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.5 #1Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
mh2000 wrote:
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.
If all you ever did was buy lenses on the basis of how it is marketed compares to how you idealize its use, then you're not going to get very far.
BTW, the 50/1.2L may be a portrait lens, but it also does just fine at f/4 and smaller. Nobody complains about its stopped down performance unless it's a faulty copy. But then people go around and say how they paid for the f/1.2 performance, so it's useless to talk about how it performs at f/4--they could get the same from a 50/1.8 II at f/8--so they say.
And that's the point--if what you need is f/1.2 - f/2 near MFD, you are by definition talking about specialty use. Those conditions are not "normal" shooting. No other production EF 50mm has that speed, no other production EF lens of any focal length has that speed except for the 85/1.2L II. It's not like you have that many choices.
The only meaningful criterion of whether or not to buy a lens is if it serves your photographic needs. It's really that simple. If you buy a lens before you know the answer to that question, then you have no one to blame but yourself for failing to do your homework. Don't blame marketing for overselling and don't blame the engineers for not designing your personal idea of perfection. There are enough people out there with copies of this lens, enough resources and reviews for you to get a baseline idea of what the lens does, and enough rental companies and brick-and-mortar stores out there for you to test drive it.
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.
If all you ever did was buy lenses on the basis of how it is marketed compares to how you idealize its use, then you're not going to get very far.
BTW, the 50/1.2L may be a portrait lens, but it also does just fine at f/4 and smaller. Nobody complains about its stopped down performance unless it's a faulty copy. But then people go around and say how they paid for the f/1.2 performance, so it's useless to talk about how it performs at f/4--they could get the same from a 50/1.8 II at f/8--so they say.
And that's the point--if what you need is f/1.2 - f/2 near MFD, you are by definition talking about specialty use. Those conditions are not "normal" shooting. No other production EF 50mm has that speed, no other production EF lens of any focal length has that speed except for the 85/1.2L II. It's not like you have that many choices.
The only meaningful criterion of whether or not to buy a lens is if it serves your photographic needs. It's really that simple. If you buy a lens before you know the answer to that question, then you have no one to blame but yourself for failing to do your homework. Don't blame marketing for overselling and don't blame the engineers for not designing your personal idea of perfection. There are enough people out there with copies of this lens, enough resources and reviews for you to get a baseline idea of what the lens does, and enough rental companies and brick-and-mortar stores out there for you to test drive it.
Feb 28, 2010 at 08:57 AM
p.5 #2Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
wickerprints wrote:
If all you ever did was buy lenses on the basis of how it is marketed compares to how you idealize its use, then you're not going to get very far.
You lads are something else.
mh2000 wrote
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. You lads are something else. Feb 28, 2010 at 09:11 AM
p.5 #3Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
I have the Nikkor AI 501.2(manual focus), and the results are almost exactly like the OP was showing. 1.2 is pretty soft, and just so little depth of field to work with, especially on a 1.6 DSLR(I use Canon).
I'll tell you what, though. That wide open softness can give a really magical feel for certain shots, like bouquets. On the other hand, I got mine for about $150.00, if I'd paid the price of that Canon 50/1.2 my expectations would be very much higher.
I'll tell you what, though. That wide open softness can give a really magical feel for certain shots, like bouquets. On the other hand, I got mine for about $150.00, if I'd paid the price of that Canon 50/1.2 my expectations would be very much higher.
Feb 28, 2010 at 09:53 AM
p.5 #4Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
wickerprints wrote:
And that's the point--if what you need is f/1.2 - f/2 near MFD, you are by definition talking about specialty use. Those conditions are not "normal" shooting. No other production EF 50mm has that speed, no other production EF lens of any focal length has that speed except for the 85/1.2L II. It's not like you have that many choices.
Your points are well taken but keep in mind the 85mm f/1.2 has a floating system and is free from the primary issue folks complain about regarding the 50mm f/1.2.
A lot of this discussion has to do with "expectations" ... should a buyer voicing concern over a purchase be dinged in these forums because he/she didn't perform due diligence and unfortunately assumed an a ultra fast 50mm L lens would work really well (i.e. work well, just like the 85 f/1.2 does)?
