Canon RF 50mm F1.2L USM sample gallery

I find the "bokeh" very pleasant indeed.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

By far one of the most beautiful lenses of the last 10 years, what a great IQ, if Sony 24 GM with AF issues is the lens of the year this should be the lens of the decade, it is that good.

Jan 22, 2019permalink

4sofnature

It's 50% longer, heaver, and almost 100% pricier than the EF 50L. What's the so-called "large mount advantage" that is so strongly advocated by Canikon?

Oct 26, 2018permalink

It is 100% better than EF 50 f1.2L, believe me. I don't think that Canon ever advocated RF mount for the size. M is for small sized lenses.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

wats0n

So I have to ask a very simple, but complicated question I really like the samples here, they might be some of the best I have seen. Under similar conditions would the Canon 6D Mark II comes close to this same IQ ? Just curious because the R is way out of my price range...

Sep 27, 2018permalink

To be honest, why bother? Because you can never mount RF lens on EF mount. I believe the IQ will be similar provided you expose it correctly. I have used 6D II extensively and it's great as long as you know the tolerance limit of PP. Take test shot or understand the metering very well to get the right exposure. But aside that, due to larger pixel pitch size, the older lower megapixel cameras appear sharper and have renders better micro-contrast on edges, my favorite being the decade+ old 5D!

Oct 1, 2018*permalink

igzy

I wish Nikon came out with an AF-capable equivalent. Good job Canon!
.
And to DPR staff: thank you for the nice photos! Sadly, most were taken in good light. Would have been great to see some low light samples so we can tell how it performs when 1.2 is really needed...

Sep 26, 2018*permalink

Imagine those who own EF 50 f1. They'll be thrilled to use it on EOS R with no AF issue.

Oct 1, 2018permalink

Kesava

because if razor thin DOF = professional.

Sep 24, 2018permalink

entoman

Horrible elliptical bokeh on the woodland scenes.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Zvonimir Tosic

Yep. And is swirly too. Lots of swirly lemons in the bokeh.

Sep 24, 2018permalink

And I love that!

Mar 1, 2019permalink

kodakrome

Okay, Canon. You want me to spend $4,600 on this lens and body combo? Then show me. Exactly how much difference would there be between these shots, and the same shots taken with a 6D and a 50mm 1.8 STM?
There wouldn't really be all that much difference, and some of those 1.2 shots would've looked better at 1.8 anyway.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

kodakrome

Of course the build quality and speed of the lens make it more expensive. My comment was not about that. My comment was about how much difference there would be between images taken with the two lenses.

Sep 26, 2018*permalink

Emadn13

same behavior as old canon lenses,bad bokeh as always

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Paul B Jones

You know what? It's going to be okay. Just don't worry so much about things that don't concern you.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

PDD

Winner is Pentax DFA 50mm f1.4!!!

Sep 23, 2018permalink

ffking

Closely followed by the Tokina Opera 50mm f/1.4 :)

Sep 24, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

Meh! Not as good as my KamLam 50mm f/1.1 and at a fraction of the price too! /s

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Can you point me to some samples?

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Buy the EOS R and use all the old MF lenses. The Manual Focus guide feature, taken from C300 II, C700 Etc will make it a breeze to focus with precision. If you haven't seen it, google it. You can even position the focus box anywhere you want, unlike the centrally fixed old Micro prism focus screen or that in the rangefinder.

Oct 1, 2018permalink

Zvonimir Tosic

Nasty bokeh, Canon, lots of swirly lemons; colour (skintones) too could be better. Of all recent 50mm lenses, Pentax HD DFA 50/1.4 delivers overall best aesthetics of the image, and finest colours too.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Better get your monitor calibrated.... and read up on bokeh - a very misunderstood term. How is the performance of your Pentax lens at f1.2?

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Zvonimir Tosic

Lowering the aperture does not improve Canon's lens performance. And that is the gain you pay for buying into the f1.2 – in Canon's case, you gain nothing but bigger swirly lemons and you pay double for them.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

naththo

I agreed that skintone looks fine. My Sony can be oversaturated on skintone sometimes that most people don't like about. It should be natural that Canon is able to produce well. Even Canon is pretty good at grey skies rather than Sony produce blue clouds in grey skies. Thats why Canon WB is pretty good at it.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Going from 1.4 to 1.2 gives you half a stop more light. Also gives you about 5-10cm less DOF at normal subject distance. This is what you pay for. As for your 'swirly lemons' - you seem to be the only one seeing them in these images so my advise is: stay away from the kool aid man...
BTW the only way to compare bokeh between lenses is to take the same image on same size sensors and compare. And even then it is highly subjective.

