This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010Post your 50L failures please
p.2 #1Post your 50L failures please
Dang, I need to use this lens more. I bought it for basketball and volleyball, for which it is terrific, but I haven't been shooting those much lately. Need to bang out some headshots with it...
Nill
Nill
May 22, 2010 at 11:05 AM
p.2 #2Post your 50L failures please
Lovely pics, rhorta and breitling65 -- more reason to consider a purchase seriously. Thanks for the opinions, everyone. Yes, I realise I need to try the lens for myself. Was hoping to see some of the trouble that people have often described in words here and elsewhere, but, as the wag says above, clearly this thread has been a failure at eliciting those. Oh well.
May 22, 2010 at 03:50 PM
p.2 #3Post your 50L failures please
rhorta wrote:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/TEMP/DUCK.jpg
Beautiful children well photographed.
The duck shot is humorous and it succeeds such as it is.
All that goes to show that some focus imprecision here and there doesn't get in the way of good and spirited photography.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/TEMP/DUCK.jpg
Beautiful children well photographed.
The duck shot is humorous and it succeeds such as it is.
All that goes to show that some focus imprecision here and there doesn't get in the way of good and spirited photography.
May 22, 2010 at 04:20 PM
p.2 #4Post your 50L failures please
There are many, many other choices at 50mm. But I don't shoot 50mm much, so I don't really need AF. As other have pointed out, you will miss many shots at 1.2 with any lens. So the point of bad shots doesn't mean much. As you can see, it has a great look like all the expensive Canon lenses.
Great shots in this thread.
Great shots in this thread.
May 22, 2010 at 04:41 PM
p.2 #5Post your 50L failures please
A focus shift can be easily fixed with a good usm response curve re-mapped by the factory. Other AF (F/B) bugs is mostly caused by the CHEAPO AF firmware. I don't trust non-1series AF on any f2.0 or faster lenses that's shorter than 60 FL. Lesser 1 series bodies does give you inconsistence shots if widely fast lens was used with busy/hi-constrast background. So, identify the right AF issue before blamed-it-on your lens.
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/20778516@N00/pool/interesting/
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/20778516@N00/pool/interesting/
May 22, 2010 at 04:54 PM
p.2 #6Post your 50L failures please
Never thought I could post these without getting caught, was certain that FM had an EXIF squad!! 
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/TEMP/LUCA8.JPG
Zuiko 50/1.4, probably at f/2
Has a look that is quite different from Canon.
Ok, the next one you could probably only tell from the EXIF, too small and undistinguished to spot the difference.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/TEMP/LUCA3.JPG
Canon 50/1.4
Actually imho the 50/1.4 doesn't do a bad job as long as you keep away from the type of background that makes for a nervous bokeh.
Ruy
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/TEMP/LUCA8.JPG
Zuiko 50/1.4, probably at f/2
Has a look that is quite different from Canon.
Ok, the next one you could probably only tell from the EXIF, too small and undistinguished to spot the difference.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/TEMP/LUCA3.JPG
Canon 50/1.4
Actually imho the 50/1.4 doesn't do a bad job as long as you keep away from the type of background that makes for a nervous bokeh.
Ruy
May 23, 2010 at 03:30 AM
p.2 #7Post your 50L failures please
Back to the OP.
Sorry about the tone back there, you made a valid request.
Besides focus shift and in my case (back) focus problems I don't think it is a bad lens. Sure it is a little weak at f/1.2 when shooting close up, but that can add to the look.
LoCA can be very noticeable at wide apertures.
Close up it also tends to suffer from halation.
The bokeh can be a little "smeared" in the corners, in a way I don't like. This mostly happens with a busy background. So in this it is not really that much better than the f/1.4 from Canon.
I generally try to avoid those situations.
Overal I like what the lens can produce (I'm a hobbyist) or else I wouldn't have cared so much.
Ruy
Sorry about the tone back there, you made a valid request.
Besides focus shift and in my case (back) focus problems I don't think it is a bad lens. Sure it is a little weak at f/1.2 when shooting close up, but that can add to the look.
LoCA can be very noticeable at wide apertures.
Close up it also tends to suffer from halation.
