It's hilarious because if you watch any video from the pre-RF 1.2 era. People constantly talked about how sharp this lens was at F1.2. Photographers did incredible and sharp work with this lens during the entire 5D2 to 5D Mark 4 era. It's just people get crazy about the newest sharpest lenses and then shit on the old lenses.
It’s like nobody had ever taken a sharp image until RF lenses were released. I’m picking up EF lenses for a fraction of the price. Just bought a nearly new 85mm f1.2 for £600 and it’s amazing on my R camera.
I did own the EF 50/1.2 for quite a long time and it really was everything but sharp wide opened. Unusable for full body portraits wide opened. Exactly as it is mentioned in the video. It was a great character lens for moody shots but at the price of sharpness. This lens was never known for its sharpness wide opened.
Uh, because the newer lenses ARE sharper? It's not that people didn't take sharp pics, they were just limited by aperture. Now you can take very sharp pics wide open with like no CA or loss of contrast and more controlled vignette.
I got the canon 50 MM 1.2L EF lens and most of my photos are SHARP because I use the camera on MANUAL CONTROL most of the times and my photos are ALL SHARP I also use this lens for video recording and in LOW LIGHT situations and when I do use is I learn so much from it and that is the best way to UNDERSTAND this CLASSIC 50 mm EF 1.2L lens
I'm glad you found it helpful! If even one person benefits from a video then I consider it a success. If you have any questions about the lens don't hesitate to ask. :)
The quality to value to size ratio on this lens is really hard to beat. I find it funny there are people looking for clinically sharp lenses when the recent trends are to shoot film and coolpix cameras from 2003. Or just run an image through AI. this lens is plenty sharp enough for photos of people at 1.2.
Great video. I would sum this lens up as an artist's lens which can be used for that purpose under any circumstance, be it personal, recreational or even professional. Before I had this lens, I took some "art shots" of a couple at a wedding I was shooting with the Canon FL 55mm F1.2 and they were great...for that purpose. I would have used this lens in a heartbeat in that situation, for that purpose, if I had it back then.
Best review so far 👍 I have both, EF50/1.2 and RF50/1.2. There are just different. Rendering of EF50/1.2 is hard to describe but it’s just magnificent. I used to use it even at f/5.6 for studio flash photography. Beautiful. Sharp and soft at the same time.
Excellent description, and thank you! Cost aside, I'm reading of more and more people moving away from the most modern f/1.2 primes because they're too sharp/unforgiving for some.
This lens is very controversial and not unanimous. It is criticized for its lack of sharpness at full aperture. Canon has also just added a fratricidal layer by releasing the RF version. Personally I find it to be a magical and poorly understood lens, an indisputable masterpiece. Sharpness is not the main criterion required for this type of lens. And the 50L perfectly fulfills its creative role as a detached dream portrait thanks to a very reduced DOF at wide aperture. We have to rush because Canon is abandoning part of its EF fleet in favor of much more expensive RF lenses. Thank you for your relevant and courageous video to support this lens that I love and unfairly criticized.
"Unfairly criticised" is a phrase I could use a lot. Harman Phoenix, this lens, the Fuji 645 folders etc are all flawed but unique. It's just a matter of what suits your needs!
I would recommend using the lens hood as little as possible. It is the size of a bus and if you hit it off anything then it can easily lever the front element off the lens...very easy to do...very expensive to fix. Speaking from personal experience!
Most comprehensive review of this lens on UA-cam, thanks! People have often mentioned it has back focusing problems with some film bodies. I haven’t noticed this with the EOS30 I use, but I’d love to upgrade to the EOS3, which I think has this problem. Out of interest, which canon film body do you use?
Great review. I’ve seen a ton of videos that report it performing superbly on something like an R5. Then this lens comes alive again on newer mirror less, so this review based on DSLR is potentially outdated. Plus in camera corrections help with some cons. For the price of an RF it’s a bit clearer than this review suggests.
Fair points, the AF is the main thing a mirrorless helps with. Vignetting and distortion corrections are "lossy" and already existed in the DSLRs, and can't help with spherical aberration, though. Canon definitely seemed to have kept the best compatibility with their prior mount overall, and it's good that lenses like this see a new lease on life.
