Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 07 Sep 2014 (Sunday) 15:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

The merits of the 50L, and why it's worth the $1000 premium

 
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,136 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6197
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 11, 2014 19:53 |  #31

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17148989 (external link)
Not only in Fred Miranda, but also in the digital picture, side by side with the Canon f/1.4, from f/1.4 to f/2 they look the same, and from f/2.8 to f/16 the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 is by far better over all (more sharp in mid-frame and corner and less CA !)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=4 (external link)

And if you compare the Canon 50mm f/1.2 side by side with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art, woooww the slap that the sigma give to Canon hahaha, shame on Canon
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)

out of all the 50's in canonland, it's probably the most reliable. I still think it's priced too high, but you certainly get some value for your money. It focuses better than the F1.8 and 1.4 counterparts, bokeh is a little blurrier, and weather sealed.

here's a realistic comparison aside from test charts: http://www.diyphotogra​phy.net …ompared-canon-50mm-f1-2l/ (external link)

sigma is technically better, but I'de go on a limb to say that the full image looks better on the L. Why should canon be ashamed? it's an old design vs new design.

has anyone here tried the Nikon 50mm f1.2 on their EOS?
How does it compare to the 50L and 50 f1.4 by Canon in terms of image quality?

the nikon 50mm F1.2 AI is very comparable. Nice lens.

as for prints with the 50L? I only print small with the lens. It's my snapshot lens, and it's very good at it.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Sep 11, 2014 19:56 |  #32

hiketheplanet wrote in post #17149006 (external link)
Soooo a sharpness comparison. Whoop-dee-doo. Yes, many people will not buy the 50L because it's not sharp enough, whatever their measure is, and that it's kinda quirky in use. Bryan obviously didn't want to fiddle with it, and I respect that, like anyone else who doesn't care for this lens. But sharpness isn't everything, and the 50L has it over the 1.4 & 1.8 in every other aspect. I like mine. Wouldn't part with it. The 1.4 & 1.8 aren't in the same league. Maybe the Sigma Art is close, and sharper, but I still prefer the way my 50L renders.

Ok, i can understand that, sharpness is not an issue for you and for 50L lovers, So i would like to know what in the 50L renders make it so different and worth the price, because it's where i have a lack of understanding


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,088 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2774
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 11, 2014 20:05 |  #33

It's the colors!... the colors!


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Sep 11, 2014 20:09 |  #34

Charlie wrote in post #17149017 (external link)
out of all the 50's in canonland, it's probably the most reliable. I still think it's priced too high, but you certainly get some value for your money. It focuses better than the F1.8 and 1.4 counterparts, bokeh is a little blurrier, and weather sealed.

here's a realistic comparison aside from test charts: http://www.diyphotogra​phy.net …ompared-canon-50mm-f1-2l/ (external link)

sigma is technically better, but I'de go on a limb to say that the full image looks better on the L. Why should canon be ashamed? it's an old design vs new design.


the nikon 50mm F1.2 AI is very comparable. Nice lens.

as for prints with the 50L? I only print small with the lens. It's my snapshot lens, and it's very good at it.

On the link you provide, the bokeh is more "nervous" on the 50L so not more blurrier but less blurried ;)

Why ? like you said it's an old design and the price is still so high compare to the new design from counter part.
But you are right, they don't need to be ashamed, it's a matter of "demand" from customers, people are ready to pay this amount of money for a less quality lens, so why they should change, in fact it's smart from Canon ;)


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Sep 11, 2014 20:11 |  #35

Talley wrote in post #17149036 (external link)
It's the colors!... the colors!

Ha ok, thanks for the answer.
So the color are very different from other 50mm ?


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scobols
Goldmember
Avatar
1,319 posts
Gallery: 119 photos
Likes: 534
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Waconia, MN
     
Sep 11, 2014 20:17 |  #36

You can't argue with the pixel peepers. They won't budge at all.

50L is an amazing lens. Nobody ever talks about how well it handles flare or how quickly it focuses. How fast does the Sigma find focus? I have no idea. nobody ever compares it to the Canon. They only talk about how sharp it is. Do your clients care? I think not. Clients care about how they look, not whether or not they are sharp.

