# 5D MARK III with 50 mm f/1.2 performence



## jimy444 (Nov 20, 2012)

the more i am using my cam the more i am liking the 50mm focal length,
i currently have the 50mm f/1.8, i am using it intensively indoors
my other prime the 135L f/2 is impressive, but unfortunately using it indoors in my current location is limiting me in my framing, i often end up only having head shots...
my question is for the 50mm f1.2 owners, is it worth paying 12 times the price of the 1.8?
i know that i really like this focal length for full body portraits,
would you advise me to do the upgrade knowing that most of my pictures are indoor pictures and that i do not have a flash
I have heard that the 50mm f/1.2 had focus peaking problems 
my question is for 5dm III owners please, did you notice a difference when using the 50mm with the 5dmIII compared to the 5dmII?

i used to have the 1.4 but i really didn't like it, most of my images were out of focus and it was real pain to autofocus in the dark... don't know if i had a bad copy of it... but i was using it with the 7d...
any feedback please


----------



## Viggo (Nov 20, 2012)

Not sure how to determine if a lens is 12 times better, but for me it's absolutely worth it. Twice as much light, weather sealed, fantastic bokeh, color and contrast. Hopeless .AF mounted on a 5d2, can't miss AF no matter what on the 1dx and also seriously much better on the 5d3. Build and handling are superb. Love it.


----------



## nightbreath (Nov 20, 2012)

Here's an interesting thread about the 50L: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=10798


----------



## hbengtsson (Nov 20, 2012)

You simply can't compare performance per dollar. Forget about the 1.8. The 50/1.2 is another lens in terms of build, character and performance. And it costs xxx dollars. If you want it, get it.

As for the AF perfomance on the mark 3 compared to mark 2. It is indeed better thanks to the heavily improved AF system on the mark 3. But it still misses sometimes and that is entirely because of the lens/AF motor design. I have not noticed any focus shift on mine. Manufactured in 2011. Canon will never ever confirm it, but I _believe _they may have improved the design or at least how they put it all together. I've heard many many similar stories. If you plan to buy one, look at the date-code and make sure you get a newer one... Just to be sure.


----------



## sandymandy (Nov 20, 2012)

jimy444 said:


> my other prime the 135L f/2 is impressive, but unfortunately using it indoors in my current location is limiting me in my framing, i often end up only having head shots...



I think thats the main purpose of owning a 135mm prime, isnt it? For headshots.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 20, 2012)

You may want to read this. 

http://ramonlperez.tumblr.com/post/34906285033/fast-prime-shoot-out-pt-2-50mm-1-2l-review


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Nov 20, 2012)

I would suggest renting one. LensRentals.com has reduced prices this week.

I have found that my 5D III makes all my lenses perform better than they did before due to the more accurate and consistent autofocus compared to my 5D classic. Many of the bad lens reviews you find on the net are due to poor performance of the camera body used.


----------



## Crapking (Nov 20, 2012)

If you can handle the thin DOF shooting at 1.2 - 2, there should be no buyer's remorse, but perfecting the distance to subject / focus point selection takes some practice. But I love this lens wide open at 10 - 15 feet. Closer distance to subject with wider apertures is a little tricky - depending on how little DOF you can tolerate.


----------



## TexPhoto (Nov 20, 2012)

If you get one of the f1.2s, you have to go and buy a Rebel, so you can take photos of your lens and make it seem even bigger than it is. Same reason men trim their pub.. public facing home lawns, yea thats what I meant to say.

It's a great lens. If you can afford it, buy it. Renting is also a good idea, just to get that monkey off your back. I've had the 85mm f1.2, and sold it preferring my 50mm f1.4 Sigma, and the extra money in my pocket.


----------



## skullyspice (Nov 20, 2012)

I just upgraded from a 40D to the 5D3 and noticed a huge difference in the 50 1.2 performance. I really love the lens and feel like I'm finally getting to see its potential. def worth the price.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Nov 20, 2012)

I think you'd be better served buying a flash or two. Lenses are fun to buy, but you already have a 50, and you really should get a flash with a moveable head.