Sep 24, 2018permalink

Aroart

Wow if I buy this lens I bet I'll be a better photo maker... Feel bad for people that can't afford it and lust for it thinking it would take them to a new level of sharpness and blurry overrated backgrounds..

Sep 23, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

Any time you buy a more expensive lens or camera it will ALWAYS make you a better photographer. The more you spend the better you become.

Oct 1, 2018permalink

Michael Ma

These photos remind me of Zeiss lenses. Cold and lifeless. Come at me bro.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

That's why I use a KamLan 50mm f/1.1

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Lol, not coming at anyone here bro :D

Sep 23, 2018permalink

And that's why I shoot Canon. Quality glass.
I shut up right here.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

bovverwonder

Sigma beats a lot of Canon L glass. But....whatever makes you sleep at night.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Nothing against Sigma. They make some great glass also. However, I can't think of one bad L lens from Canon ever.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

entoman

Canon 17-40mm F4 L.
Soft corners even at F8.
Sold mine and replaced with the far superior 16-35mm F4L.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Well yeah. The 16-35 is at least 10 years younger than the 17-40. You'd hope Canon did some improvements in 10+ years.

Sep 24, 2018permalink

With EOS R, the Sigmas are going to be even better with AF issue no longer going to be an issue. I have always wanted Sigma, but the inconsistent and unpredictability kept me off. Better to avoid frustration while on the job. But, EOS R changed all those.

Oct 1, 2018permalink

Sigma 50 ART is really lifeless and the "bokeh" is lame as anything else, EF 50 f1.2L wins hands down with "bokeh" and yes there is a noticeable difference between f1.4 and f1.2.

Mar 1, 2019permalink

KLO82

Interestingly, people are liking the photo number 9's green-yellowish tone a lot (due to setting the WB to "daylight"). I think this imperfect color has given certain "character" to that image.

Sep 22, 2018permalink

new boyz

Good job Canon. This is a helluva lens.

Sep 22, 2018permalink

Michael B 66

What a pity that this lens doesn't work on the EF-M mount. I am more and more convinced that it would be a very good 80mm equiv lens on these cameras too.

Sep 22, 2018permalink

supersargas

isn't the lens the same size as two or perhaps three of the biggest Ms? what is your idea for holding such a setup? lol

Sep 22, 2018permalink

Michael B 66

@supersargas:
I use the f/4 70-200 with adapter which has similar weight and a much more extreme balance so I think the more compact 50mm lens would work well on the M50 which has an excellent grip for such a small camera - and no, I have medium sized hands.

And if you look at the data the M50 and the RF 50mm have similar overall size but the lens' weight is 2.5 times that of the camera!

Sep 23, 2018permalink

DPR - some more samples pleeeeease :-D Can't wait...

Sep 22, 2018permalink

As you can see here in DPR they sent 3 photographers (three) to test the Sony 135 f1.8 GM (when all most pro use the 70-200 f2.8) and for the other brands usually there is one photographer more or less taking pictures for the gallery. So no, you will not see any other pictures coming from this 50 mm beauty (I tried it and I fell totally in love).

Mar 1, 2019permalink

kobakokh

I again saw this photos in my comp - very good job from Canon! But overpriced, as usual...

Sep 22, 2018permalink

agrek

Great bokeh... almost as good as on my iPhone Plus 👍

Sep 22, 2018permalink

ChicagoRob

I didn't know you were a comedian.

Sep 22, 2018permalink

I don't shoot 50mm but this gallery really convince me to give it a try with this lens.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Now why would anyone say "I don't shoot 50mm" ?
What had 50mm done to you? :D

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Canon released 50 1.2, 28-70 2.8. They have 70-130 F2 patent and 3 lens pending release (24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8, 16-35 2.8), I think this mean a professional FF mirrorless camera is coming soon.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

kobakokh

28-70 is F2, not F2.8...

Sep 22, 2018permalink

you are right. my bad.

