50mm lens

Slinky0390

hi, i'm really considering buying a 50mm lens for my eos30d. i was looking at the 1.4 by canon.. just wondering if anyone has used this lens and whats your opinion on it. also, i was wondering if there is any difference that justifies the 800 dollar price gap between the 1.4 and the 1.2L. I do have L lenses and i know that the build quality and glass is a big selling point, but for a .2 larger aperture, is it really worth it?

Dusty Sensiba

The 1.8 is good
I have the 1.8 (I know, cheap) and am really happy with it.

I don't think you can go wrong with the 1.4.

ziggy53

Slinky0390 wrote:

hi, i'm really considering buying a 50mm lens for my eos30d. i was looking at the 1.4 by canon.. just wondering if anyone has used this lens and whats your opinion on it. also, i was wondering if there is any difference that justifies the 800 dollar price gap between the 1.4 and the 1.2L. I do have L lenses and i know that the build quality and glass is a big selling point, but for a .2 larger aperture, is it really worth it?

The Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM is a very specialized lens, which I would suggest has it's greatest value in controlling DOF. If you don't know whether you need it, you probably don't.

I have both the EF 50mm f/1.8 II and the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, and I wish I had purchased the 50mm f/1.4 USM way earlier than I did. It really is a splendid lens and a vast improvement over the 50mm f/1.8 II in more predictable autofocus and bokeh.

gus

ziggy53 wrote:

The Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM is a very specialized lens,

And from what ive read...a very slow focusing lens suited to studio photography.

Slinky0390

thanks, I'll probably go with the 1.4.. I could get the 1.2, but I really dont see my need for it and I'd rather not spend all the money if I'm not going to use it to its fullest potential

Manfr3d

gus wrote:

And from what ive read...a very slow focusing lens suited to studio photography.

If I remember correctly someone on dgrin tested it here (was it Andy?)
and came to the conclusion that its just as fast (or faster) focusing
than the 50/1.4.

Slinky0390

Manfr3d wrote:

If I remember correctly someone on dgrin tested it here (was it Andy?)
and came to the conclusion that its just as fast (or faster) focusing
than the 50/1.4.

I've read the same thing, everyone who reviewed it on b&h said it focuses just as fast

claudermilk

The one opportunity I had to use the 50/1.2 it seemed to focus fast enough. It wasn't like the slow-as-molasses 85/1.2. Unless you really need that f1.2, I'd go with the 50/1.4, it's a very nice lens. I'm still undecided whether or not to swap my 1.8 for the 1.4...

gus

claudermilk wrote:

t wasn't like the slow-as-molasses 85/1.2.

Doh...thats the lens i was thinking of.

kenyahudson

These choices depend on what you want to photograph with it. For a wedding or portrait photographer, I think the 1.2L makes sense. From the reviews I've seen it clearly outperforms the 50/1.4 at f/4.0 and wider. I recently purchased the 50/1.4 to replace the 50/1.8's slow and loud autofocus. For general use, it has been fine, but for indoor sports it has not presented much of an improvement. The autofocus on it is significantly slower than that on the 28/1.8 and the 85/1.8. In fact, it doesn't seem much faster than the autofocus on the 50/1.8 though it hunts less in low light.

Manfr3d

I once had the 50/1.4 and the 50/1.8 for testing. I was
really disapointed by their cheap feel due to the plastic
build quality. Some people say they prefer the 1.4 over
the 1.8 because of better build quality. But I would prefer
the 1.8 because it's lighter and opticaly on par (except
bokeh). The 50/1.2 is a gem. It does outperform its
sister lenses until f2.2 or so but not beyond. Many
reviewers were dissapointed because of that regarding
the high price tag of the 1.2. Its build like a tank
and focuses very fast (faster than the 1.8 imo). I
for one will keep my 1.8 until I'm ready to drop the
extra cash for a 50/1.2. Remember Vitamin L is good
for you

eichert12

This might be of interest:

http://thomashawk.com/2007/04/canon-ef-50mm-f12-pretty-nice-lens-but.html

For those not interested in reading the full post the summary is:

"A good lens, but not a great lens, not as good as the 24mm in low light in my opinion -- and probably not enough better than the 50mm f/1.4 to justify the price difference. I do enjoy shooting with it though and if you've got money to blow then by all means, go for it."

Slinky0390

so, i overheard christmas gift conversations between my parents, and it looks like there is a ef 50mm 1.4 on the way from B&H to my house.. just wondering from anyone who has this lens, what the minimum focusing distance is.. i'm too lazy and late for work to look it up right now.. thanks!

Tommyboy

Wow. You ARE lazy.

1.5 feet.

I like mine. I hope you enjoy yours.

Slinky0390

hah, thanks man.. yeah, i was running so late for work and the last thought i had in my head was about the lens and i had dgrin up in safari so it was way easier to post..