Canon 50 F1.2 L Users?

[ianjenn]

Okay I sold my 24-70 a week ago and got the 50 F1.2 with rebate it was $50 over the 24-70. Here is the problem I NEVER used the 24-70 except for studio images. I wanted faster glass so I got it. But the 50 doesnt seem sharp even at F2 my 70-200 was sharper at 2.8. I shot about 400 files checking and re-checking. This lens should be a 70-200 at similiar apertures correct?

I may exchange it for another 50 to see if I have better luck.

[Franglais]

Okay I sold my 24-70 a week ago and got the 50 F1.2 with rebate it was $50 over the 24-70. Here is the problem I NEVER used the 24-70 except for studio images. I wanted faster glass so I got it. But the 50 doesnt seem sharp even at F2 my 70-200 was sharper at 2.8. I shot about 400 files checking and re-checking. This lens should be a 70-200 at similiar apertures correct?

I may exchange it for another 50 to see if I have better luck.

I had a look at the photozone.de test and the Imaging Resource test. The results don't look good, at least at wide apertures. Photozone think that this lens sacrifices everything for wide aperture and reasonable central sharpness.

Most people settle for a 50mm f1.4. It's only half a stop slower but it has much more even performance

BTW Imaging Resource mention that they tried six lenses in their tests and they were all pretty much the same

[ianjenn]

I had a look at the photozone.de test and the Imaging Resource test. The results don't look good, at least at wide apertures. Photozone think that this lens sacrifices everything for wide aperture and reasonable central sharpness.

Most people settle for a 50mm f1.4. It's only half a stop slower but it has much more even performance

BTW Imaging Resource mention that they tried six lenses in their tests and they were all pretty much the same

This is 1.6 from about 3-4 feet it is good. I shot more. My problem is the 3.5 year old NEVER STANDS still. SO below F2 the DOF is tiny. I think it is good...lower image is F1.2 BTW

[gryphonslair99]

Owning a f1.2 does not mean that you must shoot it at f1.2 unless necessary. The 50 f1.2 indeed is a bit on the soft side wide open with a slow autofocus. Personally I prefer the 85 f1.2 over the 50 f1.2. Neither lens is spectacular for quick AF. If you are needing it for moving subjects you would indeed be better served with the 50 f1.4 or 85 f1.8.

[Franglais]

Notice that in these pictures the subject is in the center and you don't care too much about the edges of the frame. If you had the two of them side by side filling the frame then you might notice the lack of sharpness on the edges.

I looked at the one shot at f1.2. You're using 200 ISO. Surely it would be much simpler to shoot at 800 ISO with a 50mm f1.8 at f2.3? You would have more depth of field and it would probably be sharper as well. You would just have more noise. I don't know how much of a problem that is on the 1Ds Mk2.

BTW for this sort of shot I too would go for a 85mm. You can stand further away and get a better control of the background.

[ianjenn]

Yeah I have a 70-200 F2.8 for more seperation. The 50 is pretty nice I think it is good.

[ianjenn]