Jump to content

Canon 50mm 1.2L lens performance


gary_anthes

Recommended Posts

I just bought the Canon 50mm 1.2L lens to use with my Canon 5D Mk 4, hand-held in very low light. In disappointed to find that it's not very sharp (even in the center) wider than f2.0, and the light fall-off out from the center is pretty bad at the widest apertures. I'm pretty happy at f2.0, and that still counts as "fast," but I wonder if it is (or I am or my camera body is) performing as it should? What's the experience of other users? What aperture do you use in very low light when you don't care much about depth of field?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You probably need to microadjust the AF on this lens. Or you could shoot in Live View with touch AF. The lens should be sharp at least in the center at f1.2, but the depth of focus is so little that it will always be difficult to get the focus just right on even the slightest of moving subjects. The lens will never rival the Sigma f1.4 or the Zeiss Otus for resolution wide open, but the real point of this lens is its great bokeh. It is indeed special purpose.
Robin Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a great idea to exchange the 1.2 for a 1.4, but may I suggest the new Sigma Art? It's sharper than the EF 50/1.4, particularly at wider apertures, and much sharper than the 1.2. And Sigma makes a fairly inexpensive USB Dock that enables you to update firmware and make AF micro adjustments, among other things.

 

I've been very happy with my Sigma. It won't save you as much as the EF 50/1.4 would over the 1.2, but it's a better lens than either.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd probably get a Tamron 45mm f1.8 VC

to use with my Canon 5D Mk 4, hand-held in very low light

I can't afford a 2nd lens for Canon yet and haven't looked too closely at the reviews. Switching from sensor stabilized Pentaxes to conventional Leicas reminded me that there are limitations to handholding, especially when you have a lot of pixels to look at. Tamron's VC should be worth sacrificing an f-stop in lens speed and if you ended shooting at f2 or slower, do you really have to sacrifice anything?

To me the 50mm f1.2 appeared as a lens that people seem to pick for it's flattering rendering characteristic bokeh etc. Most likely combined with controlled studio lighting, to get an artsy look.

I haven't really developed a taste for such glass yet myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just bought the Canon 50mm 1.2L lens to use with my Canon 5D Mk 4, hand-held in very low light. In disappointed to find that it's not very sharp (even in the center) wider than f2.0, and the light fall-off out from the center is pretty bad at the widest apertures. I'm pretty happy at f2.0, and that still counts as "fast," but I wonder if it is (or I am or my camera body is) performing as it should? What's the experience of other users? What aperture do you use in very low light when you don't care much about depth of field?

What sort of Shutter Speeds are you achieving at f/1.2? As someone else has mentioned, the extremely shallow DOF plus the high Megapixel count of the sensor will need A1 technique to produce a tack sharp image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The three 50mm lenses from Canon were reviewed side-by-side in PhotoPlus issue 103. The 1.4 and the 1.2 version both received the same overall score (4 stars), and the sigma 50 mm 1.4 lens received a 5 star rating. Sharpness was one of the characteristics that were stated for the Sigma lens. Canon1_2.PNG.e360123fa302b58dd58d81890c2e77c0.PNG

Sigma1_4.PNG.f1f6b878788d926bc7250d02657dcf31.PNG

 

Given how sensors develop, I'd second what Mark said. I'd go for the sharper lens.

Edited by TriggerHappy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been a fan of ultra wide primes for portraiture, but a couple of rentals of the 50/1.2L was enough to convince me that, in this day and age, it's a waste. IMO, both times f2.2 -> f2.5 was the widest I could shoot with it to get usable IQ (IMO) - even after MFA. The EF 50/1.4 at least crisped up by f2.0-2.2. Maybe when the 50/1.2L II comes out, it may be worth revisiting, but the Sig 50/1.4 A blows it out of the water, and even it's predecessor (The much cheaper Sig 50/1.4 EX DG HSM) outperformed it (in the center and mid - which for 50/80mm portraiture is the critical zone typically) as well as, obviously, the EF 1.4.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...