Sep 24, 2018permalink

rjp85

I can't help but think Canon will be releasing an RF 35mm 1.2L and 85mm 1.2L to go along with the 50mm. I think this will be a great system, especially with a new 5DSR type mirrorless in the future.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

I hope they release a 105 1.4 with IS.

Sep 26, 2018permalink

dmartin92

Okay. If I win the lottery, I buy the lens. I will get the body too, because it will only work on that. Otherwise, no lottery winnings, I wait a bit.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

3 weeks later: Or...I can make paymens

Sep 22, 2018permalink

William King

Hi Dan.
Could you spare a few moments to comment on the keeper rate wide open. I remember an old 5dii with the ef 1.2 50 being very hit and miss with the emphasis on miss 🙂. In theory dpaf etc should improve things greatly comparitively but how does this work out in practice. Especially hand held. Do you feel it’s an improvement over old mirror non dpaf systems or is subject / photographer movement still a large factor in hit rates?
Best.
Will

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Vintagecamera1930

Makes sense that more would miss. If your distance to subject was about 6-8 feet your DAF is only about 3 to 5 inches. Due to the shortened distance to the sensor that miss won't happen as much.

Not to mention out of all the Ef 50's MTF wise this is easily the sharpest.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Carey Rose

I can't speak to Dan's keeper rate, but in my time with the camera, it's been very good, even at F1.2 - definitely an improvement over using a DSLR at this aperture, though as you note, if you're using Single AF and not Servo, that movement will continue to be an issue.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Michael B 66

I lately found out that AF tracking is very useful for macro photography where f/2.8 is awfully wide open but gives me often the look I want especially with APS-C.

While tracking worked with DSLRs I was always bound to - in my case - 9 or so AF points which crowded the center and were seldomly I wanted them.

DPAF with tracking is another world for handheld macro under mildly windy conditions because it nails the shot usually - never had this experience with DSLRs or old fashioned EOS M camera.

The M50 advantage is the EVF and I think the EOS R is a pleasure to use in such cases (wide open macro or ultra wide open close up) too!

Sep 22, 2018permalink

Michael Ma

I can only imagine the AF to be near flawless wide open. Even with my 5D4, the keeper rate at 1.2 or 1.4 for any L lens has been for me nearly 100% when using DPAF. That includes the 50mm 1.2 L and the 24mm 1.4 II which has pretty shoddy AF through the OVF, but perfect every time through DPAF. Since the EOS R uses DPAF all the time, unless Canon rigged it to not work as well as the 5D4, which is entirely possible, I would say autofocus accuracy wide open is a non-issue for the EOS R.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

stevo23

Enjoying these images - I really like shallow depth of field stuff when it's done right. I can't wait to see the Nikon .95.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

grandmasterphill

Hi Dan Bracaglia. Can you please post more sample from this lens? Thanks

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Agree

Sep 21, 2018permalink

retr01976

Looking at these samples I'll take Canon's poor image quality over Sony's superior image quality any day of the week ;) I mean am I in the minority or has everyone been blinded by DXO over the years ? I just don't get it.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

stevo23

@srados - punches up colors in sensors? That's hogwash.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

stevo23

@srados - you flatter yourself.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Deliverator

Nikon's colours are more neutral than Canon's. In general, Sony's aren't more punchy, but to me they usually seem... off. Too cold.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

Will Sukmiof

Being a Sony fanboy I am blown away by the quality of the images. I have a hard time dealing with the cognitive dissonance right now. Please help!

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Frank_BR

Strange times we are living. A few years ago cameras were big and heavy, and 50mm F1.2 lenses were small and light. Now cameras are small and light, and 50mm F1.2 lenses are large and heavy. If the trend continues, in a few years a mirrorless camera will weigh 350 grams, and a 50mm F1.2 lens will weigh 2000 grams, be the size of a melon and cost $10,000.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

NZ Scott

We're already there with camera bodies - my Panasonic GM5 weighs just 280g.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

retr01976

Frank, I agree. When I pick up my Fuji XT2 it's nice and compact, but once a heavy lens is added it becomes front heavy and awkard to hold. My Canon DSLR feels superb in hand. The weight savings and size of mirrorless isn't quite what it used to be. The DSLR might be seen as outdated, but the style was designed specially to be comfortable to hold, balanced with larger lenses and ergonomically sound. Now we have retro styled boxy bodies with limited grips that we have to add grips to for added cost if we want the body to feel almost as good as an SLR. Makes no sense. We seem to take a few steps forward and a few steps backwards. Would rather see mirrorless tech in an SLR styled body myself instead of everyone building tiny bodies to fool people into thinking "compact", you can't change the physics of lenses.

