Talk me out of buying a 50 1.2L

[Ian Taylor]

Don't buy it, you'll be sorry.

[ingram_van_heerden]

I own a 50mm 1.8 mkII but struggling alot with the AF, also looking to upgrade to 1.4 and I'll be honest this is these are the first bad reviews I read about it, only read good thing.

[tomwatt]

Maybe the strongest feature of L-series lenses is the weatherproofing. If that is not a concern for you, and the 0.2 difference in f-stops doesn't convince you that the f1.4 is good enough for your needs, then I guess you need to pony up the money.

[35mmdelux]

nowhere did I hear avail light shooting; as such, this purchase appears to be a status lens. I have never desired a Noctilux (f/1.0) when the Summilux (f/1.4) kicks b-tt.

[tom_berkowski]

Thanks for responses. I would not buy for wider apeture (f/1.2 vs. 1.4). I use a lot of 1.8 - 2.2, sometimes a bit wider, but I've only used wide open (1.2) in rental lenses a couple times successfully.

 

My primary reason for considering purchase is the focus speed & accuracy vs. the 1.4. Secondarily for feel (solid bulk, focus feel). Third for reliability concerns, but that is offset by cost.

 

I am just not happy with 50 lens choices, and I need a normal lens. 50 1.2 is somewhat inferior to other L lenses in my experience, supporting what others have pointed out, so it's a bit of a rip-off. However, I can't use one of the other L lenses to do 50 work.

[pgranone]

If you want the Canon 50mm F1.2 then get it

 

I chose the Sigma 50mm F1.4 and am happy with the performance and resulting images

it is sharp at F1.4 or stopped down, and has quick focus

[ujwal]

I have a Canon 50mm 1.8II which is my fav. portrait lens when i am travelling light. Its very sharp at F1.8 and for me...the AF is no problem, u just need to get used to how it focuses. The AF is also quite fast and accurate. I don't have complaints....best AU$140 i have ever spent.

 

And for serious uses...like weddings, i use Canon 85mm 1.2L. ...its the MKI version and AF speed is more than enough to shoot a bridal portrait. Shes not running anywhere. And at such wide apertures, u are most likely to use MF anyway.

 

Cheers!

[jim_larson1]

http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/50mm_1.2L/index.htm

[brian_seay]

Can't do it. I love mine. I used the f/1.4 for 2 years -- since I got the f/1.2L the f/1.4 hasn't been mounted. I grew to dislike the f/1.4 because it could not AF at all in highly backlit situations. The focus on the f/1.2L is fast and accurate in challenging situations.

 

If you want a lens that is good from f/2.2 to f/5.6, the f/1.2L isn't designed for that range and you're better off with the f/1.4.

 

The Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ZE has become available in just the last few days, and it's only a matter of time until it becomes legendary -- for its harsh bokeh wide open. On the other hand, if you want sharpness at the plane of focus and smooth transition to blur at f/1.2, this is your lens.

[35mmdelux]

the reviews indicate the lenses are closely matched, except for flare (the f/1.4 flare more). $300 v. $1500. Flare is a big deal in my book, can ruin alot of pix.

 

I have a great 50/2.0 Hexanon for my Leica (about $400) and I also have a 50/1.4 Summilux ASPH (about $2500 used). go figure. best of luck.

[markonestudios]

If you buy it, little green men will come out of the box and kidnap you in your sleep. You will be teleported to an undiscovered planet and they'll pull out the hairs on your body one by one. Howzat? ;-)

[robert_turner]

Do real men buy Zeiss ZE lenses that are really Cosinas (with the obligatory license fee paid, of course), or are these

somehow lesser men? ;-)

 

PS- "hey, my cheapo Panasonic camcorder says "Leica" on the front!"

[yakim_peled1]

>> My primary reason for considering purchase is the focus speed & accuracy vs. the 1.4. Secondarily for feel (solid bulk,

focus feel). Third for reliability concerns, but that is offset by cost.

 

Then IMHO you should go for the 35/1.4 L. No 50mm lens gives you both ring USM and IF design so either focus speed

and/or accuracy is compromised. As far as feel and reliability it's also top dog.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[tom_berkowski]

Regarding suggestion to go with 35 1.4L, which has better focus. I have only limited rental experience with the 35, but I did like the focus. My question is whether 35 mm is a substitute for 50 mm. In my limited experience, I found 35 mm to be wide for my use, but then again maybe with time I could figure out how to use it more effectively.

[sarah_fox]

"My primary reason for considering purchase is the focus speed & accuracy vs. the 1.4."

 

Hmmmm... If you use your AF intelligently, you shouldn't have nearly this degree of focusing difficulty. I addressed this exact issue in a post I wrote in another thread:

 

http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00RVEk

 

In short, you should be able to AF very quickly and reliably in near darkness with a very slow lens on a very early model DSLR if you simply give your AF points a decent edge. (Seriously.) If you can see it in the viewfinder, an AF detector can nail it. An f/1.2 lens is simply a stupid level of overkill to achieve AF. The only reason to get the f/1.2 is if you plan on doing a lot of shooting below f/2.

 

But if you want to blow that kind of money on a lens that won't outperform a much cheaper one, go right ahead. I'm sure the Japanese can use help with their economy too.

[fotograf]

Tom, I'm unsure of your original post- if you're asking people to talk you out of buying this lens, it sounds likely you've already answered your own question.

[chris_clarke3]

I agree Brian. I've never had to be talked out of buying a lens and I rather like my 50L.

In fact I don't think I have ever linked the words " talk me out of buying xxx lens" in thoughts or speech.

 

More like, "My missus is gonna kill me when she sees this nice new lens!"

[yakim_peled1]

>> My question is whether 35 mm is a substitute for 50 mm. In my limited experience, I found 35 mm to be wide for my use, but then again maybe with time I could figure out how to use it more effectively.

 

Stepping forward one or two steps is all you need to do.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[tom_berkowski]

With a 35, how close could I get before I would have to worry about the big nose effect? I'll rent the 35 1.4L again to try it out, plus see if I can find a Sigma 50 to play with. After that, I'll probably be ready to make the decision.

 

Thanks everyone.

[manuel barrera houston,]

<p>that is why we have over kill in megapixels, so one can step back and then crop the heck out of it:) why worry about in camera composition?</p>

[anthony_thornborough1]

<p>Tom,<br>

Buy an 85 F/1.2 LII instead and explore its wonders.<br>

Tony T</p>