The bokeh can be a little "smeared" in the corners, in a way I don't like. This mostly happens with a busy background. So in this it is not really that much better than the f/1.4 from Canon.
I generally try to avoid those situations.
Overal I like what the lens can produce (I'm a hobbyist) or else I wouldn't have cared so much.
Ruy
May 23, 2010 at 03:45 AM
p.2 #8Post your 50L failures please
mttran wrote:
A focus shift can be easily fixed with a good usm response curve re-mapped by the factory. Other AF (F/B) bugs is mostly caused by the CHEAPO AF firmware. I don't trust non-1series AF on any f2.0 or faster lenses that's shorter than 60 FL. Lesser 1 series bodies does give you inconsistence shots if widely fast lens was used with busy/hi-constrast background. So, identify the right AF issue before blamed-it-on your lens.
I apologize to the OP for hijacking his thread, won't happen again. However as a last twitch I just have to add that it was my old 5D that initially proved to be the most reliant camera (75% in focus) and it was the 1D3 that made me go for a second servicing. Looking back I wish I hadn't brought it in for the second time, but I couldn't get a reliable MA solution for the 1D3 and that pushed me over the edge (as I like 50mm on 1.3x crop).
Right now apart from the huge difference in MA correction I see no big difference in results based on AF use. Granted not highly dynamic, but even off center AI Servo on the 5D2 gives a (surprisingly) good keeper rate.
Mine is a personal experience and I am not a highly skilled professional.
Ruy
A focus shift can be easily fixed with a good usm response curve re-mapped by the factory. Other AF (F/B) bugs is mostly caused by the CHEAPO AF firmware. I don't trust non-1series AF on any f2.0 or faster lenses that's shorter than 60 FL. Lesser 1 series bodies does give you inconsistence shots if widely fast lens was used with busy/hi-constrast background. So, identify the right AF issue before blamed-it-on your lens.
I apologize to the OP for hijacking his thread, won't happen again. However as a last twitch I just have to add that it was my old 5D that initially proved to be the most reliant camera (75% in focus) and it was the 1D3 that made me go for a second servicing. Looking back I wish I hadn't brought it in for the second time, but I couldn't get a reliable MA solution for the 1D3 and that pushed me over the edge (as I like 50mm on 1.3x crop).
Right now apart from the huge difference in MA correction I see no big difference in results based on AF use. Granted not highly dynamic, but even off center AI Servo on the 5D2 gives a (surprisingly) good keeper rate.
Mine is a personal experience and I am not a highly skilled professional.
Ruy
May 23, 2010 at 03:52 AM
p.2 #9Post your 50L failures please
mttran wrote:
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/20778516@N00/pool/interesting/
Thanks, that's one helluva good series of advertisements for the 50L.
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/20778516@N00/pool/interesting/
Thanks, that's one helluva good series of advertisements for the 50L.
May 23, 2010 at 03:56 AM
p.2 #10Post your 50L failures please
The 50/1.2L is a constantly debated lens. IMHO, it is excellent and works great for me. Easily one of my most used and favorite lenses on FF. That being said there are those who really dislike this lens. That's fine, this is true about any lens Canon makes. The 50L just happens to be one of the more highly debated lenses and I'm sure it's had some issues. Just try it out for yourself. If you like it, great! If not, oh well. There are lot's of 50mm choices out there. To be clear, the focus issue is not inaccuracy, it's focus shift. Which, for me, is not terrible and only really occurs at certain f-stops and close distances. But, it's consistent. If you find yourself in the known trouble range use MF and DOF preview. I'll take this over the inaccurate and inconsistant focusing of the sigmalux any day. Not to mention the 50L is fast-ish, quiet, and weather sealed.
Dan
Dan
May 23, 2010 at 04:27 AM
p.2 #11Post your 50L failures please
rhorta wrote:
I apologize to the OP for hijacking his thread, won't happen again. However as a last twitch I just have to add that it was my old 5D that initially proved to be the most reliant camera (75% in focus) and it was the 1D3 that made me go for a second servicing. Looking back I wish I hadn't brought it in for the second time, but I couldn't get a reliable MA solution for the 1D3 and that pushed me over the edge (as I like 50mm on 1.3x crop).