Sep 21, 2018*permalink

broncofloods

Canon 6d2 size: 144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8 mm Weight: 765
Canon r size: 135.8 x 98.3 x 84.4mm Weight: 660

My 6d2 isn't much bigger than the r but adding the new r lenses to the r body blows it all out of the water, I for one would like to see canon make smaller FF mirrorless cameras and lenses but with this company I know what it is to want...

Sep 21, 2018*permalink

kobakokh

Nothing is strange there - companies doing more and more money, make products are not final aim, aim is make profit, products are just a middle items. Olympus M1 with 4/3 sensor cost more then Nikon D610 with FF sensor!!!

Sep 22, 2018permalink

AlexisH

I would find these samples more helpful if no processing was applied to them. Set camera settings to as little corrections as possible (no sharpening, no s-curve), shoot RAW+JPG, and share those JPGs. I know you're sharing the RAW files, but that doesn't allow me to see the output of the in-camera RAW processing.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Viggo

To me, posting flat raws, makes no sense because never will one do nothing with the raw file. I agree filters and grading and ND grads etc shouldn’t be a part of a gallery for a lens, but normal raw converting makes sense.

Sep 22, 2018permalink

Thoughts R Us

Beautiful lens...the rendering and colors look fabulous.

It's funny to read the critics who have never used this lens, whereas the people who have used the lens really love it!

It will be great to see what Nikon does with a 50 f1.2.

The next few years should be fun as Canon and Nikon compete with some crazy fantastic wide aperture lenses because they now both have lens mounts large enough to accommodate.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

zxaar

Not everyone likes everything. For example take yourself. You spend half of your life telling how you don't like sony mirrorless and all.

If thats all fine then all the others who dislike anything is fine too.

As far as my personal opinion goes, looks like great lens but too expensive and too heavy for me to even consider.

Your likings could be different.

Sep 21, 2018*permalink

Thoughts R Us

Undoubtedly we all have our own opinions and are different.

The only reason why I go off on Sony is because of all of the Sony trolls who bother to come over to Canon and Nikon forums to insult the product. And please don't deny that hasn't happened.

I actually respect Sony and like a lot of what they've achieved; I still trust Canon and Nikon more, but again, if not for the annoying Sony trolls I wouldn't be so vehemently anti-Sony.

But as the Samuel L Jackson character said in the great movie Pulp Fiction, I'm tryin' real hard.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

StephanSchmidt

Yeah yeah, "I only do it because they do it" ... "But he started it mom" .... "I'm only a Sony troll because Thoughts R Us is trolling the Sony forums" ....

Grow up.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

MILC man

@stephanschmidt - "Thoughts R Us is trolling the Sony forums"

no, dpr comment section is not the sony forums, and no, trolls r us doesn't troll the sony forums with that fake account, he has lots of other fake accounts that he tries to use on the sony forum.

grow up yourself, and stop posting misinformation.

Sep 22, 2018*permalink

(unknown member)

I'd like to see how this lens/camera do when the Iris isn't 1.2. That the point of a variable aperture. You can choose how wide.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

well it becomes even sharper, and its so sharp at 1.2 that there is already nothing missing in my opinion.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

It is sharp within the very shallow DOF. But the transition to the out of focus is very abrupt. I'd like to see how the drop off to out of focus areas looks at F2 and f5.6. Does it start getting nervous bokeh?

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Can anyone comment on what this camera and lens will be like for portraiture. I personally wouldn't want to be photographed with it. An MTF approaching 1.0 is the last thing most people would want. I once read somewhere that a lot of old porn stars had to retire recently because the new cameras made them look like...old porn stars. Will 'Vaseline' become the hottest new Photoshop add-on for wedding photographers?

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Chayagrahak

haha

Sep 20, 2018permalink

TheClueless

For me, starting with the best possible result means I can do whatever I want to it later. If portraits need "beautifying", that's a matter for post. And I'd always rather have sharper to start with than self-justifying a vaselinefest like a Fuji.

