EF50-1.2 There is a reason...

Started Dec 6, 2006 | Discussions
Psychic1
Psychic1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,228
EF50-1.2 There is a reason...

...no one is posting pictures. It's not very good.

Focus is slow on the 1D and the colors are washed out.

Actually, the picture on the Canon website is accurate.
--
Supermodels don't pose in the rain.

 Psychic1's gear list:Psychic1's gear list
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 35mm F1.4L USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +5 more
nordilux
nordilux Regular Member • Posts: 158
Re: EF50-1.2 There is a reason...

right, because the reason i got this lens was to publish stupid test photos 24/7 for pixel peepers to spend hours analyzing and discussion on web forums...

Barugon Veteran Member • Posts: 9,481
Re: EF50-1.2 There is a reason...

Psychic1 wrote:

...no one is posting pictures. It's not very good.

Focus is slow on the 1D and the colors are washed out.

Actually, the picture on the Canon website is accurate.

So, do you have this lens? Are you going to post some real-world examples? Or is this post just flame bait?

-- hide signature --

Whoever said 'a picture is worth a thousand words' was a cheapskate.

http://www.pbase.com/dot_borg

Psychic1
OP Psychic1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,228
Re: EF50-1.2 There is a reason...

I purchased the lens this morning, returned at noon, shot with my 1D and 10D, and achieved the same results as the Canon website.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=152&modelid=14259
The focus is simular to my 50-1.4 but the color is richer on my 50-1.4 at 1.4.
I'm leaving now to pick-up the 35L.
--
Supermodels don't pose in the rain.

 Psychic1's gear list:Psychic1's gear list
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 35mm F1.4L USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +5 more
Barugon Veteran Member • Posts: 9,481
Re: EF50-1.2 There is a reason...

Psychic1 wrote:

I purchased the lens this morning, returned at noon, shot with my
1D and 10D, and achieved the same results as the Canon website.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=152&modelid=14259
The focus is simular to my 50-1.4 but the color is richer on my
50-1.4 at 1.4.
I'm leaving now to pick-up the 35L.

No examples? Well, the 35L is certainly a great lens.

-- hide signature --

Whoever said 'a picture is worth a thousand words' was a cheapskate.

http://www.pbase.com/dot_borg

Lemming51
Lemming51 Forum Pro • Posts: 15,278
People unclear on the concept.

Psychic1 wrote:

...no one is posting pictures. It's not very good.

Nonsense. No one's posting pictures from it because very very few are plunking down $1600 for one.

Focus is slow on the 1D

duh. No one, especially Canon, have claimed otherwise. A combination of very large/heavy focus elements needed to move and purposely slowed AF to not overshoot the extremely narrow DoF.

and the colors are washed out.

Sure? Greater OoF blur also looks like "washed out"

Actually, the picture on the Canon website is accurate.

Wouldn't expect otherwise.

 Lemming51's gear list:Lemming51's gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM +5 more
Luna9 Regular Member • Posts: 379
and yours are posted where?

Psychic1 wrote:

I purchased the lens this morning, returned at noon, shot with my
1D and 10D, and achieved the same results as the Canon website.

Why criticize others when you haven't posted any (favorable or not) yourself?

mfurman Veteran Member • Posts: 4,281
Some tests were done

The lens is getting mixed reviews. I saw images from some good copies and some bad ones too.

You can check some of that in this thread (if you did not already).

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/467828/44

I have to admit that I cancelled my order. I cannot imagine asking Canon to calibrate a new $1600 prime lens.

-- hide signature --

Michael

'People are crazy and times are strange, I'm locked in tight, I'm out of range, I used to care, but things have changed' - Bob Dylan

guitarist
guitarist Senior Member • Posts: 2,725
Re: EF50-1.2 There is a reason...

I am seriously thinking about a 24 1.4... to cove the range that I need there.. and skipping the 50 1.2...
I tried it at the counted...and looked at ALL the posted samples..
and I have the 85L mkII

it doesn't look anywhere like the 85..
the quality.. a little faster focus.. but not convincing otherwise..

I have the $$ ..............but I gues not...
I would get the 35 but have the sigma30 1.4

so I feel poushed to the 24.. a little softer...but fun

saynomore Veteran Member • Posts: 4,254
the lens is barely available.

And the samples posted are anything but ideal, I have only seen one or two pictures in which one could tell some level of sharpness at 100%, but still the sharpness parameters applied were unknown (but the OP hinted at them being unsharpened). Those pics looked very good, if they were unsharpened, and if they were sharpened, they just looked good enough.

Nevertheless, the great majority of other samples I've seen posted are neither 100% crops nor shot in conditions that one would to test lens sharpness (they were low-light, low shutter speed, high ISO or any combination of those).

