zeiss 50mm 1.4 vs canon 50 L 1.2

yea the Zeiss 2.0 looking like the one i been going thru the thread and there is some really good work in there..and with the Zeiss i can do marco and get real close to my subject which i think you cant do that with the 50L!

I own both the Zeiss 50mm/f2.0 and the Canon 50mm f/1.2. These are used on my 1DX. (I've been using 1 series for a long time). I DO NOT own the Zeiss 1.4. I include a chart for three lenses.

The two lenses offer different things for me.

For starters, and to digress , I am fond of this test site for concise reviews and data points. In particular I find the resolution charts which are mapped to aperture, to be extremely useful in the field.

http://www.photozone.d​e/canon_eos_ff

The Canon 1.2 - stopped down or wide open it is predictable, sharp and renders very nice colors. Shooting live performances and not using flash is what makes this lens work for me.

pkilla wrote in post #14913099
I'm really interested in both of these lenses but does the Zeiss beat out the canon 1.2 I'm hearing a lot of mix talk can I get some real anwsers.....

Zeiss doesn't have AF - period! Unless you always and I repeat, always use Live View for focusing and never ever your subject moves...you can get Zeiss. In all other cases get 50L.

This 3D Zeiss look is a complete madness. Who invented it?
I think Zeiss lenses are spectacular, but if you only get a fraction of shots in focus, what is the point?

I have 35 f/1.4 ZE and....it is just doesn't work for people that are on the move...and....people move.

light_pilgrim wrote in post #14926702
Zeiss doesn't have AF - period! Unless you always and I repeat, always use Live View for focusing and never ever your subject moves...you can get Zeiss. In all other cases get 50L.

light_pilgrim wrote in post #14926713
I have 35 f/1.4 ZE and....it is just doesn't work for people that are on the move...and....people move.

Very wrong statement above for me.
AF is not the fastest one always. If on the street, for example, it works faster with MF instead of setting nearest AF point. You'll miss the moment if you use AF.

I didn't stopped walking to take this picture.
F2.

i can't hit the focus on eyes with MF while using 35 f/1.4 ZE lens and 5D MKIII body. I see nothing....I try many shots hoping that at least one of them is going to be OK.

One day I went for a walk with my camera and I was photographing people. Of 100 shots taken, maybe 1 or 2 was perfectly in focus....the rest was off.

Maybe I do not know how to take pictures...I agree, but I managed to take some: www.dylikowski.com

I vote against Zeiss bright lenses for people photography on modern Canon bodies. Doesn't work.

When I realized that I cannot use Viewfinder if I want to be accurate, I started using Live View and guessing what the composition is going to be...as you cannot set the composition right while in Live View and magnifying to see whether eyes look sharp.

This one was good:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I think the topic is being lost.

Clearly, if the 35/1.4 doesn't work reliably for you then that is a key issue. But to declare it "doesn't work"...well, is inaccurate. I use the 35/2.0 and love it - manual focus and I do not use LV.

And this thread is about comparing the two 50mm lenses, is it not?

chmod

chmod wrote in post #14927046
I think the topic is being lost.

Clearly, if the 35/1.4 doesn't work reliably for you then that is a key issue. But to declare it "doesn't work"...well, is inaccurate. I use the 35/2.0 and love it - manual focus and I do not use LV.

And this thread is about comparing the two 50mm lenses, is it not?

chmod

Yes, you are right....it is just I was once there, thinking which way to go 35L or Zeiss. I got convinced that it has this enigma 3D look... Well....
At f/2 I can focus as well, but there is a reason why you have f/1.4

To the OP - think twice on the importance of AF.
While you are making your choice....only think about AF...

I must admit, I'm not using 1.4-1.6 on Zeiss for something which is moving relatively closely to the lens. If action is five or more meters away, not a big problem.

kf095 wrote in post #14927386
I must admit, I'm not using 1.4-1.6 on Zeiss for something which is moving relatively closely to the lens. If action is five or more meters away, not a big problem.

We are talking about something completely different. What you are showing are the images where your concern is to get full body in focus....which can be done even without looking through viewfinder. What I am struggling with is to get eyes in focus at f/1.6 without AF.