That said, I'm not sure I'd love this lens. Now let's see what the Nikon anchor will be like, heh

Sep 20, 2018*permalink

AlexisH

I never understood this concern about portraiture. You can always make details disappear, but if you cannot capture them in the first place...

Sep 20, 2018permalink

NZ Scott

One very easy way to smooth out detail is just to apply a bunch of noise reduction.

Sep 21, 2018*permalink

you can put a bit of noise reduction onto it and skintones will look like made with a fuji (not meant to diss fuji btw) - no problem. better to start out with the best possible option and, if needed, turn it down later.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

Great lens, but is there such a thing as too much Bokeh? If so, it seems like in some of the pics, it was a little too pronounced for my taste. IMHO

Sep 20, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

There is such a thing as too much infatuation with the entire topic of bokeh here in Dpreview fantasy land. How does bokeh affect any ordinary photographer? Why did almost no one worry about it 15 years ago? It seems to have minimal effect on film imaging.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Chayagrahak

I see too much vignette :) not sure about bokeh

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Abu Mahendra

The best bokeh is the one you don't need. Lots of images dumbed down by the obliteration of the background. Lazy, lazy, lazy.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

cShaRperThanU

@kodachromeguy "Why did almost no one worry about it 15 years ago?"
Well, maybe because 15 years old lenses simply showed a nice bokeh since they have been differently designed?

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Bokeh has to do with the nature of the OOF areas in your image not the amount of OOF elements - the way to judge it is in the 'roundness' of the OOF circles and a subjective assessment of the 'pleasantness' of the blurry parts. I think what you are referring to as 'too much bokeh' can be ascribed as a busy background - nothing to do with bokeh. Any 50mm lens taking the same shot would have the same 'busy background' (which is not a lens issue) but if you zoom in on the OOF parts and subjectively assess whether you like it or not is when you get to the 'bokeh'

Sep 21, 2018permalink

So, it is about 23 times better than the 50mm f1.8. That's amazing.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

dmartin92

Everything with camera equipment, It is « decreasing marginal improvements ». The best deals around are the 400 Dollar cameras. The 800 Dollar cameras are not twice better than the 400 Dollar ones.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Hautedawg

True, but that's true of everything. A $100 bottle of whiskey isn't 3 times better than a bottle of Jack.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Nice analogy. I once was talking with a wine waiter from a very well respected local restaurant. He asked me if I knew the difference between a $20 bottle of wine and a $40 bottle of wine. I knew where he was going, but said 'No' anyway. His reply: '$20'. I wonder if he now works in Marketing at Canon.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

It looks very nice for a $5,000 camera and lens. Now we just need a few cat pictures to see how good it really is.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Dog picutres too ;-)

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Thoughts R Us

This is now probably the best 50 lens in existence. And it's a statement by Canon about what they can do with their new RF lens mount.

Great times ahead for those who love optics.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Bhima78

Best 50mm AF lens very likely. Doubtful its better than the Otus.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

IdM photography

Bokeh is too harsh... This lens isn't the best 50mm around... Let's hope the Nikon 50mm f/1.2 will be better...

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Endgame Trigger

A new lens in a sect's world, where esoteric 'menues', 'skintones' and 'weather sealing' arguments have become the last remaining bastions in fanboy wars long time ago!

A new calculated lens, not just one of their occasionally relabeled 90ies oldies, which have even been beaten by Sigma a few years ago! O.O! Just wow! Now they are going to reactive their fourth argument, that a lens is more important than a sensor in three, two, one...

But this is not so bad as the esoteric 'colourscience' b******t, which - by three discrete digital colour channels - soon became more of a declaration of the editors technology understanding and mastering bankruptcy.

And how happy is Sony! No more 'battery life', EVF bashing and 'limited lens selection' killerphrases anymore!

Sep 20, 2018*permalink

So what do you wan't to say?
I already struggeled with all of the issues you mentioned. And yes, there is more than numbers and figures that defines the quality of a lens or the overall system. Just because it cannot be easily measured it is neither esotheric nor BS.

Sep 20, 2018*permalink

What?

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Paul B Jones

Glad you got that off your chest. You seem pretty upset. Any thoughts on the RF 50mm F1.2L?

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Matei H

That semed pretty esoteric. Any thoughts of the lens and then we can lit more scented candles?

Sep 20, 2018permalink

biggercountry

Shirley, I’m not the only one seeing the vignetting in every shot?