9:47 It's expensive piece of glass for what it is - and isn't. In terms of sharpness, the most disappointing aspect with that lens is how poorly this L glass performs against both the EF 50mm f1.4 USM and the cheap EF 50mm f1.8, both of which seem to be sharper at their largest apertures compared to the 50mm L. I got all three from MPB to play around with before deciding which ones to keep. In terms of overall performance and creative options, the EF 50mm f1.4 USM is the best choice, in particular on digital EOS bodies. The EF 50mm f1.2 L on my 5DII has severe back focus issues, I needed to adjust the auto focus in camera specifically for that lens (on two different copies actually, same issue). The EF 50mm f1.4 USM focuses just fine. I agree with your comments on sharpness. It's not good. I am also a Leica M user with a modern 50mm Summilux and the Voigtlaender 50mm f1.2 Nokton. Both blow the 50mm L out of the water by miles wide open. I did not expect the shirt comparison. Well played.
I have a friend who does use this lens for weddings but that's part of his "brand"/"look" and his clients want that. I just find that it's not up to the level of what I need for my own clients, and agree that it's crazy how sharp the little f/1.8 STM is by comparison. Thankfully I was very lucky to not need focus calibration; my friend needed the same thing with his 5D III (or IV, I can't recall). I'm not familiar with the Summilux but the Nokton is a great example of a lens with enough "character"/imperfection to yield a pleasing image, while still providing a nice and sharp photo at the same time, in my opinion. I was briefly looking into the M system at one stage before realising the eyepoint is far too small for me to use with my glasses.
Vignetting, CA and spherochromatism at wide apertures but £1500 for a 20 year old lens? When there are alternatives? I mean I really like the equally old canon 200mm f2.8L, but that doesn't really make sense apart from as an antique.
It's hilarious because if you watch any video from the pre-RF 1.2 era. People constantly talked about how sharp this lens was at F1.2. Photographers did incredible and sharp work with this lens during the entire 5D2 to 5D Mark 4 era. It's just people get crazy about the newest sharpest lenses and then shit on the old lenses.
It’s like nobody had ever taken a sharp image until RF lenses were released. I’m picking up EF lenses for a fraction of the price. Just bought a nearly new 85mm f1.2 for £600 and it’s amazing on my R camera.
@@nomadicsouls3290 nicely done ace lens
I did own the EF 50/1.2 for quite a long time and it really was everything but sharp wide opened. Unusable for full body portraits wide opened. Exactly as it is mentioned in the video. It was a great character lens for moody shots but at the price of sharpness. This lens was never known for its sharpness wide opened.
Uh, because the newer lenses ARE sharper? It's not that people didn't take sharp pics, they were just limited by aperture. Now you can take very sharp pics wide open with like no CA or loss of contrast and more controlled vignette.
So happy to see a user review without tiresome test charts. Thank you. 😊
Totally agree !!
I got the canon 50 MM 1.2L EF lens and most of my photos are SHARP because I use the camera on MANUAL CONTROL most of the times and my photos are ALL SHARP I also use this lens for video recording and in LOW LIGHT situations and when I do use is I learn so much from it and that is the best way to UNDERSTAND this CLASSIC 50 mm EF 1.2L lens
One of the overall best reviews on UA-cam. Many thanks! 😊
1:16 had this lens for couple of years now, totally love it, it is definitely the devil of a lens...
thank you , I appreciate the thorough review , and it is helpful as I’m about to buy this lens
I'm glad you found it helpful! If even one person benefits from a video then I consider it a success.
If you have any questions about the lens don't hesitate to ask. :)
The quality to value to size ratio on this lens is really hard to beat. I find it funny there are people looking for clinically sharp lenses when the recent trends are to shoot film and coolpix cameras from 2003. Or just run an image through AI. this lens is plenty sharp enough for photos of people at 1.2.
Great video. I would sum this lens up as an artist's lens which can be used for that purpose under any circumstance, be it personal, recreational or even professional. Before I had this lens, I took some "art shots" of a couple at a wedding I was shooting with the Canon FL 55mm F1.2 and they were great...for that purpose. I would have used this lens in a heartbeat in that situation, for that purpose, if I had it back then.
Best review so far 👍 I have both, EF50/1.2 and RF50/1.2. There are just different. Rendering of EF50/1.2 is hard to describe but it’s just magnificent. I used to use it even at f/5.6 for studio flash photography. Beautiful. Sharp and soft at the same time.
