50L

Hi guys.
Just wanted some help to decide in a future purchase.
I just sold two of my lens, the 24-70L, and the 100L. The 20-70 was just boring, and the 100L never got out of the bag much, I'm not so much fan of macro has I found out.
So I'm reworking my lens kit. I currently have the 16-35L II, which I love, and I was planning to get the 70-200L II, and at least another fast prime.
Thought I would get the 70-200 first, but I just got the opportunity to get a 50L with one more year of warranty for 1050€.
Should I go for it? Will it get along nice with the 16-35 and 70-200? And i the 50L that good of a lens?
Shooting Full frame BTW.
Thanks in advance. Cheers.

I have the 50L (my only lens at the moment) and am absolutely in love EVERY time I use the dang thing. The colors it produces are amazing, fast focus, shooting at 1.2 is fun, I usually stop down to 2.2, I've found thats my sweet spot.

You will not be disappointed!

acevesf wrote in post #15263250
I have the 50L (my only lens at the moment) and am absolutely in love EVERY time I use the dang thing. The colors it produces are amazing, fast focus, shooting at 1.2 is fun, I usually stop down to 2.2, I've found thats my sweet spot.

You will not be disappointed!

Any focus shifting like what all the rumors say?

shinyknights wrote in post #15263320
Any focus shifting like what all the rumors say?

I believe that focus shift are a thing of the past now, that issue was fixed.

The 50L looks to be a very versatile lens and though has a tank.
Thinking on using has a walkaround lens for street and people shots. So I don't have to push the heavy 70-200 around to much.

The focus shift is still present as it is a characteristic of the lens design. It is really easy to work around. Don't shot mfd while at lower apratures (1.4-4) from what I have read. I have only had that issue once, it isn't a big deal. It is a fantastic lens and I use it about 90% of the time.

I owned the 50L and sold it, the lens i had was UZ code date (2011) and i had to -10 on the 5d2 body, so the focus issues are still up to date . If i'd pick 70-200 II over if im in ur shoes OP, the 16-35 covers the wide end, and 35->50 is too close imo. Dont get me wrong, 50mm is a great focal range and i went with the sigmalux 50 1.4 to save $900.

Are you shooting crop or FF?

I have the lens combo you're headed towards, and I do love my 50L that fills the gap between my 16-35 and the 70-200. While the 2.8 is plenty of fast for most outdoor/shaded situations, but when it comes to indoor/low light, a fast prime is a must, and the 50L works perfect on a FF. But if you're mostly shooting outdoor, I'd keep saving for the 70-200, you will get a lot more mileage out of that lens. The order I acquired my lens is 70-200 > 16-35 > 50L (after I got the 5D3).

Dasani wrote in post #15263450
I owned the 50L and sold it, the lens i had was UZ code date (2011) and i had to -10 on the 5d2 body, so the focus issues are still up to date . If i'd pick 70-200 II over if im in ur shoes OP, the 16-35 covers the wide end, and 35->50 is too close imo. Dont get me wrong, 50mm is a great focal range and i went with the sigmalux 50 1.4 to save $900.

I used the sigma before, It was ok, but it felt a bit cheap and the focus was slow.
It's not about covering the gap between the 16-35 and the 70-200. I don't like shooting people with the 16-35, and the 70-200 is just to big to be walking with it in the street, and intimidating.
Don't you agree?

subpixel wrote in post #15263527
I used the sigma before, It was ok, but it felt a bit cheap and the focus was slow.
It's not about covering the gap between the 16-35 and the 70-200. I don't like shooting people with the 16-35, and the 70-200 is just to big to be walking with it in the street, and intimidating.
Don't you agree?

I totally agree with you on your last thought about the 16-35 on ppl and 70-200 is too big for street photography and i'm sure most if not all ppl here think the same way.

The 50L is a love/hate lens. I love the quality it produces when stopping down, wide open is ok, i had faced a couple times where i was in really dim venue and the lens wouldn't focus. To me, the sigma is good enough since 50mm is not my favorite range. But in the end, it's your shooting style and your money to spend on the equipments that you will be using for a while (or worst you can just get it to try it out and re-sell it down the road if it doesn't fit )

Dasani wrote in post #15263450
I owned the 50L and sold it, the lens i had was UZ code date (2011) and i had to -10 on the 5d2 body, so the focus issues are still up to date . If i'd pick 70-200 II over if im in ur shoes OP, the 16-35 covers the wide end, and 35->50 is too close imo. Dont get me wrong, 50mm is a great focal range and i went with the sigmalux 50 1.4 to save $900.

One thing for clarity; it's a 'known' issue the lens needs adjusted; is there any negative after setting MA on a body? One of my reasons for not getting faster glass has been lack of MA on my crop body; but shouldn't that make any front focus issues null?

(Whenever I get a nice fast prime; it will be to shoot wide open under poor lighting, so focusing accuracy will be key, one of the reasons the new 35mm f/2.0 IS looks tempting..)

Dasani wrote in post #15263636
The 50L is a love/hate lens. I love the quality it produces when stopping down, wide open is ok, i had faced a couple times where i was in really dim venue and the lens wouldn't focus. To me, the sigma is good enough since 50mm is not my favorite range. But in the end, it's your shooting style and your money to spend on the equipments that you will be using for a while (or worst you can just get it to try it out and re-sell it down the road if it doesn't fit )

I imagine that if the 50L had a hard time to focus, that almost any other lens would't even be able to get focus. I remember of that happening a bit with the Sig.

w0m wrote in post #15264150
One thing for clarity; it's a 'known' issue the lens needs adjusted; is there any negative after setting MA on a body? One of my reasons for not getting faster glass has been lack of MA on my crop body; but shouldn't that make any front focus issues null?

I thought that to, I can always MA on 5D II, my old 24-70 had a bit of MA and it was fine.

I'l be seeing the lens tomorrow. let's see how it goes

subpixel wrote in post #15263240
Hi guys.
Just wanted some help to decide in a future purchase....I just got the opportunity to get a 50L with one more year of warranty for 1050€. Should I go for it? Will it get along nice with the 16-35 and 70-200? And i the 50L that good of a lens? Shooting Full frame BTW. Thanks in advance. Cheers.

50L is one of the best lenses from Canon. Period.

yalemba wrote in post #15264869
50L is one of the best lenses from Canon. Period.

+1. I shoot at close distances all the time from 1.2 to F4 and I get shots that are in focus.

yalemba wrote in post #15264869
50L is one of the best lenses from Canon. Period.

My very unscientific opinion is that the 50L just has 'it.' It's always a fun lens to shoot with and I don't regret my purchase.

i had the 24-70L or the 24-105L for several years before taking the plunge with just the 50L to cover the normal range (apart from the longer end of my 17-40L). I have to say that I've not missed the 24-70L at all.
for me, the image quality of the 50L more than makes up for the lack of convenience offered by a zoom.
my suggestion, for what it's worth, is go for it - get the 50L.