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Austin Garland

Surely*

Sep 20, 2018permalink

pjsalty

Surely you can't be serious?
I am serious...and don't call me Shirley
(Airplane, the movie)

Sep 20, 2018permalink

dmartin92

Just thinking, could vignetting be an expected downside of a f/1.2 lens, et f/1.2 ?

It would almost make sense. Or rather, it would make sense.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

dtibi

I like vignetting lenses. Perfect lenses are boring. Also if i need uniform light level across the frame like for studio work, usually i stop down the lens and the vignetting disappears.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

it is a 1.2 lens at 1.2...surely it does vignette. how shouldnt it?

Sep 21, 2018permalink

dtibi

Vignetting could be reduced by using larger diameter lens elements in the front part of the lens. But even like this, the lens is huge.

Sep 23, 2018permalink

raminm

The lens is a good performer; maybe as good as the Sony 55mm Sonnar or the 50mm Planar.

Sep 20, 2018*permalink

(unknown member)

The Bokeh on the Sony's is not comparable to this Canon 50. They are simply much better. This lens looks busy in the bokeh and have a swirly/circular looking bokeh. Very distracting!!

Sep 21, 2018permalink

"The Bokeh on the Sony's is not comparable to this Canon 50."
I agree. The Canon is way better....

Sep 21, 2018permalink

PaulSnowcat

Frankly speaking this lens seems to be less interesting then Nikon Nikkor 58/1.4 (F mount lens)...

Sep 20, 2018permalink

just someone

The Nikon 58mm is a sublime lens!
Probably the most underated lens of all time.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

rhlpetrus

True. This lens shows pretty nervous bokeh and flare issues.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

I agree that the bokeh looks nervous.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Herb

Some people have their magnifying glasses out and because it’s new and better they must find something wrong. The photos look great! Now can I get the same results? If I can I will get this lens!

Sep 20, 2018permalink

arbux

Why not? Your results depend only from yourself.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Herb, do you think the photos look great? Well, I think the bokeh shows 'room for improvement', doesn't it?

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Ecajoe

Hmmm. These pics seem to have some heavy vignetting. Is that post or out of camera. When showing a lens please don't add post editing. That's just dumb. If it is out of camera that's not good either.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

out of camera for sure... its 1.2, what do you expect? Its nice for portraits though, and reminds me of the EF 50mm 1.2 L .. great lens the new one, sharp at 1.2 and similar bokeh than the old 1.2 ... too bads is much bigger and eavier and no IBIS to back it up ;-)

Sep 20, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

Looking at the first image I wouldn't call that "heavy vignetting". There are photos in this collection (#18 for one) where vignetting clears up nicely at f1.6.

Sep 20, 2018*permalink

@wasTF, do you shoot static subjects in dark places only? In my experience, I at least shoot above 1/125 for anything moving, or at worst, 1/60. Missing IBIS or IS for that focal length to shoot at the general 1/125 is no problem. If you talk about video, that's something else, but again, amateurs don't buy this lens to shoot video, and pro will turn off IBIS/IS anyway and use a gymbal/glidecame/tripod etc anyway. What's your complain about?

Sep 21, 2018permalink

Carey Rose

//When showing a lens please don't add post editing. That's just dumb.//

That is correct, and is why we don't add vignetting to sample gallery images. Ever.

Sep 21, 2018permalink

@Jack Lian: You need IBIS to prevent micro shakes, otherwise you have to do 1/(focal lengh*5) to be save.. hence 1/250 sec for 50mm. And no, not every picture is blurry, but some will be at 100%. Maybe this is a personal thing, not everybody is the same. But the old formula "1/focal lengh" for longest shutter for a shake free image does not apply anymore with 20+ MP.

But hey, feel free to tell yourself what features you dont need in the canon R. That mentality you have to be very good at with Canon lately. Cant wait for my Z6 ;-)

Sep 23, 2018permalink

UncoyDP

@wasTF You make a good point that high resolution digital photography requires new multipliers. In controlled circumstances I could not get better than 1/10 sharp with 135mm and 1/60th second on an 24 MP APS-C sensor. With the Fuji X-H1 IBIS, that went up to 7/10 sharp. Still the 5x multiplier implies someone with shaking issues. I'd say taking the old formula and doubling it would be useful, i.e. 2 x focal length.