Right now apart from the huge difference in MA correction...Show more →
Hi Ruy, my post was not refering yours at all. It was my experience with couple 5D in the past. My 5D2 is much better now but still not a bullet proof as shown below. It takes me awhile to figure it out. Well - these are not the 50L sample but you know what i mean...strange canon AF behavior when seeing high contrast in the back ground. I saw this F/W bug almost on any canon bodies i have had/tried but 1ds2.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4568704394_6c8e531709_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4573639709_fe6ea2e43e_b.jpg
mttran wrote
A focus shift can be easily fixed with a good usm response curve re-mapped by the factory. Other AF (F/B) bugs is mostly caused by the CHEAPO AF firmware. I don't trust non-1series AF on any f2.0 or faster lenses that's shorter than 60 FL. Lesser 1 series bodies does give you inconsistence shots if widely fast lens was used with busy/hi-constrast background. So, identify the right AF issue before blamed-it-on your lens.I apologize to the OP for hijacking his thread, won't happen again. However as a last twitch I just have to add that it was my old 5D that initially proved to be the most reliant camera (75% in focus) and it was the 1D3 that made me go for a second servicing. Looking back I wish I hadn't brought it in for the second time, but I couldn't get a reliable MA solution for the 1D3 and that pushed me over the edge (as I like 50mm on 1.3x crop).
Right now apart from the huge difference in MA correction...Show more →
Hi Ruy, my post was not refering yours at all. It was my experience with couple 5D in the past. My 5D2 is much better now but still not a bullet proof as shown below. It takes me awhile to figure it out. Well - these are not the 50L sample but you know what i mean...strange canon AF behavior when seeing high contrast in the back ground. I saw this F/W bug almost on any canon bodies i have had/tried but 1ds2.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4568704394_6c8e531709_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4573639709_fe6ea2e43e_b.jpg
May 23, 2010 at 04:36 AM
p.2 #12Post your 50L failures please
Glassbottle wrote:
Thanks, that's one helluva good series of advertisements for the 50L.
You should check this out as well: http://www.ignphotography.com/2010/03/review-canon-ef-50mm-f1-2-l-usm-lens/
mttran wrote
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/20778516@N00/pool/interesting/You should check this out as well: http://www.ignphotography.com/2010/03/review-canon-ef-50mm-f1-2-l-usm-lens/
May 23, 2010 at 05:36 AM
p.2 #13Post your 50L failures please
The frustration with this lens is it came AFTER the 85L, and with a comparable price tag. It was reasonable to expect this lens to utterly rock in the way its bigger brother does, yet it didn’t. I've seen good shots taken with it, sure, but a not-so-sharp, shifty-by-design f1.2 was hardly an exciting prospect for Canon to produce in recent times. Heck, the 50/1.4 ain't that much different and at least I know where that will focus.
I held off getting 50L mk1 (ie the 1.0 version), thinking this lens would kill it. Turns out the 50/1.0 just keeps getting more attractive and more expensive. If you're happy with it then great, but I really hope to see a mkII version some time soon.
I held off getting 50L mk1 (ie the 1.0 version), thinking this lens would kill it. Turns out the 50/1.0 just keeps getting more attractive and more expensive. If you're happy with it then great, but I really hope to see a mkII version some time soon.
May 23, 2010 at 06:01 AM
p.2 #14Post your 50L failures please
The only failure in this thread is the original post.
Oh, about 1/2 the shots on my blog with any sort of bokeh were taken with the 50/1.2. Enjoy. http://jamiehowell.net/blog
Oh, about 1/2 the shots on my blog with any sort of bokeh were taken with the 50/1.2. Enjoy. http://jamiehowell.net/blog
May 23, 2010 at 07:03 AM
p.2 #15Post your 50L failures please
Lord Fluff wrote:
The frustration with this lens is it came AFTER the 85L, and with a comparable price tag. It was reasonable to expect this lens to utterly rock in the way its bigger brother does, yet it didn’t. I've seen good shots taken with it, sure, but a not-so-sharp, shifty-by-design f1.2 was hardly an exciting prospect for Canon to produce in recent times. Heck, the 50/1.4 ain't that much different and at least I know where that will focus.