The colors being "washed out", that I'd like to see. I am usually very skeptic when people start talking about the "color" of each lens. Color bias is mostly dependent on post-processing, especially with digital. Of course there can be lenses with color casts, but that rarely happens with super expensive lenses.

Psychic1 wrote:

...no one is posting pictures. It's not very good.

Focus is slow on the 1D and the colors are washed out.

Actually, the picture on the Canon website is accurate.
--
Supermodels don't pose in the rain.

mfurman Veteran Member • Posts: 4,281
Re: the lens is barely available.

How about these:

http://www.pbase.com/ghuff/50lf12_box_shots

They were done in response to another set of box pictures that were quite bad. I am not convinced that the lens is much better than 50 f/1.4
--
Michael

'People are crazy and times are strange, I'm locked in tight, I'm out of range, I used to care, but things have changed' - Bob Dylan

misha Forum Pro • Posts: 18,768
Re: the lens is barely available.

mfurman wrote:

How about these:

http://www.pbase.com/ghuff/50lf12_box_shots

They were done in response to another set of box pictures that were
quite bad. I am not convinced that the lens is much better than 50
f/1.4
--

These look pretty good to me (plus there is always a possibility of a slight focus error at f/1.2-1.4

-- hide signature --

Misha

saynomore Veteran Member • Posts: 4,254
Yeah, I hadn't seen those

They look actually very, very good, if those are 100% shots. What kind of sharpening was applied, though? If they were not shot in RAW nor processed in RIT, then they could be a little bit sharper.

misha wrote:

mfurman wrote:

How about these:

http://www.pbase.com/ghuff/50lf12_box_shots

They were done in response to another set of box pictures that were
quite bad. I am not convinced that the lens is much better than 50
f/1.4
--

These look pretty good to me (plus there is always a possibility of
a slight focus error at f/1.2-1.4

saynomore Veteran Member • Posts: 4,254
I meant...

saynomore wrote:

They look actually very, very good, if those are 100% shots. What
kind of sharpening was applied, though? If they were not shot in
RAW nor processed in RIT, then they could be a little bit sharper.

If these particular pics were shot in RAW or processed in RIT, they could be a little sharper if they weren't.

Lemming51
Lemming51 Forum Pro • Posts: 15,278
Re: the lens is barely available.

mfurman wrote:

How about these:

http://www.pbase.com/ghuff/50lf12_box_shots
... I am not convinced that the lens is much better than 50
f/1.4

Of course not. The f/1.4 isn't much better than the f/1.8 either. Looking solely at sharpness completely misses the point of this, or any other ultra-wide aperture lens. It's not claimed to be the sharpest 50 ever. Canon doesn't even claim it's any sharper than the $70 f/1.8. It's all about getting f/1.2.

 Lemming51's gear list:Lemming51's gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM +5 more
ju_ju
ju_ju Senior Member • Posts: 1,077
Re: not to worry

Yes lemming and more much more they just dont get it and probably never will. Not to worry. .O to be content. :> )

 ju_ju's gear list:ju_ju's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 30D +25 more
zlatko Regular Member • Posts: 401
The box shots look excellent

The box shots look excellent. Really, that is excellent performance for f/1.2. I hope every copy is that good.

Grandin Regular Member • Posts: 192
Re: the lens is barely available.

Of course not. The f/1.4 isn't much better than the f/1.8 either.
Looking solely at sharpness completely misses the point of this, or
any other ultra-wide aperture lens. It's not claimed to be the
sharpest 50 ever. Canon doesn't even claim it's any sharper than
the $70 f/1.8. It's all about getting f/1.2.

...and improved build quality (over both the cheaper 50's), real USM (unlike 50/1.4), weather sealing...

...and, hopefully, more accurate AF than 50/1.4

 Grandin's gear list:Grandin's gear list
Pentax Optio W60 Canon EOS 5D Mark II Olympus PEN E-P3 Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM +7 more
michaelbs Senior Member • Posts: 2,772
Re: the lens is barely available.

misha wrote:

mfurman wrote:

How about these:

http://www.pbase.com/ghuff/50lf12_box_shots

They were done in response to another set of box pictures that were
quite bad. I am not convinced that the lens is much better than 50
f/1.4
--

These look pretty good to me (plus there is always a possibility of
a slight focus error at f/1.2-1.4

Yes but there are clear signs of sharpening artifacts. This means that the test is useless imo.

-- hide signature --
mfurman Veteran Member • Posts: 4,281
Please explain

Could you elaborate please? I would like you to explain to me clearly what I am missing (or what I have been missing in the last 30++ years of using both SLR cameras and Leica rangefinders)
--
Michael

'People are crazy and times are strange, I'm locked in tight, I'm out of range, I used to care, but things have changed' - Bob Dylan

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads