Canon EF 50mm f / 1.2L USM

Advantages: Magic, recognizable, characteristic picture, constructive, weight, dimensions

Disadvantages: Most controversial Canon L-fix

Comment: In my opinion, this is the most complex and capricious glass in the entire line of electric. It is unlikely that it will be possible to simply wind it on the carcass immediately after the purchase and start threshing cool cards in series. It takes a long time to get used to the 50L - despite the fact that I have had 35L, 85LII, 135L, 200 2.8LII for a long time, and the fact that I shot a lot with the 24-70 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L zooms of the first versions, this fifty for a long time did not give the expected result from him. Firstly, it is almost impossible to shoot with it along the central point with re-framing, the grip plane moves. Secondly, autofocus seems to have a life of its own. Thirdly, the lens specifically draws on the open, and because of all of the above and the softness of the pattern in conjunction with aberrations, at first you don't understand at all whether you got into focus or not, and what the result should ideally be. It took me some time to get used to it - I just took only this fifty dollars with me on trips, leaving all the rest in Moscow, shot with manual focus, shot live view, shot in AF, shot them on 6D and 5D3, in the studio and in the city, night and day, with hands and a tripod, until at some point I caught myself thinking that this is my favorite lens. Basically, on 5D3, I now use this fifty dollar as a staff. I would definitely not advise a beginner to buy it - Sigma Art will give the result faster. I would not advise anyone who does not see anything in the photo except sharpness. Anyone who wants a linear increase in quality in proportion to the price compared to 50 1.8 STM - you shouldn't take it either, you will be disappointed. If you need a cinematic, color, special, recognizable picture, if you see frames shot at 50L in the stream, if 50mm is your focal point, if you need a creative lens charming with its irregularity (which will no longer exist, apparently) for shooting mostly people , mainly on open, up to 2.8, where this lens opens up to its maximum, then take it, you will not regret it. And yet - they are very different from 85LII and do not replace each other.

Advantages: To understand all the advantages of Canon EF 50 f / 1.2 L, you need to start testing with the younger copy 50 1.8 II

Disadvantages: At short distances, from 0.5 to 1.5 meters, strange things happen with focus, the more you clamp the aperture, the more the focus goes to the back. On the forums, for a similar effect of individual copies (a manifestation of design features), the lens was dubbed as "shift focus".

Comment: I often read reviews on the net that for the difference between f / 1.4 and f / 1.2 it is simply not reasonable to overpay such an amount, while some manage to compare Canon EF 50 f / 1.2 L with Sigma 1.4! After the first tests of 50 f / 1.2, I realized how much everyone is wrong and far from the truth. The colors and sharpness of the lens can only be compared with the 135 2L. Canon EF 50 f / 1.2 L - does not paint, he paints oil paintings. In the range of f / 1.2 - f / 1.6, simply amazing volumetric female portraits are obtained, requiring minimal refinement if necessary. The Canon 135 f / 2L is, in this respect, a sharper, more masculine portrait lens. I discovered the amazing abilities of the Canon EF 50 f / 1.2 L in the landscape genre even at f / 1.2, not bad results are obtained when using a gradient and polarizing filter. The lens works great both at full format - 5D and crop - 50D.

Advantages: Art glass. A very interesting drawing. For this, he can be forgiven all the shortcomings or look at them through the prism of merits. Aperture - you can blur unnecessary background, highlight the model with vignetting, use its sharpness instead of changing the focal length ... It's more interesting to work than a vario lens. The crop camera has a cool portrait lens, without a doubt one of the best. Dust and moisture protection. The workmanship is excellent! Does not resize when focusing. Universal FR. You can shoot everything, but knowing how) And a portrait, and a landscape, and a panorama, and a still life, and just play around ...))

Disadvantages: 1. Vignetting is strong, it is good and bad, corrected in the raw editor or in the camera (5DM2) 2. Focuses for a long time in low light and contrast. 3. Aberrations. Well, how can we do without them at 1.2 then ... 4. Poor image quality at the edges - the price for excellent bokeh. 5. Price, price, price ...

Comment: I rented it. I would like to buy, but terribly expensive :)

Advantages: I own it for six months. It is impossible not to love the lens, I always shoot with regret, because I have no other lenses that give a comparable picture. Produces crazy photos straight from the camera. Plus, an excellent crop portrait.

