Anyone upgraded from a 50mm 1.4 to the 1.2L here?

Has anyone previously used the 50mm 1.4 and then upgraded to the 50mm 1.2L?

And why?

Were the results worth the massive price difference?

Why are you considering this switch? Need a good reason. 50/1.4 is veyr good and affordable. Most who get the 1.2 have a specific need in mind, or are just showing off.

gasrocks wrote in post #4895692
Why are you considering this switch? Need a good reason. 50/1.4 is veyr good and affordable. Most who get the 1.2 have a specific need in mind, or are just showing off.

Flaunt it if you got it! LOL.

Don't quote me on this but from my research between the 1.8, 1.4, 1.2.

-1.8 is affordable and awesome lens to have.
-Between the 1.8 and 1.4, for a little more $$, you retain some build quality and between the 1.8 and 1.4, there is noticeable difference.
-Between 1.4 and 1.2L, well not much difference, other than, the build quality on the 1.2L is obviously awesome!

Overall, for the best bang for your buck. Get the 1.4. If you are Donald Trump, get the 1.2 and if you are on a budget, 1.8.

I've got the 50mm 1.4 and was wondering what L'ness would bring to this lens. Apart from being able to use the same filters as the other L lenses. Oh and it looks better on the end of a camera too.

vampalan wrote in post #5006621
I've got the 50mm 1.4 and was wondering what L'ness would bring to this lens. Apart from being able to use the same filters as the other L lenses. Oh and it looks better on the end of a camera too.

Well some L lenses anyway... Most of the prime L lenses are 72mm while most of the zoom lenses are 77mm.

vampalan wrote in post #5006621
I've got the 50mm 1.4 and was wondering what L'ness would bring to this lens. Apart from being able to use the same filters as the other L lenses. Oh and it looks better on the end of a camera too.

1.4 versus 1.2 not much difference. Literally not much difference other than quality. however, you can join the cool club and be like bam!

I upgraded... but hated the 1.2L and sold it immediately. I like that the 1.4 doesn't have the backfocus issue. Keep your 1.4.

If you can afford it why not?

I upgraded. It depends on your needs and whether you get a good copy of the 1.2.

My 50L is very sharp wide open. The 50 1.4 wasn't as sharp wide open. My 50L is sharper at 1.4 than the 50 1.4 wide open.

The 50L has superior build (no comparison!), better AF (ring USM vs. micro), is near-silent, better color/contrast, and is sharp wide open.

Is that worth the potential $800-$900 extra that you would pay for the 50L. for some no, for some yes.

Personally, I am loving my 50L. I just got it not too long ago. The bokeh is creamy, f/1.2 is usable, and it is tack sharp.

I haven't had any problems with Front/Rear focusing, then again I haven't tested it out against charts, and I don't intend to.

I upgraded from the 50mm f/1.8 Mark I to the 50mm f/1.2L... No comparison. The L is better in every regard... Except for maybe the price. But I did get it for a song, so I can't complain. Oddly, I don't even use the 50mm FL all that much, but when I need it, I need it.

Perhaps my biggest reason for getting it is to have a weathersealed prime, which unfortinately, my 35L didn't give me.

I'd think usability wide open and AF would be the biggies. 1/3 of a stop ain't that much.

The reason most will want the 1.2 is for it's bokeh & isolation abilities and sharpness wide open .. same reason people buy the 85 1.2. It's not the extra speed (which is very slight).

The 1.2 aperture can create a slight degree of additional isolation between a subject and the background than that offered by the 1.4 and 1.8 versions.

For portrait & wedding photographers this helps set them apart from the rest of the pack and is worth the additional money.

mmahoney wrote in post #5008541
The reason most will want the 1.2 is for it's bokeh & isolation abilities and sharpness wide open .. same reason people buy the 85 1.2. It's not the extra speed (which is very slight).

The 1.2 aperture can create a slight degree of additional isolation between a subject and the background than that offered by the 1.4 and 1.8 versions.

For portrait & wedding photographers this helps set them apart from the rest of the pack and is worth the additional money.

Well in fairness that's a bit different because the 85L is a whole stop faster than the 1.8.

I did after the USM motor died in my 1.4 after 13 months.

Love the 1.2, it has rapidly become my favourite lens (on the 5D at least)

Not only is it exceptional wide open it is pretty good stopped down THISis at f/16

^ Nice shot, Neil - definitely sharp there. On a 5D, I'd say the 50L is a match made in heaven. On a 1.3x I find the 35L better, but alas - not weathersealed and a touch slower.