Pixel peepers should get the Sigma. Everyone else, get the 50L.


www.scottbolster.com (external link)
facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,136 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6197
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 11, 2014 20:24 |  #37

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17149040 (external link)
On the link you provide, the bokeh is more "nervous" on the 50L so not more blurrier but less blurried ;)

Why ? like you said it's an old design and the price is still so high compare to the new design from counter part.
But you are right, they don't need to be ashamed, it's a matter of "demand" from customers, people are ready to pay this amount of money for a less quality lens, so why they should change, in fact it's smart from Canon ;)

so.... which do you think creates the better image? I'm still sticking that the canon images look better. Sigma cant get to 1.2, and that will give larger bokeh balls. The article also states that the difference between the canon and sigma is 3/4 stop in exposure.... that's huge when it comes to low light.

as for why not the 1.4 and 1.8, those have a serious hit on contrast wide open. The 1.8 happens to be the worst focusing lens in existence, and the 1.4 happens to be the easiest to break. Neither can match the contrast of the 50L.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Sep 11, 2014 20:56 |  #38

scobols wrote in post #17149050 (external link)
You can't argue with the pixel peepers. They won't budge at all.

50L is an amazing lens. Nobody ever talks about how well it handles flare or how quickly it focuses. How fast does the Sigma find focus? I have no idea. nobody ever compares it to the Canon. They only talk about how sharp it is. Do your clients care? I think not. Clients care about how they look, not whether or not they are sharp.

Pixel peepers should get the Sigma. Everyone else, get the 50L.

And you're right about the customers, they care how they look, better bokeh or not > they don't care ... but mostly/all they want sharp pictures ;)

Yes can't argue with pixel peepers, i am just trying, in my point of view, that we can say the same thing about people which spent $1,549.00 on this lens and try to justify in every ways that it's worth the price compare to others lenses more cheaper, it's like just because of the price + the L you cannot go wrong and it's a "Canon" so you have the best of the best ...
am i wrong ? behind my computer screen it's how look those threads about 50L (85L include ;) ) >> "our lens cost $1000 more than other lenses so we do have the best of the best, can't be another way"


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scobols
Goldmember
Avatar
1,319 posts
Gallery: 119 photos
Likes: 534
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Waconia, MN
     
Sep 11, 2014 21:01 |  #39

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17149101 (external link)
And you're right about the customers, they care how they look, better bokeh or not > they don't care ... but mostly/all they want sharp pictures ;)

Yes can't argue with pixel peepers, i am just trying, in my point of view, that we can say the same thing about people which spent $1,549.00 on this lens and try to justify in every ways that it's worth the price compare to others lenses more cheaper, it's like just because of the price + the L you cannot go wrong and it's a "Canon" so you have the best of the best ...
am i wrong ?

No, definitely not wrong. People can do amazing things with the 50 f/1.8 and people can do amazing things with the 50L. I paid for the 50L and of course I want to feel like it's worth it. Some days it feels like it is and other days not so much. If I had the 50 f/1.4, I'd probably try to justify selling it and upgrading to the 50L. Human nature, I guess.


www.scottbolster.com (external link)
facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hiketheplanet
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 14
Joined May 2013
     
Sep 11, 2014 21:04 |  #40

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17149020 (external link)
Ok, i can understand that, sharpness is not an issue for you and for 50L lovers, So i would like to know what in the 50L renders make it so different and worth the price, because it's where i have a lack of understanding

I don't think sharpness is an issue, it's plenty sharp. My copy is sharper than my former 50/1.8 and dare I say sharper than my former 24-70ii @50mm. I do think it is a difficult lens to nail focus wide open, but when you do, it's pretty good even at 1.2.

But that's just one aspect of the lens. Colors are brilliant on this lens. Especially in dim lighting or heavy contrast, or during the golden hours. Color reproduction is so good, I really never have to adjust it in post. They're just spot on beautiful SooC.

I also think many are attracted to the fall-off, that "glow" it can produce on subjects when you're wide open. This is cool, but stop it down a bit and then it's isolation power kicks into overdrive. It's the same kind of isolation you get on the 85ii, 135, 200/2. I think these are the "magical" properties people refer to.

All that in a beautifully crafted, ruggedized, weather sealed lens housing. It's a gorgeous lens. Once you start shooting with one, and if you stick it out through the initial learning curve of such thin DOF and its bit of quirkiness in the AF department, you really grow to love this lens. I think it's evident in how fans of this lens talk about it, we all say similar things. Maybe a bit of mass hysteria.... no, it's just that good!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scobols
Goldmember
Avatar
1,319 posts
Gallery: 119 photos
Likes: 534
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Waconia, MN
     
Sep 11, 2014 21:06 |  #41

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17149101 (external link)
... but mostly/all they want sharp pictures ;)

There's a difference between out-of-focus pictures and not sharp pictures. I think most clients don't want out-of-focus pictures but are perfectly fine with the sharpness of the 50L, even at f/1.2.


www.scottbolster.com (external link)
facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
Avatar
2,844 posts
Gallery: 265 photos
Likes: 217
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Kawasaki, Japan
     
Sep 11, 2014 21:21 |  #42

Whether a lens cost $100 or $10,00' people want to feel like it was money well spent.
Of course they want to justify the cost, that's human nature on any purchase.

I think my rose photos shows how 'dreamy' the 50L can be
While Buchie's shows how sharp it can be even wide open.
From my own experiences, I spend less time post processing my 50L images compared to my 50 f1.4
To me, that time saved is worth a portion of the cost of the lens.


James Patrus
6D | 16-35L F4 | 24L II | 50L | 100L | |  -> Website (external link) & Gallery (external link)
For Sale:Canon 16-35mm f4 IS l Do you enjoy Super Famicom games? (external link) PM me directly.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Sep 11, 2014 21:21 |  #43

scobols wrote in post #17149118 (external link)
There's a difference between out-of-focus pictures and not sharp pictures. I think most clients don't want out-of-focus pictures but are perfectly fine with the sharpness of the 50L, even at f/1.2.

Out of focus is out of focus, nothing to do with sharpness, we can see sharpness where the focus was made, if the subject is out of focus ;)

Yes, i do agree, clients are not picky as we can be ;)


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,088 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2774
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 11, 2014 21:24 |  #44

scobols wrote in post #17149118 (external link)
There's a difference between out-of-focus pictures and not sharp pictures. I think most clients don't want out-of-focus pictures but are perfectly fine with the sharpness of the 50L, even at f/1.2.

Exactly and you would be very surprised at how many people locally that I see posting images on facebook from local "mommy" type photogs that have some OOF shots and everyone loves them.

There is alot of times that shooting wide open just is too much. The images I love the most is when the subject is fully sharp yet the background is just blown out. Alot of times this takes my 85 around 1.8-2 and I have to balance good subject to camera to background distances.

The main thing I see is when you have that image that just "pops" it's amazing.

Too many people these days have access to software that creates lens blur so a photo with tons of lens blur just isn't as impressive as one that really "pops" out at ya.

You cannot digitally create that either... also the contrast/deep colors out of the box really help out.

This sigma art series are really up there on being on par with L glass. I have no issues with the results from my 35. Fixing to add the 50A and kinda waiting to see if a 24A is announced if not I'll go with the 24L.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Sep 11, 2014 21:26 |  #45

hiketheplanet wrote in post #17149112 (external link)
I don't think sharpness is an issue, it's plenty sharp. My copy is sharper than my former 50/1.8 and dare I say sharper than my former 24-70ii @50mm. I do think it is a difficult lens to nail focus wide open, but when you do, it's pretty good even at 1.2.

But that's just one aspect of the lens. Colors are brilliant on this lens. Especially in dim lighting or heavy contrast, or during the golden hours. Color reproduction is so good, I really never have to adjust it in post. They're just spot on beautiful SooC.

I also think many are attracted to the fall-off, that "glow" it can produce on subjects when you're wide open. This is cool, but stop it down a bit and then it's isolation power kicks into overdrive. It's the same kind of isolation you get on the 85ii, 135, 200/2. I think these are the "magical" properties people refer to.

All that in a beautifully crafted, ruggedized, weather sealed lens housing. It's a gorgeous lens. Once you start shooting with one, and if you stick it out through the initial learning curve of such thin DOF and its bit of quirkiness in the AF department, you really grow to love this lens. I think it's evident in how fans of this lens talk about it, we all say similar things. Maybe a bit of mass hysteria.... no, it's just that good!

scobols wrote in post #17149106 (external link)
No, definitely not wrong. People can do amazing things with the 50 f/1.8 and people can do amazing things with the 50L. I paid for the 50L and of course I want to feel like it's worth it. Some days it feels like it is and other days not so much. If I had the 50 f/1.4, I'd probably try to justify selling it and upgrading to the 50L. Human nature, I guess.

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #17149138 (external link)
Whether a lens cost $100 or $10,00' people want to feel like it was money well spent.
Of course they want to justify the cost, that's human nature on any purchase.

I think my rose photos shows how 'dreamy' the 50L can be
While Buchie's shows how sharp it can be even wide open.
From my own experiences, I spend less time post processing my 50L images compared to my 50 f1.4
To me, that time saved is worth a portion of the cost of the lens.

Thanks a lot for all theses answers and also for "fill in" my lack of understanding why you like this lens (human nature beside)
I can understand now ;)


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

12,281 views & 0 likes for this thread
The merits of the 50L, and why it's worth the $1000 premium
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is KopiLuwak
869 guests, 293 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.