Disadvantages: - Chromatic aberrations of 1.2 are very often detected in my copy. In defense, we can only say that they appear in complex high-contrast areas of the image - branches, night lights. - Very slow autofocus. Of course, I only use the lens at a wide aperture. Autofocus is slow and often fails altogether. I shoot in difficult conditions, in the studio there are no problems with that, of course. As a result of the transition to an almost complete manual focus, a slight backlash appeared at the focusing ring (approx. 0.5 mm)

Comment: The lens is unique, after it everything darker than 2.8 does not satisfy at all and I really do not want to buy zooms at all.

Advantages: It's kind of strange to hear this from an adult man, but I just fell in love with this lens! Amazing picture, beautiful and deep bokeh, high sharpness, good autofocus performance. The lens is made of high quality, looks nice and solid on the camera (much better than any kind of zooms, wide-angle and telephoto lenses), unpretentious and versatile. Not suitable for professional portraits, but at the amateur level, portraits are excellent. The depth of field at open aperture and at FF is simply amazing. True, this greatly interferes with video filming. The lens is equipped with a uranium "emerald" lens ... A very nice lens that is strangely ignored by most photographers, more and more zooms are used. If I had to use only one lens, I would choose only this one and no other.

Disadvantages: Slightly changes the focal length at polar values ​​of sharpness; at an open aperture, sharpness decreases along the very edge (insignificantly). Dear.

Comment: An absolutely awesome lens! It's amazing that I used to use vario / lenses and nothing else. In addition, I have 24-70 / 2.8 and 85 / 1.2. The latter is a separate story, but it lacks universality. Another thing is fifty dollars. Now I take him on all business trips. You can shoot almost anything, except maybe fast-moving subjects. At first I walked around and "clicked" everything, then the euphoria passed, but the most positive sensations remained. It is not cheap, but it is better to take an uncompromising fix than a zoom of the same price - the quality of the images is incomparable. But if the main subjects for filming are running children and dogs, it is better to take a low-range zoom - 24-70 / 2.8, for example.

Advantages: Aperture, one of the most attractive bokeh among all other glasses, ergonomics, build quality, focusing speed

Disadvantages: this lens has no flaws. There are only features that are easy to get used to.

Comment: Draws gorgeous, blurring the background into soft clouds! Such glasses, as they say, can photograph air. An absolutely noble lens, definitely worth its money, works great on crop.

Advantages: - high aperture - impressive appearance, construction, assembly, protection from moisture and dust (filter required) - medium, but fast enough autofocus speed and accuracy (using one (1Ds)) - for professional use, if the quality of all is most important to you components for any money, there is no better Canon autofocus lens than this lens .. ƒ / 1.0 version doesn’t count. (the same and a minus below) - all the advantages inherent in the FR of 50 mm (versatility: from landscapes to portraits and reportage)

Disadvantages: -a very high price, but, for the most part, it is justified, after all, L and there is a difference from ƒ / 1.4 -not the best autofocus by modern standards (but quite good), the notorious shift focus characteristic of such large relative apertures. - terrible HA and low sharpness on the open, about 1.8 no working holes at all - about the two previous points: already quite old, this is the first of 50 and 85 ƒ / 1.2 canons, but 85 is still tighter with autofocus .. - a bit old (2006 year), hence autofocus and sharpness and HA, which do not compete with new lenses, even zooms of a similar price (this, of course, 24-70 II and 70-200 II), but somewhere (in terms of sharpness and HA) and fixes (not -L) and zooms (L) are cheaper, but newer. - a bit old, which means it is not very promising for buying, because it should be updated, which will cause an obvious decline in prices for it. At the beginning of 2014, one is already hearing about the 35L update at last, otherwise it is no longer funny, it (EF 35 ƒ / 1.4L USM) was announced in 1998 and there is not even dust-moisture-protection, what can I say about the rest, about the new half a toss is not heard yet. - well, the promised minus of the plus - no choice. If you, like me, prefer high-aperture fixes, and not no matter how good zooms, then you get a half-shot, which loses 24-70 II in everything, except for aperture for close prices (the difference is about 10-15K rubles at the beginning of 2014 : about 50K for 50 mm and 60-65K for 24-70 II)

