issues at all....but I think these are basic photography DOF issues anyway..
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:38 PM
p.4 #15Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
wickerprints wrote:
I have some rather annoying ants that appear to be holding a gymnastics competition in my backyard, who may beg to differ.
I like ants...
jamesf99 wrote
... no one in their right mind tries to use a MPE lens for sports. I like ants...
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:40 PM
p.4 #16Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
fotografur wrote:
I would not keep this $1500 lens
I use a canon 50 @ f1.4 on a rebel with sharper results. These are all wide open.
Hang on... I thought people here say they can't shoot with lenses that has bigger aperture than f/2.8 on stock focusing screen as it doesn't show proper DOF?
digitalbug30d wrote:
harsh is a understatement...for the price I would expect better performance and no front or back focus issues at all....but I think these are basic photography DOF issues anyway..
Yeap, I was wondering because the bokeh from my TSE17 looks much softer than that, like you've applied a gaussian blur.
I would not keep this $1500 lens
I use a canon 50 @ f1.4 on a rebel with sharper results. These are all wide open.
Hang on... I thought people here say they can't shoot with lenses that has bigger aperture than f/2.8 on stock focusing screen as it doesn't show proper DOF?
digitalbug30d wrote:
n0b0 wrote
Slightly off topic but the bokeh looks pretty harsh in that f/1.2 shot. Is that normal?Yeap, I was wondering because the bokeh from my TSE17 looks much softer than that, like you've applied a gaussian blur.
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:50 PM
p.4 #17Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
brucemuir: Hey, I just grab my camera and go when I feel that itch to do street photography. I've used a P&S, a Digitial Rebel, and the G9 for this activity. Right now, I'm partial to the 35mm f/1.4 L lens mounted on my T1i. This combo also captures fine landscape images.
IMHO, other FMers would do well to gain the opinion of their fellow FMers and to research any significant photo gear before purchase of it. In addition, as always, I recommend renting to try before buying any lens: www.lensrentals.com
IMHO, other FMers would do well to gain the opinion of their fellow FMers and to research any significant photo gear before purchase of it. In addition, as always, I recommend renting to try before buying any lens: www.lensrentals.com
Feb 27, 2010 at 06:53 PM
p.4 #18Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
Flickr Canon 50mm f/1.2L User group - 956 members, 8078 items
http://www.flickr.com/groups/20778516@N00/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/20778516@N00/
Feb 27, 2010 at 08:24 PM
p.4 #19Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
I agree with what's been said (over and over in several threads might I add)
But I also really enjoy my 50L, I use it quite often in fact. I am well aware of its quirks, yet that somehow doesn't seem to prevent me from getting an image I'm happy with or proud to present.
I will say this though, I desperately wanted to love the Sigma 50mm. I bought one, tried to get it working right, but after 3 trips to sigma for AF calibration and a whole lot of bad attitude and awful customer service from them, i got rid of it and moved back to the 50L.
To the OP though, I have to say your copy does not look so hot, It's not so much a focus shift as it is a front or back focus issue. I personally would just send it in to canon and have it adjusted. It is a unique lens, and one Im glad to have
But I also really enjoy my 50L, I use it quite often in fact. I am well aware of its quirks, yet that somehow doesn't seem to prevent me from getting an image I'm happy with or proud to present.
I will say this though, I desperately wanted to love the Sigma 50mm. I bought one, tried to get it working right, but after 3 trips to sigma for AF calibration and a whole lot of bad attitude and awful customer service from them, i got rid of it and moved back to the 50L.
To the OP though, I have to say your copy does not look so hot, It's not so much a focus shift as it is a front or back focus issue. I personally would just send it in to canon and have it adjusted. It is a unique lens, and one Im glad to have
Feb 28, 2010 at 12:47 AM
p.4 #20Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
I don't buy it. The lens is marketed as a high quality normal lens, not a speciality lens... the only thing that makes it a "specialty lens" is that it design flaws and doesn't work for "normal" shooting.
>>It's not a "street" lens; it really is a portrait lens. You'd be better off with the EF 35/1.4L or 24/1.4LII for street photography. I think a lot of dissatisfaction with the 50/1.2L stems from the fact that some people are buying it without really understanding that it is a special-purpose lens. And that's entirely understandable, given that the 50mm length has traditionally been regarded as the "standard" or "all purpose" focal length. People want a 50mm lens to do a lot of different things, and since the 50/1.2L is the only 50mm L lens in production, it makes sense that there would be some people who misunderstand that it isn't just an L version of an all-purpose lens.
>>It's not a "street" lens; it really is a portrait lens. You'd be better off with the EF 35/1.4L or 24/1.4LII for street photography. I think a lot of dissatisfaction with the 50/1.2L stems from the fact that some people are buying it without really understanding that it is a special-purpose lens. And that's entirely understandable, given that the 50mm length has traditionally been regarded as the "standard" or "all purpose" focal length. People want a 50mm lens to do a lot of different things, and since the 50/1.2L is the only 50mm L lens in production, it makes sense that there would be some people who misunderstand that it isn't just an L version of an all-purpose lens.
Feb 28, 2010 at 03:50 AM