AFAIC OP had a reasonable expectation that his new and very expensive 50mm f/1.2 lens would be nice and sharp and the AF switch meaningful at small object distances (as versus a lens with an AF calibration issue plus objectionable focus shift due to "SA minus a floating system"), YMMV.
Regards,
Joe Kurkjian
And that's the point--if what you need is f/1.2 - f/2 near MFD, you are by definition talking about specialty use. Those conditions are not "normal" shooting. No other production EF 50mm has that speed, no other production EF lens of any focal length has that speed except for the 85/1.2L II. It's not like you have that many choices.
Your points are well taken but keep in mind the 85mm f/1.2 has a floating system and is free from the primary issue folks complain about regarding the 50mm f/1.2.
A lot of this discussion has to do with "expectations" ... should a buyer voicing concern over a purchase be dinged in these forums because he/she didn't perform due diligence and unfortunately assumed an a ultra fast 50mm L lens would work really well (i.e. work well, just like the 85 f/1.2 does)?
AFAIC OP had a reasonable expectation that his new and very expensive 50mm f/1.2 lens would be nice and sharp and the AF switch meaningful at small object distances (as versus a lens with an AF calibration issue plus objectionable focus shift due to "SA minus a floating system"), YMMV.
Regards,
Joe Kurkjian
Feb 28, 2010 at 09:54 AM
p.5 #5Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
So Joe what was you experience with the lens?
Did you use it for long?
Ruy
Did you use it for long?
Ruy
Feb 28, 2010 at 02:01 PM
p.5 #6Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
The Zeiss macro 50 2.0 is an outstanding alternative. I love this lens. Great for macro, portraits and landscapes
Feb 28, 2010 at 02:25 PM
p.5 #7Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
I have used the 50 1.2 for an entire year doing weddings and portraits I find it like any other lens.. It has it's strengths and weakness... It took me many months to get use to the lens because it was the first prime on the then new to me 5D.. After a year of REAL WORLD use I'd say it's d@mn good at what it does... Is it perfect? No. I have learned to use it for it's strengths and add sharpening to it's weakness.. Overall I think it comes down to clearing your mind of expectations and just use the lens..
I had a 24L vI for a while and used it for a month and then sold it because I thought it was a piece of crap... The day before I sold it I shot a wedding and my 2nd shooter used it at the reception and some during the ceremony.. I sold the lens before I got a chance to look at his work.. I kick my self for selling it everyday... Most of time my 5d and 50L work great together but I have learned that sometimes the same shot taken back to back will not have the same sharpness, it's rare but it happens..
I had a 24L vI for a while and used it for a month and then sold it because I thought it was a piece of crap... The day before I sold it I shot a wedding and my 2nd shooter used it at the reception and some during the ceremony.. I sold the lens before I got a chance to look at his work.. I kick my self for selling it everyday... Most of time my 5d and 50L work great together but I have learned that sometimes the same shot taken back to back will not have the same sharpness, it's rare but it happens..
Feb 28, 2010 at 03:26 PM
p.5 #8Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
mark1958 wrote:
The Zeiss macro 50 2.0 is an outstanding alternative. I love this lens. Great for macro, portraits and landscapes
+10000
Having the ability to close focus (yes its 1:2 but its superior to the Canon 50) offers great compositional freedom.
Awesome lens that I rent frequently (gotta buy it this summer).
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/666445-REG/Zeiss_1762_851_50mm_f_2_0_Makro_Planar_ZE.html
The Zeiss macro 50 2.0 is an outstanding alternative. I love this lens. Great for macro, portraits and landscapes
+10000
Having the ability to close focus (yes its 1:2 but its superior to the Canon 50) offers great compositional freedom.
Awesome lens that I rent frequently (gotta buy it this summer).
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/666445-REG/Zeiss_1762_851_50mm_f_2_0_Makro_Planar_ZE.html
Feb 28, 2010 at 03:46 PM
p.5 #9Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
hyperion wrote:
I rented it for my MK4s and could not stand it. IMO its a complete waste of money.
Your results are exactly what pros experience when using it - and why most pros don't own it.
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&no=161
(read this review and look at the pictures - pretty much sums up how useless the lens is imo)
Horribly soft at any aperture that you might want to use it at. (this has nothing to do with shallow depth of field and difficulty using it).