I held off getting 50L mk1 (ie the 1.0 version), thinking this lens would kill it. Turns out the 50/1.0 just keeps...Show more →
The 50/1.0L is a mythological creature. It's something that practically no one has ever used, yet everyone seems to think it's amazing. Truth is, the current 50/1.2L is better in almost every way (including optical quality in most situations). Additionally, copy variation was a *serious* problem with the 50/1.0L. The current lens, much less so. About the only drawback to the current lens is it's lack of a floating element. The drawbacks of this have been discussed ad naseum.
The frustration with this lens is it came AFTER the 85L, and with a comparable price tag. It was reasonable to expect this lens to utterly rock in the way its bigger brother does, yet it didn’t. I've seen good shots taken with it, sure, but a not-so-sharp, shifty-by-design f1.2 was hardly an exciting prospect for Canon to produce in recent times. Heck, the 50/1.4 ain't that much different and at least I know where that will focus.
I held off getting 50L mk1 (ie the 1.0 version), thinking this lens would kill it. Turns out the 50/1.0 just keeps...Show more →
The 50/1.0L is a mythological creature. It's something that practically no one has ever used, yet everyone seems to think it's amazing. Truth is, the current 50/1.2L is better in almost every way (including optical quality in most situations). Additionally, copy variation was a *serious* problem with the 50/1.0L. The current lens, much less so. About the only drawback to the current lens is it's lack of a floating element. The drawbacks of this have been discussed ad naseum.
May 23, 2010 at 07:05 AM
p.2 #16Post your 50L failures please
deepbluejh wrote:
The only failure in this thread is the original post.
That seems gratuitously rude, if I may say so.
Oh, about 1/2 the shots on my blog with any sort of bokeh were taken with the 50/1.2. Enjoy. http://jamiehowell.net/blog
Very nice indeed.
The only failure in this thread is the original post.
That seems gratuitously rude, if I may say so.
Oh, about 1/2 the shots on my blog with any sort of bokeh were taken with the 50/1.2. Enjoy. http://jamiehowell.net/blog
Very nice indeed.
May 23, 2010 at 09:00 AM
p.2 #17Post your 50L failures please
deepbluejh wrote:
The 50/1.0L is a mythological creature. It's something that practically no one has ever used, yet everyone seems to think it's amazing. Truth is, the current 50/1.2L is better in almost every way (including optical quality in most situations). Additionally, copy variation was a *serious* problem with the 50/1.0L.
In addition, everyone seems to feel qualified to utter verdicts on the 50 f/1.0 performance.
The 50/1.0L is a mythological creature. It's something that practically no one has ever used, yet everyone seems to think it's amazing. Truth is, the current 50/1.2L is better in almost every way (including optical quality in most situations). Additionally, copy variation was a *serious* problem with the 50/1.0L.
In addition, everyone seems to feel qualified to utter verdicts on the 50 f/1.0 performance.
May 23, 2010 at 09:56 AM
p.2 #18Post your 50L failures please
Breitling65 wrote:
Why don't you provide "your bad" samples than?
What, another 50L thread? Now there's a surprise...
anybody who has been around this forum over the last 2 years knows it's a controversial lens so i won't go there this time.
As far as asking someone to provide "bad" samples, that's just not fair. I have this wonderful little button on my keyboard that says "Delete".
My 50L is gone and I couldn't provide ANY samples if my life depended on it, and many others probably can't either. Why keep rubbish?
rhorta wrote
Based on *my* experience I wouldn't readily recommend this lens to anyone,What, another 50L thread? Now there's a surprise...
anybody who has been around this forum over the last 2 years knows it's a controversial lens so i won't go there this time.
As far as asking someone to provide "bad" samples, that's just not fair. I have this wonderful little button on my keyboard that says "Delete".
My 50L is gone and I couldn't provide ANY samples if my life depended on it, and many others probably can't either. Why keep rubbish?
May 23, 2010 at 11:40 AM
p.2 #19Post your 50L failures please
Ok ok, let's not get crazy here. Maybe I'm lucky or something but, I own both the 50/1.0L and 50/1.2L, they are both outstanding. My only complaint about the 50/1.0 is the slow focus and size, which is basically the same as the 85L. It's a lens I will never sell!
Dan
Dan
May 23, 2010 at 08:18 PM