Canon 35 1.4 vrs 50 1.2

Thought I would ask what other owners felt about their Canon 50 1.2 and the 35 1.4. Let me know how you like either of these lens if you have them and do you prefer one over the other.

basauder wrote in post #18852073
Thought I would ask what other owners felt about their Canon 50 1.2 and the 35 1.4. Let me know how you like either of these lens if you have them and do you prefer one over the other.

I had the EF 50 1.2 twice and never used it much. It was okay.

The RF 50mm 1.2 is one of the best lenses I've ever used, and has me using it even more than my 85mm lenses which I have used the most in the past.

Agree w/ previous poster. EF 1.2 is lackluster.

I absolutely love my 50 1.2. I've owned it for about 8 years now and it's probably the lens use most. I've used it for portraits, travel etc. I even toyed around this weekend using it for some pseudo macro and it did pretty well. I find it very versatile but I like to shoot at 50mm. IMO it's an outstanding lens but I often hear of people complaining that its's soft.

To the OP it really just depends on the focal length you like to shoot at. I can see both being useful.

EF 50L is my favorite lens, has been for 8 years (stop copying me, Tommy). Now with the EOS R, it has really transformed into a total rockstar: no more focus shift to worry about, and subjects eyes are in focus every time. Very moody look to the photos at 1.2, and sharp enough when stopped down to f/5.6 when you want more DOF, it's a great tool for composing photos.

Which 35 f/1.4 are you talking about? The old v1 was a lens in the same vein as the 50L/85L II/135L, more character than clinical, whereas the new 35L II is all about winning test chart battles (and is an awesome lens). Of these two, not sure which I'd choose because 35mm isn't really a focal length I shoot at; that being said, I'd take my 50L over any 35mm 100% of the time

MatthewK wrote in post #18876449
EF 50L is my favorite lens, has been for 8 years (stop copying me, Tommy). Now with the EOS R, it has really transformed into a total rockstar: no more focus shift to worry about, and subjects eyes are in focus every time. Very moody look to the photos at 1.2, and sharp enough when stopped down to f/5.6 when you want more DOF, it's a great tool for composing photos.

Which 35 f/1.4 are you talking about? The old v1 was a lens in the same vein as the 50L/85L II/135L, more character than clinical, whereas the new 35L II is all about winning test chart battles (and is an awesome lens). Of these two, not sure which I'd choose because 35mm isn't really a focal length I shoot at; that being said, I'd take my 50L over any 35mm 100% of the time

I saw on YouTube that the 50 1.2 for the R mount is sharper than the EF version. Which are you using?

I use my EF 50L on the EOS R.

Almost every lens, R or EF, is sharper than the EF 50L at f/1.2 Stopped down to f/5.6, the EF 50L does pretty well though.

MatthewK wrote in post #18877605
I use my EF 50L on the EOS R.

Almost every lens, R or EF, is sharper than the EF 50L at f/1.2 Stopped down to f/5.6, the EF 50L does pretty well though.

I guess that begs the question, though: Why not just use the 50 f/1.4? As I recall, that was quite a nice lens.

jough wrote in post #18877751
I guess that begs the question, though: Why not just use the 50 f/1.4? As I recall, that was quite a nice lens.

For myself, sharpness isn’t everything. The 50L has an unique character that I prefer more than ultimate clinical sharpness. Just a preference, is all.

That, and the 50 1.4 is known for its fragile build quality, very vulnerable to AF motor failure. Doesn’t matter here nor there for its IQ, just rather not deal with it. It’s definitely a lens Canon could update w/ a more robust build, IS, and AF, and they’d have a big winner on their hands.

35L gives better bokeh than L zoom on 35. It is visible for sure
But nothing gives 50L rendering. I have many 50 in EF and LTM, M mount. 50L EF is standing out. Not just bokeh, but colors on digital EOS. It lives 15K Leica kit in dust.