Would U buy Canon 50mm f/1.0 "new" / "like new" if U had $$

In the weeks ahead, I will buy a 50mm. I was on Ebay and spotted a Canon 50mm f/1.0 "new" for under $4000.00 .... I understand how tough repair may be, if even possible. It crossed my mind before that new copies may exist. Then I see this ad. But the listing also said unopen box and the lens works great. And I thought how can you know the lens works unless the box was opened and tested?

My questions for savvy forum users ... If a new 50mm 1.0 is for sale on Ebay, are the odds good it's legit. And if you had the cash on hand, would you buy it, realizing you may get years of use?

Otherwise, my main aim is Canon 50mm 1.2 or Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art. But when I saw the "new" on Ebay and a couple others listed as very good condition, it put the question in my head about getting one. So it's like 70% of me says don't buy f/1.0 and 30% of me says do it.

Your thoughts?

If it's not able to be fixed by the manufacturer I wouldn't buy it. Plus that particular lens is SOOOOO expensive. I think the 1.2 would be just fine.

Is it new or "like new" ? If not in sealed box, then it is not fair to say that it is new.

Many people who bought this expensive lens were rich amateurs who used it very little... But you never know.
The lens has a very complex optical design, needing perfect calibration for good wide-open sharpness. Plenty of bad copies are around.
Ask for full size sample pictures wide open at MFD and infinity.
In any case, I'd recommend buying the lens only if you can return it if not happy.

Do not espect Otus performance. This lens is all about rendering character. Good copies are as sharp as a 50/1.2, but good luck finding one.

if i had money to throw around i'd buy it as a collector's item and possibly pull it out now and then if i was after a particular look

i do love my 50 art tho

I would be interested to see what the 50 .95 gives you for results over the 50 1.2 or even the Sigma ART for substantially less money, like 1/3 to 1/5 of the cost. Are there any back to back showing differences? Part of the price is the allure of having something many others don't, not necessarily the results it produces over any other lens, IMO, but then again some side by side shots might convince me otherwise. Just the fact that a nice quality box for that lens goes for a crazy price gives me this impression. The only way a box lends anything to the images is if it used as a pinhole camera box.

I paid $89 for my 50 STM. For the amount of times I've used it, it is the least bang for the buck lens I own. Spend 45x as much wouldn't make me like 50mm any better. I'll pass. Thanks.

Heya,

Nope.

F1.0 on a short lens is just not that appealing to me. The vingnetting, the weird bokeh slicing, the softness wide open, the flaring, the lack of any kind of service, along with the crazy price tag, leaves these more for collectors in my opinion these days. Why pay $3k more for F1.0 when you can get F1.2 for less than a grand? Don't get swallowed up in the idea of F1.0. For $4k you could get a 50 F1.2L, 85 F1.8L and 35 F1.4L.

But, if you have the money and you're collecting and $4k is basically no different than buying a coffee for you, then do what you want!

Very best,

If i am that lucky that i could spend 4k on a normal lens, i would get the otus with no hesitate.

With the current 50 f1.2L been considered as one of the slowest canon L on the market, so what's up in my mind with this lens was it must be slower.

And, if it was that slow, then there's no point for me to get one unless i am rich enough to add it to my collection. But that's just me

Appearance wise, that is an impressive piece of glass. I think the only thing more impressive might be the f0.95 Canon made for rangefinders. Of course the front element on long telephoto lenses are impressive but to see that huge front element on a small lens is impressive. By the way, many of these f0.95 lenses are being modified for some Sony A7's.

Not sure this is your lens but I see one f1.0 on eBay. In the item name it also says Japan but the item location is Italy.

The "boiler plate" print states New: A brand-new, unused, unopened, undamaged item in its original packaging (where packaging is applicable). Is that where you are getting the "never opened"? The seller further states (scroll down) "This item is in Mint++ condition".

I would not spend the asking price of $4000 but instead might opt for the "Excellent" condition at $3000 (starting bid) at http://www.ebay.com …id=p2047675.c10​0005.m1851

PeterAlex7 wrote in post #18460801
With the current 50 f1.2L been considered as one of the slowest canon L on the market, so what's up in my mind with this lens was it must be slower.

You mean slowest focusing, right ?
In that case, yes, the lens is as slow as the 85L.

John from PA wrote in post #18460803
Appearance wise, that is an impressive piece of glass. I think the only thing more impressive might be the f0.95 Canon made for rangefinders. Of course the front element on long telephoto lenses are impressive but to see that huge front element on a small lens is impressive. By the way, many of these f0.95 lenses are being modified for some Sony A7's.

Not sure this is your lens but I see one f1.0 on eBay. In the item name it also says Japan but the item location is Italy.

The "boiler plate" print states New: A brand-new, unused, unopened, undamaged item in its original packaging (where packaging is applicable). Is that where you are getting the "never opened"? The seller further states (scroll down) "This item is in Mint++ condition".

I would not spend the asking price of $4000 but instead might opt for the "Excellent" condition at $3000 (starting bid) at http://www.ebay.com …id=p2047675.c10​0005.m1851

Yes, that's the one I was looking at.

I figured that lens would be a 50/50 chance of being good, or having a problem that can't be fixed, even if it's new. So I bought a refurbished 50 1.2 today to ensure my lens was new-like and repairable if needed. But I'd love to be able to shoot a 50 1.0 someday.

Also bought a 70-200 f/4 IS today as a lightweight spare and addition to my 70-200 f/2.8 ... figured not getting the 50mm 1.0 enables me to buy up to 3 or 4 lenses.

CheshireCat wrote in post #18461067
You mean slowest focusing, right ?
In that case, yes, the lens is as slow as the 85L.

Yes, thank you, i forgot to say it specifically

mdvaden wrote in post #18461189
Also bought a 70-200 f/4 IS today as a lightweight spare and addition to my 70-200 f/2.8 ... figured not getting the 50mm 1.0 enables me to buy up to 3 or 4 lenses.

You made the right choice.

Only for a small glimpse outside of the autofocus world:
You could buy for example a Sony A7II + a Mitakon 50mm f/0.95 and some things more for that money.
So even a bit faster, new lens. Classic repairable lens with no electronics.

From what I have seen the Canon EF 50mm f/1 lens gives under some light condistions very bad onion rings in the blur from the aspherical elements. Up to now I have not seen those that extreme from the Mitakon.
The old Canon LTM 50mm/0.95 rangefinder lens is not a very sharp lens, but it has a very special bokeh ( like the Meyer Trioplan).

Regarding the difference between f/1.2 and f/1 or such:
I use several f/1.2 lenses, but I am quite happy with that f/0.95 Mitakon, even knowing it has worse CA than the Canon FD 50mm f/1.2 L.
http://asklens.com ….8-on-a-0.9m-wide-subject

ZoneV wrote in post #18461240
From what I have seen the Canon EF 50mm f/1 lens gives under some light condistions very bad onion rings in the blur from the aspherical elements.

I think it depends on the version. Some copies don’t show this problem as much as others. My guess is that Canon has updated aspherical production technology at some point in time.

Up to now I have not seen those that extreme from the Mitakon.
The old Canon LTM 50mm/0.95 rangefinder lens is not a very sharp lens, but it has a very special bokeh ( like the Meyer Trioplan).

Regarding the difference between f/1.2 and f/1 or such:
I use several f/1.2 lenses, but I am quite happy with that f/0.95 Mitakon, even knowing it has worse CA than the Canon FD 50mm f/1.2 L.
http://asklens.com ….8-on-a-0.9m-wide-subject

I wish.... but Canon f/1.2 lenses are actually f/1.26, so the right comparison is the following:
http://asklens.com ….8-on-a-0.9m-wide-subject

The 2/3 stop advantage of the f/1 lens gives it a much larger bokeh than the f/1.2, but not as pleasant (to my eye). Part of the problem is that the reflex mirrorbox is chopping the bokeh circles horizontally on the top and the bottom, which generates a weird effect (I much dislike). Using the lens on a mirrorless body gives much better results.

It is also interesting to note that the lens is well corrected for chromatic aberration, and especially for purple fringing, which is not quite as bad as with other similar lenses.
The lens flares a lot, but in a very special way: drawing rainbows. This is part of its unique character.
Color rendering is also interesting, often pastel looking. The 50/1.2 has more pure colors.