Save the cash and buy the Zeiss 50mm F1.4 imo.
Best of luck getting your money back.
http://i45./jph1k8.jpg
I'm sorry but those results are just pathetic for a lens at that price.
My Sigma 50 1.4 would wipe the floor with that.
I rented it for my MK4s and could not stand it. IMO its a complete waste of money.
Your results are exactly what pros experience when using it - and why most pros don't own it.
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&no=161
(read this review and look at the pictures - pretty much sums up how useless the lens is imo)
Horribly soft at any aperture that you might want to use it at. (this has nothing to do with shallow depth of field and difficulty using it).
Save the cash and buy the Zeiss 50mm F1.4 imo.
Best of luck getting your money back.
http://i45./jph1k8.jpg
I'm sorry but those results are just pathetic for a lens at that price.
My Sigma 50 1.4 would wipe the floor with that.
Feb 28, 2010 at 03:51 PM
p.5 #10Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
Every lens is a compromise of design criteria and the 50 1.2 is no exception. My advice is go shoot with it and see if you like the photographs this lens produces, and stop looking at 100% crops on your computer. If razor sharp images at all apertures is your goal, look elsewhere, but if creamy bokeh, excellent color, excellent contrast, and just a really nice looking photograph is your goal, the 50L is an excellent choice.
Feb 28, 2010 at 03:56 PM
p.5 #11Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
311erin wrote:
... If razor sharp images at all apertures is your goal, look elsewhere, but if creamy bokeh, excellent color, excellent contrast, and just a really nice looking photograph is your goal, the 50L is an excellent choice.
But my Sigma delivers all of that, plus sharpness, for a lot less money.
Its f/1.4 instead of f/1.2, but f/1.4 is plenty fast for me.
... If razor sharp images at all apertures is your goal, look elsewhere, but if creamy bokeh, excellent color, excellent contrast, and just a really nice looking photograph is your goal, the 50L is an excellent choice.
But my Sigma delivers all of that, plus sharpness, for a lot less money.
Its f/1.4 instead of f/1.2, but f/1.4 is plenty fast for me.
Feb 28, 2010 at 04:02 PM
p.5 #12Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
Pardon me, but the lens has focus shift. it is a design of the lens, not a error in construction or "version". It is inherent in the design.
As for the softness. check on 5dII or other Live view capable body. It looks like it is just off. Or try focus-bracketing and see if there is another shot that is better. that is what I often got with AF on the original 5d, but when I manual focus (well) and when I live view in studio, it comes out FAR better.
As for the softness. check on 5dII or other Live view capable body. It looks like it is just off. Or try focus-bracketing and see if there is another shot that is better. that is what I often got with AF on the original 5d, but when I manual focus (well) and when I live view in studio, it comes out FAR better.
Feb 28, 2010 at 04:06 PM
p.5 #13Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
^^^^
What he said.
And the example pictures in the start of the thread show exactly that - focus shift. The F/1.2 samples are all frontfocused, as can easily be seen from the magenta-shift in fringes. The smaller aperture shots seem to be fairly well center-of-field focused. How good the lens CAN be when the focus shift is compensated for can be seen in the 1D4-sample somewhat later in the thread - keep in mind that the 1D4 in fact demands more of the lens (than a 5D2) due to the higher p/mm count...!
The focus-shift is an optical phenomenon that stems from the distribution of the SA line, and that's not something you can get a sample "with" or "without" - it's a built in optical "feature" as some would see it (as I see it, it's definitely a "defect"...)
What he said.
And the example pictures in the start of the thread show exactly that - focus shift. The F/1.2 samples are all frontfocused, as can easily be seen from the magenta-shift in fringes. The smaller aperture shots seem to be fairly well center-of-field focused. How good the lens CAN be when the focus shift is compensated for can be seen in the 1D4-sample somewhat later in the thread - keep in mind that the 1D4 in fact demands more of the lens (than a 5D2) due to the higher p/mm count...!
The focus-shift is an optical phenomenon that stems from the distribution of the SA line, and that's not something you can get a sample "with" or "without" - it's a built in optical "feature" as some would see it (as I see it, it's definitely a "defect"...)
