Canon 50mm f/1.2 L, talk me out of it.
Sep 13, 2010 at 12:41 AM Post #31 of 48

patalp

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Posts
298
Likes
11
Quote:
But really, no one will ever look at one of your pictures and think or say "nice bokeh".  And if they do, they won't be someone whose opinion you care about anyways. 
wink_face.gif

Indeed, hahaha 
bigsmile_face.gif

 
Sep 13, 2010 at 9:49 PM Post #32 of 48

choka

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 13, 2009
Posts
380
Likes
13
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.

 
Quote:
yeah for sure.  I thought the question was still 1.2 vs 1.4.  If the OP is going to go with 1.4, then he/she should definitely pick the best 1.4 out there for the price.  From the video, the Sigma does look a bit better, though there's more to a lens than just bokeh I think sharpness might be more important and I'm still skeptical cause it's Sigma.



 
Sep 13, 2010 at 9:59 PM Post #33 of 48

CEE TEE

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Posts
2,184
Likes
404
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
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.)
 
Sep 13, 2010 at 10:03 PM Post #34 of 48

CEE TEE

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Posts
2,184
Likes
404
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
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.
 
Sep 14, 2010 at 2:02 AM Post #35 of 48

llegoz

New Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 11, 2010
Posts
3
Likes
0
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.
 
 
Sep 15, 2010 at 12:05 PM Post #37 of 48

wnewport

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Posts
1,203
Likes
10
Update: I convinced my college to buy the 24L, 50mm Sigma, 100L Macro for our student group. Yay! (I'm president of the filmmaking club)
 
My friend and I looked at a lot of comparisons between the Canon/Sigma 50mm 1.4 and the 1.2L.  In some cases, like lens flare and sharpness, the Canon 1.4 won.  The Sigma's bokeh looked almost as good as the 1.2, with similar iq as the Canon, so I decided on that.
 
Sep 16, 2010 at 12:12 PM Post #38 of 48

choka

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 13, 2009
Posts
380
Likes
13
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.
 
Quote:
Update: I convinced my college to buy the 24L, 50mm Sigma, 100L Macro for our student group. Yay! (I'm president of the filmmaking club)
 
My friend and I looked at a lot of comparisons between the Canon/Sigma 50mm 1.4 and the 1.2L.  In some cases, like lens flare and sharpness, the Canon 1.4 won.  The Sigma's bokeh looked almost as good as the 1.2, with similar iq as the Canon, so I decided on that.



 
Sep 16, 2010 at 12:33 PM Post #39 of 48

cswann1

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Posts
1,656
Likes
90
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.
 
Nov 17, 2010 at 7:12 PM Post #41 of 48

mangamonster

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Posts
371
Likes
56
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.
 
May 10, 2013 at 11:10 AM Post #42 of 48

charvak

New Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Posts
17
Likes
10
I want a Canon 50mm 1.2.  Anyone want to sell me a used one?  I don't know if there are so few used ones on the market because they hold their value very well or because nobody who owns one wants to give it up.  There must be someone out there who needs a couple thousand dollars and doesn't use the lens much anymore.
 
May 10, 2013 at 9:12 PM Post #43 of 48

Jon L

For him, f/1.2 is a prime number
Joined
May 20, 2003
Posts
4,299
Likes
553
When buying a used 50L, try to get one made in last few years.  The older ones tend have some focus issues going by many user inputs on the net.  I used to have the Canon 50 f/1.8, Canon 50 f/1.4, Sigma 50 f/1.4, and Canon 50L, and I have only hung on to the 50L.  
The Lensrentals 50 mm shootout is a helpful article, and according to their testing, 50 L is the sharpest lens at f/2.0 and wider, sharper than Zeiss 50 f/1.4, Zeiss 50 f/2 Makro at these apertures.  At f/1.2, it's the sharpest 50 mm period.  The beautiful bokeh is very addictive as well. 
 
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout
 
May 20, 2013 at 9:16 PM Post #45 of 48

MadCow

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Posts
296
Likes
12

Users who are viewing this thread

Top