Comment: If we compare it with the EF 24-70 ƒ / 2.8L II USM, then if both are at 50mm and at ƒ / 2.8 (which is open for zoom!), Half a meter merges terribly in HA, in terms of sharpness in the field as a whole, in autofocus, and in general throughout! It is worth taking it now only if you like fixes, you need exactly fifty dollars, high aperture and autofocus. I will not write about boke, colors and patterns. Someone really likes it, but personally, I consider such people who have not seen truly artistic lenses, which are usually not autofocus. The background washes a lot, the colors are conveyed well, the drawing seems to be there, but I'm not happy. So, I don't recommend this lens if you can do without it. 24-70 II and 70-200 II are not much more expensive, but if you do not need a fix, they will win in everything, and 70-200 with a good stub, which gives an equivalent "aperture" somewhere nearby.Do not forget also, as many beginners are mistaken, "poltos" is not a portrait portrait for you. Poltos is a standard focal length, it is a "staff". Yes, you can shoot portraits with it, as well as with a telephoto, but the telephoto does not become a portrait photographer. It's the same with EGF, which doesn't make him a portrait photographer either: perspective and all that. P.S .: HA are simply terrible not only for a lens of this class, but also for lenses in general, and at ƒ / 2.8 as well.

Advantages: as many say - the aperture ratio - constructive (not the same as in 50 1.4 the trunk does not leave for another half a centimeter, and this gives the advantage of shopping mall 1.4 in the bag fell from a distance of 30 cm to the floor and the outgoing part fell inside the result-repair) - figure ( differs from 50 1.4 very much) - autofocus on par with 50 1.4 (no slower)

Disadvantages: - focus at close distances, but this is more likely not a minus, but a feature of the optics - it is not convenient to remove the cover with a hood on - HA are large enough

Comment: I use with a crop (60D) the sharpness at 1.2 is good enough) the drawing, colors, and glare are at a height) autofocus is quiet and tenacious even on the crop, from the technical point of view the lens is very well done, if there is a backlash or some other drawbacks, these are problems of a single lens , I have no problems even with a used one. The price at the moment is a new 55+ k for ebay with delivery of 47 from America, the cheapest I've seen, (but the difference is that the American ones under warranty do not service us in the service center), used ones have the opportunity to buy from 40-45 + k but When buying a used one, look at the package number and the number on the lens itself, otherwise the SC may refuse to repair it even if there is a guarantee) In general, the lens is worth its money with the younger models 50 1.4 and 50 1.8, it makes no sense to compare a completely different level if who writes that the difference from 50 1.4 is not big, he simply did not even hold 1.2 in his hands)

Advantages: Fast, compact, well made.

Disadvantages: Soapy, poor autofocus, although it is on the 5D markIII. If you shake something, something claps in the lens unit, although it works properly.

Comment: The colors and colors are good, almost like the 85L 1.2's older brother, but shoddy autofocus, only in the 85 it somehow moves the lens and in the 50 it moves quickly, even smartly, but there is still no sense. If there is little light, it drives focus and cannot catch it. everything works quickly, but in these conditions, other glasses work quickly. When I bought it, I was counting on a quick focus in the dark, but I got figs for you, no focus, no sharpness. On closed apertures it works like everyone else. The only bold plus is the PAINT drawing almost like 85 PORCIOUS This is not a faceless reportage zoom, but art glass. This is the main difference for which I paid 50 thousand rubles. Well, you yourself understand the universal 50mm-staff, and after all, there is no alternative to it! The rest are either manuals (zais and watering can) or junk (tamrons tokiny samiyangi and other exotics, including from the USSR) The rest there 1.8 or 1.4 are no match for completely different weight categories and only the blind will not notice the difference. So whatever you say, Canon is beyond competition here.

Advantages: Excellent color rendering, hole 1.2, constructive. L fix

Disadvantages: They are not, if you understand what this glass is for.

Comment: I bought it yesterday and already want to share my impressions. Despite the fact that the autofocus is slow and sometimes lathers when open, it is just a Magic Glass! I walk and rejoice like a child. It is a 3D calendar maker. Perfect for portraits. And I think everything else will be useful too. I have never held anything like it in my hands before. If there is an opportunity and understanding, take it !!!