----------



## jimy444 (Nov 20, 2012)

thanks all for your comments, thanks also for the poster who suggested some links.

most of the comments suggest that if budget is not an issue, i should be buying it.
most of the comments confirm that the lens works much better with the 5DIII

one more question please, can the 50 f1.2 be compared seriously with the sigma 50 f1.4?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 20, 2012)

As has been beaten to death, the 50L is Canon's sharpest 50mm lens from f/1.2 to f/2. Narrower it is not. The 50 f/1.4 actually gets sharper from about f/2.8 and narrower. 

However, sharpness is not everything. If you are going to be shooting a lot wider than f/2.8, then by all means get it. I don't think it is worth the price, but then again, if you are the consumer you know the price going into it.


----------



## jimy444 (Nov 20, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> As has been beaten to death, the 50L is Canon's sharpest 50mm lens from f/1.2 to f/2. Narrower it is not. The 50 f/1.4 actually gets sharper from about f/2.8 and narrower.
> 
> However, sharpness is not everything. If you are going to be shooting a lot wider than f/2.8, then by all means get it. I don't think it is worth the price, but then again, if you are the consumer you know the price going into it.



some people are mentioning the Zeiss 50mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar ZE Macro as a replacement for the 50mm 1.2 or the sigma 1.4, any feedbak please?


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 20, 2012)

jimy444 said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > As has been beaten to death, the 50L is Canon's sharpest 50mm lens from f/1.2 to f/2. Narrower it is not. The 50 f/1.4 actually gets sharper from about f/2.8 and narrower.
> ...



The Zeiss is the sharpest 50mm made but its only F/2 and the bokeh isn't as nice as the 50L.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=727&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=403&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=4


----------



## Plato the Wise (Nov 20, 2012)

I have the 50L and the 5D III and it is a great combo.

I've never used the 50 1.4, but I have some other non L lenses and the color and contrast are much better on the L lenses. The color, contrast and bokeh on the 50L are very nice...as mentioned before sharpness isn't everything.

This lens is best suited for organic/portrait type work.


----------



## Zlatko (Nov 20, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The Zeiss is the sharpest 50mm made but its only F/2 and the bokeh isn't as nice as the 50L.


The Zeiss looks great in The Digital Picture comparison. However, the "sharpest 50mm made" appears to be the current Leica 50mm f/1.4. That lens seems to outperform the best from Canon, Nikon, Sigma and Zeiss — though it costs a bundle and won't work on any DSLR.  See the charts in the "Overall Comparison" section of the LensRentals "50mm Shootout" here:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout
And Leica may have surpassed even their own sharpest 50 with their new 50/2 ($7,200), not tested in the LensRentals shootout.


----------



## Zlatko (Nov 20, 2012)

jimy444 said:


> I have heard that the 50mm f/1.2 had focus peaking problems
> my question is for 5dm III owners please, did you notice a difference when using the 50mm with the 5dmIII compared to the 5dmII?
> 
> i used to have the 1.4 but i really didn't like it, most of my images were out of focus and it was real pain to autofocus in the dark... don't know if i had a bad copy of it... but i was using it with the 7d...
> any feedback please



The 50/1.2L is a sweet lens with a wonderful look. It does not have focus peaking problems (not sure what that is). Its only problem is backfocusing when stopped down to about f/2.8 - f/4 and shooting closeups. This is an inherent fault in many fast lenses that lack a floating element. That problem is easily avoided by shooting closeups with wider apertures (f/1.2 - f/2.5) or smaller aperture (f/5.0 and smaller). And again, it's only an issue for closeups and only at certain apertures, certainly not for full-body shots.

The 50/1.2L seems to focus more accurately on the 5DIII than on the 5DII. Actually, all lenses seem to focus better on the 5DIII than on the 5DII. Of course, accurate focus at very wide apertures (f/1.2 - f/2) still requires extra care. 

