Canon 50mm f1.2 Owners - Would You Recommend?

This is aimed specifically at those people who own this lens, or those who (even in such a relatively short amount of time) have used it extensively.

I'm looking to buy the 50mm f1.2 quite soon but am concerned by the oft talked about quality issues (front/back focussing etc).

So my question is simple: would you recommend purchasing this lens?

AND if by chance you own or have owned Canon's 35L or 85L, how does it compare?

i own both the 85L and the 35L...i was also concerned about buying the 50L after reading various posts from the first buyers...my copy has been excellent so far...i have used it to shoot jazz clubs several times and have gotten pictures that rival my 85L which is my favorite lens...the 50L is sharp wide open and i have seen none of the backfocus/frontfocus issues thus far....my copy is a uu12 datecode and a lot of the complaints seem to have come from the uu1000 datecode..who knows?...so far so good

I'm convinced that I have a good copy. Opitical quality is comparable to both the 35L and 85L if you ask me. I've previously owned both. Color, contrast, OOF blur, and AF speed are all on the level. AF is not as fast as the 35L, but quicker than the 85L MK I. After extensive shooting, I found it to be not quite as "razor" sharp as the 35L or 85L, but it's still sharp. I used a filter the whole time I shot with it in Africa, so that may have degraded optical quality somewhat. Knowing what I know right now with the focusing issues, I'd hold off on buying this lens for the time being. With more and more people coming out of wood work claiming they're having focusing issues, including those who said they have a good copy and are now claiming otherwise, there very well may be a problem with this lens. It could also be paranoia or buyers remorse for some of these guys. When you pay this much for lens, you expect it to be completely trouble free and I don't really blame them for painstakingly testing their lens to point where they finally do find something wrong. I'm monitoring the situation closely.

For the most part, I just take pictures with mine. Though it appears to work as advertised, I'm now constantly on the look out for the dreaded back-focus monster. It should strike any day now...

With that said, I voted Canon should address the issue. I know I'd feel a lot better about it.

I had one of the first off-the-boat and it should never have been shipped, and Calumet NYC exchanged it for the 35L I had on hold.
If you have a return policy I would suggest testing the lens.
If you get your $$$ worth, you will enjoy the lens.
It is definitely worth a shot.

Take a look at Anna Yu's shots taken with the the 50L. She compares the optical quality to that of her 200 f1.8L!

http://www.pbase.com/a​nnayu/skansenjan

Very nice examples here.

Sure is sharp though. You can see the dust specs on my scope real good.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

As I'm not an owner, I can't vote in the poll. But I will be watching it. I've seen some really nice images produced using this lens, and I am considering it in the future.

There aren't enough 50L users on this forum.

It appears there aren't a huge amount

It's currently 5 vs 2 in favour of waiting for Canon to sort the quality issues out, so I think I shall wait.

What a shame!

I have the three lenses you mention. I would rank the 50L right up with the other two. I hope all the naysayers really have used the lens. There are people I trust on this forum and others who have had legitimate back focusing issues. If you buy from a good merchant you should not have trouble if a return is needed.

Don't know how to say this without risking to sound condesending, but will try anyway... I find the 50mm focal length a bit "boring". It's not long enough for portraits, but a slightly longer for group/across the table shots. I own and love my 50 f/1.4, but as I got 85 and 35 I started realizing this. I'm well aware that 50mm is the classic length. I'm also well aware of that my opinion on this subject is worth about .003% of anyone else who knows photography, but it's Monday morning and I wanted to start the week with this semi-controversial post

Oh yeah, and I didn't vote since I don't actually own the f/1.2 lens.

chancellor wrote in post #2580129
Don't know how to say this without risking to sound condesending, but will try anyway... I find the 50mm focal length a bit "boring". It's not long enough for portraits, but a slightly longer for group/across the table shots. I own and love my 50 f/1.4, but as I got 85 and 35 I started realizing this. I'm well aware that 50mm is the classic length. I'm also well aware of that my opinion on this subject is worth about .003% of anyone else who knows photography, but it's Monday morning and I wanted to start the week with this semi-controversial post

Boring?! Boring??!! That friggin' jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none 28-300L of yours is boring! You should've kept the 16-35L! Now THAT's exciting!

But you're right. The 50 isn't a focal length to get too excited about, but I like it.

It's quite easy for me:

Easily my most used lens is my 35L, but there are times when I wish it was a touch longer.

I love my 85L, but sometimes I wish it was just a touch wider.

Where does that take you? The 50L I had thought

Lord_Malone wrote in post #2580146
Boring?! Boring??!! That friggin' jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none 28-300L of yours is boring! You should've kept the 16-35L! Now THAT's exciting!

But you're right. The 50 isn't a focal length to get too excited about, but I like it.

Well, well, Mr. Malone himself... The 28-300L cannot be boring due to the possibilities of it's range. It can be boring because it's not f/1.4, but focal length-wise - nah.

16-35... One day I'll mature and acquire the test for it. After owning 2-3 copies I found myself not using it at all. I've used my new 35L more times than the previous 16-35s.

Cheers.