50mm 1.2L vs 1.4

plasticmotif wrote in post #9910251
At this point, I don't think they care. The Sigma has eaten into their sales of new 50 1.4s. It's also probably one of the most problematic lenses for them to service.

A new 50/1.4 at or near the same price point of the Sigma wouldn't hurt the people who've already bought the 50L.

It's time for a 50 1.2 with a floating element to remove the focus shift issue anyway.

The old 55 1.2 aspherical had a floating element and was a damn fine lens. I still have mine.

Either that or its time for them to stop charging such ridiculous price premiums on the more popular of their L-series lenses. That Sigma 85 f/1.4 is going to be extremely good (as the Canon 85/1.8 already is). It's only a matter of time before someone else makes a great 135/2.

Down_Shift wrote in post #9908153
Been looking at pictures. the bokeh on the 1.2 is wow. 1.4 isn't shabby either.

Thinking bout selling my 1.4 for the 1.2. yay or nay?

I'm on a 5d mkii

I own, have used, and consider both the 50 1.2L and the 50 1.4 great lenses. From my real world experience the L has better bokeh, color/contrast at all apertures, and better build quality. The auto focus accuracy/consistency of the L is much better than the non-L wider than f2.8 (as good as my other L primes), and they are about the same smaller than f2.8. The L’s low light auto focusing ability is extraordinary. Better than any of my other fast L primes. It will literally snap into auto focus in a dark room where other lenses just hunt and fail. It’s downright difficult to make the L flare. Both lenses are sharp. The L is slightly but noticeably sharper wider than f2, somewhere between f2 and f2.8 they become the same, and I can’t see a difference smaller than f2.8.

If you frequently shoot wider than f2 or in low light situations, then it’s a “yay.” If most of your shots are smaller than f2.8, it’s a “nay.” If you shoot mostly in between or at a wide range of apertures, then let your wallet cast the final vote.

Good Luck with your decision.

Down_Shift wrote in post #9908153
Thinking bout selling my 1.4 for the 1.2.

I'm sure you already know this, but flogging the 1.4 won't get you very far to the cost of the 1.2!

get the siggy over the canon 1.4 anyday. it whoops it in everything except for weight and price, which is still 1/3 of the 50L.
I love the 50L, and would have gotten one if it didnt have all those focusing issues. i guess i'll wait for 50L II

Sell the 1.4 and get a 1.8. Use the rest of your money on something worthwhile.

Bwqian wrote in post #9910684
Sell the 1.4 and get a 1.8. Use the rest of your money on something worthwhile.

Huh? "Worthwhile" is certainly a relative term. There are plenty of us that believe what some would dub the "excessive" price of the 50L more than "worthwhile". Besides that wasn't the OPs question. Of course there are plenty of people that would argue cost versus function but at the end of the day there are benefits that each individual are going to take into account that others may not. It just comes down to which you feel are more advantageous to your needs.

Does the 1.2 and 1.4 use the same glass?

MotoXPunk481 wrote in post #9912509
Huh? "Worthwhile" is certainly a relative term. There are plenty of us that believe what some would dub the "excessive" price of the 50L more than "worthwhile". Besides that wasn't the OPs question. Of course there are plenty of people that would argue cost versus function but at the end of the day there are benefits that each individual are going to take into account that others may not. It just comes down to which you feel are more advantageous to your needs.

That's true. I've shot with both the 1.4 and 1.2 (both were borrowed), and the 1.2's focus is really terrible. They are inconsistent and therefore cannot be fixed by microadjustments. The 1.4, on the other hand, is quite soft at large apertures. So for me, I prefer the 1.8. It's loud, it's crap build, it has ugly bokeh, but hey, I can get nice images with it and that's all that matters.

Have you considered renting one? They're not very expensive to rent for a few days. As was already posted here if you have a 1.4 that has accurate AF and shoot mainly stopped down I'd say nay, if you do a lot in low light it's definitely a yay. The 1.2L is tricky with the shift issue especially at 1.2, the copies I've rented didn't have the shift issue stopped down a little.

Bwqian wrote in post #9970459
That's true. I've shot with both the 1.4 and 1.2 (both were borrowed), and the 1.2's focus is really terrible. They are inconsistent and therefore cannot be fixed by microadjustments. The 1.4, on the other hand, is quite soft at large apertures. So for me, I prefer the 1.8. It's loud, it's crap build, it has ugly bokeh, but hey, I can get nice images with it and that's all that matters.

I never found the 1.8 to have "ugly" bokeh. It may not look amazing in The Digital Picture reviews but for general purpose I think it is rather pleasing, and you can't dispute the price point. I'm really debating the canon 1.4 and siggy 1.4 though... unless I'm always shooting 1.2, there isn't a point in owning a slow focusing 50L...

Bwqian wrote in post #9970459
That's true. I've shot with both the 1.4 and 1.2 (both were borrowed), and the 1.2's focus is really terrible. They are inconsistent and therefore cannot be fixed by microadjustments. The 1.4, on the other hand, is quite soft at large apertures. So for me, I prefer the 1.8. It's loud, it's crap build, it has ugly bokeh, but hey, I can get nice images with it and that's all that matters.

The only focus issue with the 50L is focus shift. It's easy to learn to work around. The 50L is one of the best 50mm lenses ever made. It's color and contrast are amazing.

plasticmotif wrote in post #9971830
The only focus issue with the 50L is focus shift. It's easy to learn to work around. The 50L is one of the best 50mm lenses ever made. It's color and contrast are amazing.

I agree.

My work around, manual focus.

I bought the 50 1.4 and the next day I went back to the shop to return it and pay the extra $$$ for the 50 1.2. I can tell you it is well worth it. The focus shift for 1.2 lenses is not an issue at all because in certain cameras e.g. the 5D2, you can make the necessary calibration using the microadjustment function. My 50 1.2 needed (-6), and 85 1.2 needed (-3) but they are razor sharp now!

plasticmotif wrote in post #9971830
The only focus issue with the 50L is focus shift. It's easy to learn to work around. The 50L is one of the best 50mm lenses ever made. It's color and contrast are amazing.

What is the work around for the 50L? I'm considering getting one but since I get "acceptable" results with my 1.4 I'm procrastinating. I would use it firstly for the great L lens color and contrast quality and secondly for the 1.2 aperture. In other words general usage - not simply wide open. Also has the focus issue been fixed by a running change or do the latest lenses still exhibit this problem? All the internet complaining about this lens is worrysome. Thanks. Steve