The Canon 50/1.4 USM is not a bad lens, certainly very sharp stopped down, but my impression is its old autofocus motor design is not as precise as that in newer lenses.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 20, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > The Zeiss is the sharpest 50mm made but its only F/2 and the bokeh isn't as nice as the 50L.
> ...



Well I assumed that most here would understand in the context of Canon EOS lenses. Afterall the OP didn't ask about leica equipment.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Nov 20, 2012)

You buy the 50L for its bokeh and build quality. For head shots it's too short IMHO, but its bokeh is what you want. If you have to ask, then the 50/1.8 might be all you want.

My son, born November 14, 2012, 20 hours old, f1.2 @ 1/60, Canon 5D3, funky indoor hospital room lighting.


----------



## jimy444 (Nov 22, 2012)

i am looking to buy a new 50mm because i mostly shoot indoor and in low lights, even harder than this, i shoot my little 1 year old kid, i am moving away from the 50mm f/1.8 because in many situation at iso 4000-6400 it is very slow to focus in low lights...
Flash is not an option because i cant hit the baby with it while he is eating before going to sleep per example...
so my goal is to pick up the fastest 50mm that will focus very fast with the 5dmark III considering that he is never still!
attached a few pictures for the kind of pictures i take.
i am not a big fan of retouching....


----------



## te4o (Nov 26, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> You buy the 50L for its bokeh and build quality. For head shots it's too short IMHO, but its bokeh is what you want. If you have to ask, then the 50/1.8 might be all you want.
> 
> My son, born November 14, 2012, 20 hours old, f1.2 @ 1/60, Canon 5D3, funky indoor hospital room lighting.



Congratulations, Daniel! The boy looks really stress free, and well made! I hope you will have time to review the millions of photos you'll take of him 
I found that the 50 mm FL was the best for babies and children and use the MakroPlanar for that purpose. One problem with these ultra fast primes is that it's often only you behind the camera. For the rest of the family it is unusable, especially if MF...


----------



## jVillaPhoto (Nov 26, 2012)

I'm absolutely in love with the 5D3/50L combo! I shot a couple live bands in very low light @ ISO 6400 and was pretty damn pleased with the results. Check them out here if you all would like! http://jvillaphoto.com/live_concert/ I have a few more but only added my favorite few 

Shooting teenage bands that jump all over the stage in low light @ f/1.2 was a pain, but the results are awesome when you get a decent shot!


----------



## NormanBates (Nov 26, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> My son, born November 14, 2012, 20 hours old, f1.2 @ 1/60, Canon 5D3, funky indoor hospital room lighting.



absolutely gorgeous pic

[quote author=jimy444]
so my goal is to pick up the fastest 50mm that will focus very fast with the 5dmark III considering that he is never still!
attached a few pictures for the kind of pictures i take.
[/quote]

nice pics too

you are describing the 50 f/1.2L


----------



## rpt (Nov 26, 2012)

jimy444 said:


> i am looking to buy a new 50mm because i mostly shoot indoor and in low lights, even harder than this, i shoot my little 1 year old kid, i am moving away from the 50mm f/1.8 because in many situation at iso 4000-6400 it is very slow to focus in low lights...
> Flash is not an option because i cant hit the baby with it while he is eating before going to sleep per example...
> so my goal is to pick up the fastest 50mm that will focus very fast with the 5dmark III considering that he is never still!
> attached a few pictures for the kind of pictures i take.
> i am not a big fan of retouching....


I like the third one. Seems to say *"You are in my space mister!"*


----------



## spinworkxroy (Nov 26, 2012)

Personally, i feel the only reason why you'd buy a 50 f1.2 is because you shoot at f1.2.
If you're gonna buy it to shoot at f4 or f5.6, you're not better off getting a 50 f1.4 or even a 50 f1.8..it's going to be almost identical in IQ.
It's at 1.2 that makes this lens so special..
Since people are talking Leica, it's the same..you buy the Leica 50 f0.95 not to shoot at f5.6, it's to shoot at f0.95


