Canon 50mm f/1.2 L, talk me out of it. - Page 3

Quote:

Indeed, hahaha 

I am pretty sure the Sigma is sharper than both Canon 50/1.4 and Nikon 50/1.4G wide open. Sigma also has slightly smoother bokeh @ 1.4. If you plan to use the 50 as a portrait lens and can't afford the Canon 50/1.2, Sigma 50/1.4 is the way to go. I know the Nikon 50/1.4G is slightly sharper around f/8 though. Not sure about the Canon one.

 

It is also true that Sigma usually have some QC issues with their stuff, so you might have to try out a few samples to get a really sharp one.

 

I used to have the Leica 50mm F1.0.

Seriously. Crazy glass. So expensive I didn't like carrying the M6 rig around...

With today's VR and the new level of low light photography with today's high-end sensors, you'd have to want it for the sharpness.

Because, really- always want something wider. I like to see and crop later, plus if you will make prints you need headroom for print format sizes.

Didn't read the thread but if this thing is still alive, thought I would give my 2 cents.

Looking at the previous couple posts, I'd much rather get things sharp and then apply selective filter later.

Invest in a Wacom tablet (Bamboo are around $70) and the lasso (selection tool) will be your new BFF. (Get feathering down.)

Okay, just did what I should have done and read OPs post.

If you aren't making money with it regularly, do not buy that lens.

Rent it/borrow it when you want to go really shoot. Then you'll enjoy it and make the most of it.

I can think of many things you can spend your money on to make your photography better and get enjoyment out if it. Feel free to PM me.

If you really want it, buy it dude.

 

But since you want to be talked out of it. I've used the lens several times with my 30d. The 1.2 is overkill on a small sensor. The 1.2 is slow to focus due to the heavy glass it has to move around. Its heavy, big, and in my opinion, over priced. Id just buy the 1.4. I had one an it was my favorite until I broke it. The bokeh on the 1.4 is amazing and smooth. Shooting at 1.2 can be problematic. Its hard to get much in focus and with the slow autofocus, it be can a pain if you miss shots.

 

Take a look at the canon 50mm 1.4, or even the sigma 1.4 I hear thats a great lens. I'd rather have the 35mm L. But again, thats just me.

 

Congrats! But for the Sigma, carefully check for focal shift problems.  My friend's 1st one had front focusing problem and he had to exchange it. I also tried a copy that would very occasionally stop auto-focusing andI had to unmount and remount the lens. So... watch out for that as well. If you got a good copy, then it is amazing.
 

I may be too late (haven't read the whole thread) but I have to go with Krmathis on this one.

 

 

At f/1.2 your DOF is almost unusable.  Almost nobody "needs" that much light gathering ability and a f/1.4 is fast enough for anything I've ever needed and they are much less expensive.

That's much better! The 50L has probably the worst value-money ratio.

It's  a pretty great lens. I have an old Takumar 50mm f1.4 and it has stood the test of time. I'm not too much into the whole bokeh 'movement' any more...it's just too much now for my type of shots. I prefer to shoot a couple stops higher for most of my shots now to reduce the severe bokeh when using super fast glass.

 

Now, I'm looking at some 35mm equivelent lenses at f2.8.

Edited by mangamonster - 11/17/10 at 4:14pm