Excellent description, and thank you! Cost aside, I'm reading of more and more people moving away from the most modern f/1.2 primes because they're too sharp/unforgiving for some.
This lens is very controversial and not unanimous. It is criticized for its lack of sharpness at full aperture. Canon has also just added a fratricidal layer by releasing the RF version. Personally I find it to be a magical and poorly understood lens, an indisputable masterpiece. Sharpness is not the main criterion required for this type of lens. And the 50L perfectly fulfills its creative role as a detached dream portrait thanks to a very reduced DOF at wide aperture. We have to rush because Canon is abandoning part of its EF fleet in favor of much more expensive RF lenses. Thank you for your relevant and courageous video to support this lens that I love and unfairly criticized.
"Unfairly criticised" is a phrase I could use a lot. Harman Phoenix, this lens, the Fuji 645 folders etc are all flawed but unique. It's just a matter of what suits your needs!
I would recommend using the lens hood as little as possible. It is the size of a bus and if you hit it off anything then it can easily lever the front element off the lens...very easy to do...very expensive to fix. Speaking from personal experience!
I haven't actually used it since you told me that... Very wary.
Thanks for the “heads up” - I will be using a rubber lens hood.😊
Most comprehensive review of this lens on UA-cam, thanks! People have often mentioned it has back focusing problems with some film bodies. I haven’t noticed this with the EOS30 I use, but I’d love to upgrade to the EOS3, which I think has this problem. Out of interest, which canon film body do you use?
I use an EOS 1V and never had any accuracy issues. I shot both of my cats wide open quite a lot and it was fine!
Another excellent video. Thanks for all you do. Peace ☮️
Thank you for this sharp review !
I got one of these canon 50 MM F1.2L lens
11:30 but it released in 2007 and targeted for 1Ds mark3 and upcoming 5D mark2 (2008)
Great review. I’ve seen a ton of videos that report it performing superbly on something like an R5. Then this lens comes alive again on newer mirror less, so this review based on DSLR is potentially outdated. Plus in camera corrections help with some cons. For the price of an RF it’s a bit clearer than this review suggests.
Fair points, the AF is the main thing a mirrorless helps with. Vignetting and distortion corrections are "lossy" and already existed in the DSLRs, and can't help with spherical aberration, though. Canon definitely seemed to have kept the best compatibility with their prior mount overall, and it's good that lenses like this see a new lease on life.
9:47 It's expensive piece of glass for what it is - and isn't.
In terms of sharpness, the most disappointing aspect with that lens is how poorly this L glass performs against both the EF 50mm f1.4 USM and the cheap EF 50mm f1.8, both of which seem to be sharper at their largest apertures compared to the 50mm L. I got all three from MPB to play around with before deciding which ones to keep. In terms of overall performance and creative options, the EF 50mm f1.4 USM is the best choice, in particular on digital EOS bodies.
The EF 50mm f1.2 L on my 5DII has severe back focus issues, I needed to adjust the auto focus in camera specifically for that lens (on two different copies actually, same issue). The EF 50mm f1.4 USM focuses just fine.
I agree with your comments on sharpness. It's not good. I am also a Leica M user with a modern 50mm Summilux and the Voigtlaender 50mm f1.2 Nokton. Both blow the 50mm L out of the water by miles wide open.
I did not expect the shirt comparison. Well played.
I have a friend who does use this lens for weddings but that's part of his "brand"/"look" and his clients want that. I just find that it's not up to the level of what I need for my own clients, and agree that it's crazy how sharp the little f/1.8 STM is by comparison.
Thankfully I was very lucky to not need focus calibration; my friend needed the same thing with his 5D III (or IV, I can't recall).
I'm not familiar with the Summilux but the Nokton is a great example of a lens with enough "character"/imperfection to yield a pleasing image, while still providing a nice and sharp photo at the same time, in my opinion. I was briefly looking into the M system at one stage before realising the eyepoint is far too small for me to use with my glasses.
Vignetting, CA and spherochromatism at wide apertures but £1500 for a 20 year old lens? When there are alternatives? I mean I really like the equally old canon 200mm f2.8L, but that doesn't really make sense apart from as an antique.
Helpful with the cons.
mine copy is really sharp on my r6.