Sep 24, 2018permalink

@UncoyDP: I was talking about real world, taking wedding photography, always in a hurry, always on the move. Multiplier 5 ensures sharp images, unless you really are moving too much. And that was with 22mp. I can take a sharp image with 1/50 at 50mm, but it may or may not work every time. I dont like taking a gable on it though. It's not so good to shoot people at slower speeds than 1/60 anyways. I even like 1/125 or a bit faster, sometimes sudden movements can blur just a bit which can be nice but with 1/60 it may be too severe.

Sep 24, 2018permalink

UncoyDP

Yes, people shots below 1/90 are always a gamble if you don't want motion, as people are almost always moving a little bit or even blinking. If you're shooting weddings and have a DSLR, I can see why you don't want to pop off two extra shots for insurance (extra disturbance).

The X-H1 is so quiet even with mechanical shutter, I'd just pop off a few more shots for people motion.

Sep 25, 2018permalink

@UncoyDP: Its not even about disturbance, sometimes is purely about the moment, things happen so fast! With modern cameras like G9 you could just go 12 fps or even 20 fps and get just everything... but it will be painful to go through all the files later.. you better get the shot right in the first place .. 3-4 fps is more than enough to get the right moments. Even better must be the canon 1d or nikon d3/4/5 series.. They have a destinct advantage: lower time from shutter press to picture taken ! It is something that is rarely talked about i feel, but makes a great difference if you are a attentive photographer.
I dont know how the Nikon Z7 times are, but it felt much faster than my d610.. no wonder, no mirror to move and the AF is quite snappy too. Not every mirrorless is quite this snappy though...

I have not used a fuji, apart from a very brief hands on with a x100f.. quite the beast :-)

Sep 25, 2018permalink

UncoyDP

I agree about the moment and too many photos. Bad photographers way overshoot these days. I've been to live performances where they just clacked away a pair of them with Nikons like barking dogs. Totally ruined the long multiple performance show. I had more high quality photographs out of about 50 exposures for the whole show (I was shooting even less than normal at it was not a dress rehearsal but a live performance as there were only two evenings).

You might enjoy an outing with an X-H1. It's literally zero disturbance (apart from visually looking a lot like a DSLR, it's only a little smaller than my 5D III). Silent mechanical shutter has been the holy grail since the demise of the affordable leaf shutter.

I'm looking forward to working with my Z6 when it ships in November.

Sep 25, 2018permalink

xgoldman

I don't like these images. They're flat-no air, no presence. Too sharp? Too much contrast? I dislike them the same way I dislike Samsumg S9 images. They leave me longing for film to heal my eyes. I prefer Canon pro full frame DSLR in every way. I'm sure I'm a minority with this take. I'm also sure I'm gonna need a whole lot of convincing to buy into this system.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

Go back to using film. There are plenty of amazing black and white emulsions still available. And there are plenty of awesome classic lenses that work perfectly with film.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

Is it the weather in Seattle or the camera, its lens and the PP? Colors look somehow muted and rather cool. Although the light looks soft on many images, they are full of contrast. I think they serve current viewing habits of tech forum members. Well maybe changing camera or PP settings fixes some of these issues.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

Many photos show a swirly or circular bokeh. Arrgh. :-(

Sep 20, 2018permalink

those photos are really though on lenses since the distances is higher.. believe me these results are pretty good compared to every thing else on the market.. looking forward to the Z-Mount Version

Sep 20, 2018permalink

It is very difficult - rather impossible - to compare the bokeh of different lenses by images of different scenes. DPR should add some bokeh comparison. AFAIR they already published such stuff.

Sep 20, 2018permalink

dtibi

I LOVE swirly bokeh 💞

Sep 20, 2018permalink

always strikes me how people want to compare and judge a lens with pictures that are made in totaly different places with different light etc. - i can show you a couple of images form my 85 1.2 L that have such a rubbish bokeh that you want to drive over that lens with a truck. and again in reverse. and then light it with fire.

but we all know how beautiful that thing can render in most other situations.

btw: love swirly bokeh.

Sep 21, 2018*permalink

@emfor: i know its difficult, and you have no reason to believe me. But i can manage, having shot years of weddings full time with the EF 50 1.2 L

Sep 21, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

This was the more exciting introduction than the camera.

Sep 20, 2018permalink