Feb 28, 2010 at 05:15 PM
p.5 #14Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
Another 50L thread. Fun times indeed. I think we should have one of these a week here in this forum just for kicks. There is nothing like beating a dead horse when there is nothing productive to talk about.
I've used this lens for two years and know it *very* well. It is probably the most difficult lens I have ever used. It takes practice to "get right". It isn't perfect, but it is very very good when you *learn how to use it*. This lens isn't the same as your 24-105/4 kit lens or even your 85/1.2L. You're not going to master this lens in two days.
Examining sharpness by shooting test chart will exploit the very worst of the lens. People who do this and fret over the results just don't "get it". If you think you can measure the value of a lens by measuring resolution via an ISO chart, you've got a lot to learn about photography. Don't get offended, it's just true.
Go out and take real pictures. Get a feel for the strengths and weaknesses and learn how to use it better. The endless cycle of measurebating gearhead nonsense will get you nowhere.
I've used this lens for two years and know it *very* well. It is probably the most difficult lens I have ever used. It takes practice to "get right". It isn't perfect, but it is very very good when you *learn how to use it*. This lens isn't the same as your 24-105/4 kit lens or even your 85/1.2L. You're not going to master this lens in two days.
Examining sharpness by shooting test chart will exploit the very worst of the lens. People who do this and fret over the results just don't "get it". If you think you can measure the value of a lens by measuring resolution via an ISO chart, you've got a lot to learn about photography. Don't get offended, it's just true.
Go out and take real pictures. Get a feel for the strengths and weaknesses and learn how to use it better. The endless cycle of measurebating gearhead nonsense will get you nowhere.
Feb 28, 2010 at 05:30 PM
p.5 #15Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
Agreed. I own this lens as well, and it does take some time to learn/unravel it's mysteries. Much like any new relationship, there is a period of learning and of understanding. One doesn't get married after the first date because we know that it takes time to coax understanding and clarity from the dance... I'm not saying that camera gear is a suitable metaphor for that young hottie you've been lusting after (although some of the passion portrayed about photo gear could have me questioning this assertion) but I think it's important to point out that immediate gratification and perfection cannot be bought. Sure. there are variances in any manufacturing process, but just like musical instruments, you make your choice, and then learn it to perfection. Learn the limitations, the capabilities, and the characteristics that make it yours and make it unique to your art.
$0.02 dispensed...
-Rich
deepbluejh wrote:
Another 50L thread. Fun times indeed. I think we should have one of these a week here in this forum just for kicks. There is nothing like beating a dead horse when there is nothing productive to talk about.
I've used this lens for two years and know it *very* well. It is probably the most difficult lens I have ever used. It takes practice to "get right". It isn't perfect, but it is very very good when you *learn how to use it*. This lens isn't the same as your 24-105/4 kit lens or even your 85/1.2L. You're not going...Show more →
$0.02 dispensed...
-Rich
deepbluejh wrote:
Another 50L thread. Fun times indeed. I think we should have one of these a week here in this forum just for kicks. There is nothing like beating a dead horse when there is nothing productive to talk about.
I've used this lens for two years and know it *very* well. It is probably the most difficult lens I have ever used. It takes practice to "get right". It isn't perfect, but it is very very good when you *learn how to use it*. This lens isn't the same as your 24-105/4 kit lens or even your 85/1.2L. You're not going...Show more →
Feb 28, 2010 at 06:05 PM
p.5 #16Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
...4ft and f2-4 seems very "normal" to me (people *do* complain in this range)... or at least how I often shoot my other 50's. My initial excitement for the 50L included these distances... and I don't think the 1.8 or 1.4 perform as well as I would like past f4 either... depending on your shooting you can easily get crappy bokeh from either at f5.6 or f8.
I guess I've been lucky that I've never bought a lens that had such a handicap... all the lenses I've bought pretty much worked perfectly out of the box, it was only the subtlties that I worried about (probably too much). I've never owned a Canon AF lens that didn't focus correctly... I guess I was just asking too much out of the 50L.
