Testing my new 50 f/1.2L (no rulers!)

So, after sitting by the door for most of the day, waiting for UPS, I got my 50L in the mail, and took a walk around the neighborhood to try it out.

I did some shooting around for a bit, indoors, just getting a feel for the focus. From what I could tell at first, focus was dead on. Stopping down to f/2.8, up close, I did notice a bit of a focus shift (different from backfocus). This doesn't bother me, since I don't shoot in that "danger zone". I was concerned with AF accuracy and speed from f/1.2-1.8, primarily.

I had used the 50L for a few hours at a wedding last year, and was impressed with it. The sharpness was decent, which was nice. Certainly more than acceptable for a fast lens. But, I was expecting and hoping for a lot with this one, given the sharpness of the 24, 35, and 85 (especially the 85).

The verdict thus far is that this 50L is pretty sharp wide open. Not as sharp as the 85L or 35L, but roughly on par with my 24L ... or maybe slightly softer, I'm still learning the lens. I am impressed with the detail it resolves, at middle and far distances, wide open and down one stop. Close up results may be a bit softer, but I need to use it more to know for sure.

After a few hundred shots today, I can say I'm happy with the 50L. It will get the real test tomorrow at a shoot, so I'll report back on how it works.

On to the pics. Disclaimer: this is NOT, and was NOT intended to be a controlled test. This is me, playing around with a new lens to feel it out before I take it to work. I am not interested in shooting rulers, blank walls, or test charts. It either works in real life or it doesn't. That said, hopefully someone finds this interesting

These are all shot in RAW, converted in Lightroom with just the default (25) sharpening to a quality-93 JPEG. I took crops out of the center in CS2.

Few more:

Thanks for your post Ryan...I'll be keeping an eye on your thoughts regarding the 50.

The 50L is one of those lenses that I'm really interested in [I adore my 85 at 1.2] but I've read so many complaints and horror stories online I've become very apprehensive about it...especially at the price too.

Can someone explain to me in simple terms what the supposed "danger zone " is for this lens and more importantly, -for me-...does using the lens primarily at f1.2 take you out of this "danger zone"?

Adam

TheGreatDivorce wrote in post #5353691
Few more:

That's a sharp 50L you have there. Definitely a keeper.

I do not like the chromatic aberrations wide open from this lens.

Looking nice - congratulations!

And kudos for not shooting rulers and batteries!

Then I guess the 35L and 85L aren't in your cards either...

To the OP...your review just about sums up how I feel about my 50L. I also don't shoot in the "danger zone" much so the focus shift issue is a non-issue.

Great glass. Expensive? Heck yeah...but great.

mrkgoo wrote in post #5354219
I do not like the chromatic aberrations wide open from this lens.

mrkgoo wrote in post #5354219
I do not like the chromatic aberrations wide open from this lens.

Then you'll probably want to stay away from the 24L, 35L, 85L, 70-200L, and just about every other fast lens in existence. Also, never shoot wide open or around harsh contrast.


@ Meta4 ... I was apprehensive about the 50L too, because it does get dogged on a lot online. But, I wanted to try it for myself, to see if it was just the typical internet "squeeky wheel" phenomenon. I was fine with sending the lens back to Canon for calibration if it was off ... but surprise, surprise, it's just fine (like every other lens I've bought).

The danger zone, where the focus shift occurs, seems to be around f/2.8-4.0, and from MFD out to about 4 feet. After f/4, the greater DOF mostly makes up for the shift, and at greater subject distances, the same thing occurs where the DOF increases enough to make up for the shift. I'm still testing to see how that works. But yes, I think it's safe to say that shooting mostly wide open, or under f/2.0, you'll stay out of the danger zone. I shoot wide open, or a stop down, most of the time. I'll report back on Sunday or Monday how I feel the lens works at a real shoot.

Double and Chioque, thanks!

Nicksan, exactly. Ya gotta pay to play.

Ryan, thanks for posting this as I know we're on the same page with lens ideas.... Have you ever used the 50mm f/1.4 out of curiosity? All the harsh press (most likely squeaky wheel) it's size/weight, and price combined with the fact my f/1.4 has been awesome has left me wondering about this lens.

Mostly I'm just wondering if I've had zero issues with the 1.4, why switch? So if you've used a 1.4 as well I'd love to know your thoughts.

I've had both as well and I can say that the 50L is sharper wide open than the 1.4 and certainly sharper at 1.4.

There's some differences in color/contrast and the AF on the 50L is better. The build is tons better and I like the size, weight, and balance.

Is it worth all that money? I don't know...I would say if you are happy with the 1.4 then keep it. It's really a great bang-for-the-buck lens much like the 85 1.8 is.

On the other hand, if you shoot a 50mm a lot, then it is certainly worth at least looking into, if you can afford it.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #5356249
Ryan, thanks for posting this as I know we're on the same page with lens ideas.... Have you ever used the 50mm f/1.4 out of curiosity? All the harsh press (most likely squeaky wheel) it's size/weight, and price combined with the fact my f/1.4 has been awesome has left me wondering about this lens.

Mostly I'm just wondering if I've had zero issues with the 1.4, why switch? So if you've used a 1.4 as well I'd love to know your thoughts.

How dare you test your lens in real-world conditions.

Mike Deep wrote in post #5356754
How dare you test your lens in real-world conditions.

Looks like you are having fun and are happy with your new toy, which is the main thing. Enjoy!

Too many negative comments have kept me from purchasing the 50L. Then again, I've seen many wonderful shots with it. Enjoy.

Ben, I'd echo what Nick said. I borrowed the 50 f/1.4 for a couple weeks, and have used it for a bit at a couple weddings. The one I used actually impressed me with wide open sharpness, just because I'd heard so many negative things about it. I would say the 50L is definitely sharper wide open and at f/1.4. Not massively so, but certainly noticeable. The biggest things for me were the great color/contrast on the 50L wide open, and the lack of halation compared to the f/1.4.

Also, I felt like the AF on the f/1.4 was dodgy in low light. I haven't used the L a lot in low light, but it seems better.

The price is hard to ignore, and I think that's the major sticking point as to whether it's worth it or not. Size and weight are fine with me ... I'd rather the lens be a little heavier. Either way it's lighter than the 85L, which I use most of the time

The bokeh is certainly smoother, too.

But, if you're happy with the f/1.4, I might say to keep it. I didn't feel like I could trust it when I needed it, which made me shy away from it. And when I'm processing 3000 images, having the best color and contrast I can get, SOOC, saves me some editing time.

I'd say to try renting it, but that always makes me a bit nervous of renting a dud (although I think most 50L's are probably good). FWIW, mine is a UV0902 date code, so it's fairly new, but not especially.

Maybe I can borrow the f/1.4 again for some head-to-head shootouts...

@Mike Deep, that made me laugh

Mike Deep wrote in post #5356754
How dare you test your lens in real-world conditions.

Yeah! unless we see a chart shot...this is NOT an official pixel-peepers thread...