----------



## risc32 (Nov 26, 2012)

Well, sure you buy an ultra fast lens to use it at ultra fast speeds, but sometimes you just want more DOF, and it would be nice if the 50L was as sharp as the 50mm 1.8(a $100 plastic lens) at more mundane fstops. but perhaps choices in lens design have to be made and you can't have both. If it was the equal or close to the 1.8 at these smaller fstops i would have bought one years ago. every now and again i still think about it though. sharpness isn't the end all for me anyway. this most recent time the thought of buying the 50L was in my mind i bought a sigma 35 1.4, so who knows? maybe i won't like it, and i'll be back to thoughts of the 50L. (i'd like to see the 35L v2, but i'm afraid of the expected price)

also, i know what you mean about a camera bringing a lens to life. before i got my 5dmk3 i rarely used my 300mm f2.8. it was OOF so often and just never really did it for me. sure when it hit it was great but i just couldn't count on it. as a part time wedding photog i need to know my gear will work. that's job #1. now, with the mk3, i can use it like it was meant to be used. it's just amazing. 

BTW- i've seen some very good low light AF tracking photos on the net from the 5dmk3 and 50L so it might just be up to the task. Personally, unless you think you can figure out in a day or 2 whether or not the 50 is right for you i'd buy in it instead of renting. the resale is high enough that you could probably save money just using it for a month, or a year and selling it if it's not for you. my 2 cents and my wife will tell you that's about how much it's revalue is :-[


----------



## 7enderbender (Nov 26, 2012)

You should try it or at least buy it somewhere where you can return it without taking a hit. I'm using mine on a 5DII and came from the 50 1.4 which I sold in the meantime.

First off, it's good for people who really like the 50mm focal range on full frame. That's the most important thing. Then if you tend to shoot wide open a lot it may be right for you. And to me that's not a matter of low light conditions but a choice to throw a lot of things out of focus. With that it is a clear winner over the 1.4 since sharpness and especially contrast improve. This comes at a price - and not just in hard earned dollars. There is the much discussed focus shift issue (hasn't bothered me yet at all) and there is a visible increase in CA. I don't mind the latter either. It's the design of the lens and I love the results.

If all you care about is "sharpness" and you shoot mostly between 2.8 and 4 or even higher then keep the 1.8 or maybe consider any of the other choices. My 1.4 was noticeably sharper between 2.8 and 4. Still couldn't see myself using it ever again really so I sold my really good copy.

Also the build quality alone makes it worth it to me. Again, that comes a at a price. It's heavy and big in comparison. I don't mind that either.

What concerns me is that you were so unhappy with the 1.4. You may end up being as unhappy with a 1.2 for similar reasons - unless there really was something wrong with your copy. Don't know how it behaves on the Mark III but if anything it should be slightly better with the improved AF system. Depends on use I suppose.


----------



## Zlatko (Nov 26, 2012)

spinworkxroy said:


> Personally, i feel the only reason why you'd buy a 50 f1.2 is because you shoot at f1.2.
> If you're gonna buy it to shoot at f4 or f5.6, you're not better off getting a 50 f1.4 or even a 50 f1.8..it's going to be almost identical in IQ.
> It's at 1.2 that makes this lens so special..
> Since people are talking Leica, it's the same..you buy the Leica 50 f0.95 not to shoot at f5.6, it's to shoot at f0.95


The 50/1.2L is also quite special at around f/2.5. It has a lovely look that is not matched by the 50/1.4 or the 50/1.8 lenses at the same f-stop. By f/5.6 it probably looks the same as any other 50mm lens, but I feel that it offers something special not just at f/1.2 but also in the range from f/1.4 to f/2.8 or so.


----------



## @!ex (Nov 26, 2012)

If you are shooting low light indoor portraits of your family 5d mkiii and the 50 1.2 are an awesome combo. Just be sure to know how to use your continuous AI in servo mode. I actually set the front function button (normally used for DOF preview) to quick switch into continuous servo mode when ever I hold it down, that way whenever the moment is right I am always ready. Also, head shots with a 50mm are totally fine, especially with a little distortion correction in post. 

