sebastian_klamt

Robin, thanks a lot, I guess I will do so! Best regards, Sepp

Sharpness by the way is also not my main task, at soft portraits, and I guess even the performance of the lens at 1.2 looks better than the pure data. The main thing is, I want a professional prime lens, with inner focus (the mechanics of the 1.4 is just as bad as the 1.8...), with great colours.

Hey there, and thanks for your quick and detailed information. @ John: This is quite delicate a theme to me, I tried to get one of this great conversion-kits for a while, but I couldn't reach EdMika at all, and even used kits weren't available. Now I acutally don't want to go without AF, because the modern algorrhythms are so qucik and precise, it would be a waste of time and my nerves to do MF again. This is spared for my medium formate images I do with the great Mamiya C330S;-) Sepp

Hey there! I've been using 50mm primes for quite a while, for being used to this breed from analogue times. First I had the 1.8 mk2, then the 1.4 USM, I'm using up to now. Due to a Cash Back from Canon now, I think about purchasing the 1.2 L lens. I already have the FD 1.2 55mm aspherical for analogue systems, and this one is real a gem. For soft portraiture and other proposals I'm still happy about the standard prime lens. One thing that makes me angry, everytime I use the 1.4 lens, is that the autofocus is quite slow (for USM) and often pumping, (this was one reason why I got rid of the 1.8 lens, but the problem is still the same). So finally my question to you is, who has experience with the 1.2 50mm lens. Is it really worth the high price. My 1.4 50mm lens and the 100mm macro are my last non-L-lenses, and I appreciate the L-quality very much. The thing that makes me unsure, is the measured sharpness of the 1.2 50mm lens. But on the other hand, I guess the FD version was even worse , but no one argued about, because no one could measure it?! Could you please help me!! Best regards from Germany, Sepp