I never had to "learn to use a lens" either... maybe some lens will flare worse than others (28/1.8) or have nastier blurred highlights (50/1.8) or brightline (50/1.4)... but those only show up in the exceptions... overall the lens works.
I guess if you don't shoot close with a 50 there isn't a problem... if shooting close makes me a "specialty shooter," I guess it does... but I follow Robert Capa's advice all the time.
I would have been just as happy with a 50/1.4L or even 50/2L... the f1.2 aperture was kind of cool, but no real big deal for me.
wickerprints wrote:
If all you ever did was buy lenses on the basis of how it is marketed compares to how you idealize its use, then you're not going to get very far.
BTW, the 50/1.2L may be a portrait lens, but it also does just fine at f/4 and smaller. Nobody complains about its stopped down performance unless it's a faulty copy. But then people go around and say how they paid for the f/1.2 performance, so it's useless to talk about how it performs at f/4--they could get the same from a 50/1.8 II at f/8--so they say.
And that's the point--if...Show more →
I guess I've been lucky that I've never bought a lens that had such a handicap... all the lenses I've bought pretty much worked perfectly out of the box, it was only the subtlties that I worried about (probably too much). I've never owned a Canon AF lens that didn't focus correctly... I guess I was just asking too much out of the 50L.
I never had to "learn to use a lens" either... maybe some lens will flare worse than others (28/1.8) or have nastier blurred highlights (50/1.8) or brightline (50/1.4)... but those only show up in the exceptions... overall the lens works.
I guess if you don't shoot close with a 50 there isn't a problem... if shooting close makes me a "specialty shooter," I guess it does... but I follow Robert Capa's advice all the time.
I would have been just as happy with a 50/1.4L or even 50/2L... the f1.2 aperture was kind of cool, but no real big deal for me.
wickerprints wrote:
mh2000 wrote
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.BTW, the 50/1.2L may be a portrait lens, but it also does just fine at f/4 and smaller. Nobody complains about its stopped down performance unless it's a faulty copy. But then people go around and say how they paid for the f/1.2 performance, so it's useless to talk about how it performs at f/4--they could get the same from a 50/1.8 II at f/8--so they say.
And that's the point--if...Show more →
Feb 28, 2010 at 10:49 PM
p.5 #17Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
deepbluejh wrote:
Another 50L thread. Fun times indeed. I think we should have one of these a week here in this forum just for kicks. There is nothing like beating a dead horse when there is nothing productive to talk about.
I've used this lens for two years and know it *very* well. It is probably the most difficult lens I have ever used. It takes practice to "get right". It isn't perfect, but it is very very good when you *learn how to use it*. This lens isn't the same as your 24-105/4 kit lens or even your 85/1.2L. You're not going...Show more →
+1 and it's a really nice lens
Another 50L thread. Fun times indeed. I think we should have one of these a week here in this forum just for kicks. There is nothing like beating a dead horse when there is nothing productive to talk about.
I've used this lens for two years and know it *very* well. It is probably the most difficult lens I have ever used. It takes practice to "get right". It isn't perfect, but it is very very good when you *learn how to use it*. This lens isn't the same as your 24-105/4 kit lens or even your 85/1.2L. You're not going...Show more →
+1 and it's a really nice lens
Feb 28, 2010 at 11:00 PM
p.5 #18Just 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.
I use 50mm all the time for my street photography. Nothing ungainly or limited about it.
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.
I use 50mm all the time for my street photography. Nothing ungainly or limited about it.
Feb 28, 2010 at 11:52 PM
p.5 #19Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
Just have a look at this thread on POTN - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=307389
It just shows 126 pages of people that USE the lens instead of TEST the lens. Myself included
It just shows 126 pages of people that USE the lens instead of TEST the lens. Myself included
Mar 01, 2010 at 12:06 AM
p.5 #20Just got 50L - mixed feelings.
This opposed to "do your homework" suggestions?
>>Go out and take real pictures. Get a feel for the strengths and weaknesses and learn how to use it better. The endless cycle of measurebating gearhead nonsense will get you nowhere.
>>Go out and take real pictures. Get a feel for the strengths and weaknesses and learn how to use it better. The endless cycle of measurebating gearhead nonsense will get you nowhere.
Mar 01, 2010 at 09:55 AM