One thing no one has mentioned is the motivation factor certain gear can have. This lens camera combo is so sexy and creates such lovely images that it compels you to shot with it, even if you aren't feeling in the mood.

Here are some shots with the combo I've taken recently.




Low Key by @!ex, on Flickr




In the Dark by @!ex, on Flickr




Confederate Cloth. by @!ex, on Flickr




Bugging Out by @!ex, on Flickr




Into the Sun by @!ex, on Flickr




Available Light... by @!ex, on Flickr


----------



## THX723 (Nov 29, 2012)

Those are great pics Alex!


----------



## mrmarks (Nov 29, 2012)

Alex, lovely shots! BTW, how do you do the distortion correction in post? Thanks


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Nov 29, 2012)

the only reason you buy a 1.2 is to shoot in 1.2 nothing less.


----------



## @!ex (Nov 29, 2012)

mrmarks said:


> Alex, lovely shots! BTW, how do you do the distortion correction in post? Thanks



Lightroom, photoshop or DPP all have the 50L profile preloaded, one click really. I actually turn off the vignette correction most of the time (both in camera, if I'm shooting JPEG, and in post if I'm shooting RAW), as I feel it really adds to the character of the lens. I do always leave the CA correction on, as even this technically beautiful lens can get a little CA wide open.


----------



## dirtcastle (Nov 29, 2012)

@!ex said:


> mrmarks said:
> 
> 
> > Alex, lovely shots! BTW, how do you do the distortion correction in post? Thanks
> ...



+1 great shots!

I'm also not a fan of vignette correction, in general, unless I'm going to re-crop and I want to move the vignette.


----------



## Bosman (Dec 2, 2012)

Congrats Daniel! Love the snarl from the boy Jim. I wish i had kids to snap photos of, I always thought it would be fun.


----------



## Bosman (Dec 2, 2012)

jVillaPhoto said:


> I'm absolutely in love with the 5D3/50L combo! I shot a couple live bands in very low light @ ISO 6400 and was pretty damn pleased with the results. Check them out here if you all would like! http://jvillaphoto.com/live_concert/ I have a few more but only added my favorite few
> 
> Shooting teenage bands that jump all over the stage in low light @ f/1.2 was a pain, but the results are awesome when you get a decent shot!


Nice shots JVilla, I guess if you are going to shoot F1.2 with action subjects you better be ready to throw 80% or more away lol. Still its worth those that turn out like what you got.


----------



## Axilrod (Dec 3, 2012)

jimy444 said:


> some people are mentioning the Zeiss 50mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar ZE Macro as a replacement for the 50mm 1.2 or the sigma 1.4, any feedbak please?



I have both, and while I love my 50L for some stuff you can't even really compare the two in terms of sharpness, the Zeiss absolutely smokes it, especially on the edges. 9.5" minimum focusing distance/Macro capability on the Zeiss is awesome too. And honestly I rarely shoot my 50L below F2 so I don't feel like I'm missing much. The focus ring on the Zeiss is butter smooth and has hard stops and Macro and infinity. As for the bokeh, I think the 50L might blur a little bit better, but the Zeiss bokeh is beautiful in it's own right. 

I guess the biggest thing is whether or not you can live without AF, as the Zeiss is totally manual focus (although it does have focus confirmation). For video, the Zeiss is superior without a doubt, same goes for sharpness. I still love my 50L for some stuff though.


----------



## Bosman (Dec 3, 2012)

If it was about video for me the Zeiss is an obvious choice, since its not its not a choice.


----------



## jVillaPhoto (Dec 4, 2012)

Bosman said:


> jVillaPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I'm absolutely in love with the 5D3/50L combo! I shot a couple live bands in very low light @ ISO 6400 and was pretty damn pleased with the results. Check them out here if you all would like! http://jvillaphoto.com/live_concert/ I have a few more but only added my favorite few
> ...



Thanks a lot Bosman!  It definitely is worth throwing away 80% or more, has a very awesome look to those that are sharp!


----------