You didn't specified it. It was just - people are moving. Then it was people moving at 1.6.
Now people eyes at 1.6. While they are moving?

kf095 wrote in post #14928179
You didn't specified it. It was just - people are moving. Then it was people moving at 1.6.
Now people eyes at 1.6. While they are moving?

Portraits....where eyes being in focus is of critical importance. And.....in most cases....the reason why people purchase 50mm lens is because of portraits. And people move...they never stand still, they are alive.

So, at least for me, is very hard to see whether eyes are in focus with 5D MKIII. Maybe others have zero problems. Most examples that I have seen from Zeiss in MF is where precise focusing for something that can move is not very critical. But if it is.....you really, really, really need to think a lot whether you with be happy without AF.

IQ on Zeiss is exceptional...but so what...............you need to hit the focus.

I think the 50 F1.2 I got is good. This is day 2 with it so need to stop er down a bit see what F1.8 to 2.2 look like this is wide open from 6 feet or so.

Congratulations on 50L! Nice portrait!

Now to 35 1.4 Zeiss using issues.

light_pilgrim wrote in post #14929227
Portraits....where eyes being in focus is of critical importance. And.....in most cases....the reason why people purchase 50mm lens is because of portraits. And people move...they never stand still, they are alive.

So, at least for me, is very hard to see whether eyes are in focus with 5D MKIII. Maybe others have zero problems. Most examples that I have seen from Zeiss in MF is where precise focusing for something that can move is not very critical. But if it is.....you really, really, really need to think a lot whether you with be happy without AF.

IQ on Zeiss is exceptional...but so what...............you need to hit the focus.

Thank you for more explanation of the problem with MF.

50mm is classic general purpose lens on 35mm cameras. Believe me, I'm old enough to remember film cameras. I'm using them, still. Check my gear list and flickr. All film pictures were taken with different 50mm primes.
Portrait lenses are 85mm and up, because on 35mm format they give less distortion compare to 50mm prime.

People stay still if you ask them. But only for a moment. And so do you.
This is why your statement about LV using only and your problems are linked together.
If you want to shot wide open portraits, LV is too slow to operate. Your sitter will move and you will move, because it takes too long time. At this case one second is too long.
If taking portraits on large apertures like 1.4, 1.6, select nearest to the single eye AF point, place it directly on the eye or very close to it. Use back button focusing and learn how to move your upper body to fine tune for focus. It will take time to practice with MF. How to fine tune by your body, how to breathe and then to press shutter release. Same idea as taking eyes of tiny bugs in focus with macro lens while hand holding camera.
It might looks complicated here, but with practice it makes almost no difference MF or AF.

Now, my copy of 50 1.4 ZE sometimes just doesn't want to cooperate on large apertures and very dark light situations. It just not confirming AF. Sometimes.

kf095 wrote in post #14929485
Congratulations on 50L! Nice portrait!

Now to 35 1.4 Zeiss using issues.

If you want to shot wide open portraits, LV is too slow to operate. Your sitter will move and you will move, because it takes too long time. At this case one second is too long.
If taking portraits on large apertures like 1.4, 1.6, select nearest to the single eye AF point, place it directly on the eye or very close to it. Use back button focusing and learn how to move your upper body to fine tune for focus. It will take time to practice with MF. How to fine tune by your body, how to breathe and then to press shutter release. Same idea as taking eyes of tiny bugs in focus with macro lens while hand holding camera.
It might looks complicated here, but with practice it makes almost no difference MF or AF.

To fine-tune you need to have an indication - you should be able to see whether eyes are in focus on not and then fine-tuning comes handy and yes, you can use different skills and technique to do it. But...one thing is certain - you need to be sure that what you see is in focus or is out of focus and then apply fine-tuning.

My problem is that I do not see it via viewfinder. I can select a certain focusing point and have it on the eye, but because AF-confirm is not reliable (by Zeiss's own words)...the only thing you can count on is your eyes. And we are back again to the same problem...it is almost impossible to just by eyes alone.

So..............my honest suggestions to all people who are considering AF vs MF for people photography....really.​..sit down, think...do not buy into 3D look and get an AF lens. 50L is fantastic...and being a bit soft in corners, even if this is true, is in fact a desirable effect for portraits. It has to be super sharp in the center...corners are irrelevant.