# Canon 50mm f/1.2 R review by Tony Northrup



## Chaitanya (Oct 26, 2018)




----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 26, 2018)

Thanks, Chaitanya.

Interestingly, he joins the chorus asking for IBIS. Unless there is a significant downside, why not? Wouldn't the 50mm focal-length be a good candidate? I like the bokeh...
I wish he didn't use LR screenshots for his samples. And I wonder how the bokeh looks with trees in the background when stopped down a little bit. Nervous like the EF version of the 1.2L? Or is that better controlled?

Still, nothing here to make me want the lens less!


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 26, 2018)

Tony Northrup was getting treated like a rockstar at New York's photo plus expo yesterday. He's a little touchy feely for me but I rarely feel like he gets something totally wrong.
I had a chance to handle the new 50 1.2 a few times yesterday and it's a very impressive lens both in the way it feels in the hand and what I could tell about the IQ given the crappy lighting. My favorite of the new RF lenses. It's seriously front heavy on the R though. The control ring on the front is a great addition because thats exactly where your left hand is going to have to be. I'd say its a left handed camera in that regard because I would default to holding it in my left hand. But, set that control ring to exposure compensation in manual with auto ISO and I could shoot portraits all day without making any other adjustments. I honestly didn't get a very possitive first impression of the R body but that 50 seems to be a terrific lens.


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 26, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> Thanks, Chaitanya.
> 
> Interestingly, he joins the chorus asking for IBIS. Unless there is a significant downside, why not? Wouldn't the 50mm focal-length be a good candidate? I like the bokeh...
> I wish he didn't use LR screenshots for his samples. And I wonder how the bokeh looks with trees in the background when stopped down a little bit. Nervous like the EF version of the 1.2L? Or is that better controlled?
> ...



IBIS does make it more difficult to dissipate heat (one reason why Sony cameras had overheating issues with 4K), and in some implementations, the sensor can not be locked in place. This can be bad for time lapses or for wildlife shooters.

For most applications, I don't find IS useful at the shorter focal lengths because it tends to be less effective (in stops) and the shutter speeds get so long that it's not practical for live subjects. However, if Canon chooses to put IS in lenses, I'd rather Canon put it in the 2.8 zooms rather than the fast "L" primes for the shorter focal lengths. Lenses designed for general purpose use will encounter situations where IS is useful more often than fast prime shooters. And because IBIS is less effective than lens IS, I'd expect the benefit to be even less for a lot of added complexity. Ideally, it could be coupled with lens IS to get something slightly better than just lens IS, but again that has to be traded with complexity, heat dissipation, etc. Also think of run-and-gun video shooters -- a stabilized lens trio of 16-35/24-70/70-200 would be used for most scenarios, and at point I'd rather have IS lenses than no lens stabilization and only IBIS. 

I find the IS for the 70-200 and above to be useful. 85 f/1.4L is not often useful because usually I'd rather carry a IS zoom for general purpose/travel and if I'm in a portrait situation, I'm relying on my flashes for the main lighting. I do like the 16-35 f/4 IS for building interiors but again, it's about 1-2 stop benefit and I don't do that often, so much so that I should consider selling the 16-35 f/4 IS now that I have the 16-35 III.

I found out the hard way that IS is useless for taking pictures of waterfalls from foot bridges. The vibration induced by other people walking on it was too much for IS to handle. Even with IS

Going off on a tangent, I'd love to see what a RF version of a 85mm "L" prime would be like. The engineers talked about the IS and the rear element limiting the 85 f/1.4L IS design. The RF would allow the last large element to be closer to the sensor plane and give more space for placing the IS unit. I'd love to see a return to f/1.2 for the 85mm focal length...


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 26, 2018)

Much food for thought here. Despite all the advances, photography continues to be the craft of compromises.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 26, 2018)

Unfortunately, regardless of IBIS's technical merits, Canon has ceded the innovation high ground to a few of their competitors and when they don't include features that Sony and others do it appears to the buying public that they are unwilling/unable to do so rather than choosing not to for sound purpose driven reasons. That perception is held by a large and growing portion of the market. You can say that's not fair or those other companies have it wrong all you want but Canon has really painted themselves into a corner with their slow rate of technical advancement/adoption. Canon's lens design and manufacturing is second to no one but you can't draw any sort of logical line through Canon's stills and video camera development. When you are asking photographers to invest in a system that is a serious problem and one solely of their own creation.


----------



## eyeheartny (Oct 31, 2018)

I just got my 50 1.2 yesterday. First time I've used a super-speed lens like it. How legit are Tony's concerns seem about the lack of IS in this lens? From a few minutes of messing around in my apartment the lens seems sharper and with better resolving power than the 24-105 I am still renting. I am on a plane right now to New Orleans and I have both the 50 and the 24-105 with me. Will be eager to get it out in some nice light and some challenging conditions as well.


----------



## memoriaphoto (Nov 1, 2018)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Tony Northrup was getting treated like a rockstar at New York's photo plus expo yesterday. .



Is there a place where one can see his actual photography? It's interesting. Most of these youtube specification reviewers seem to have a lot of opinions but rarely I see any actual work (not the sad test images and portraits)


----------



## Viggo (Nov 1, 2018)

Didn’t he say he had 50% hitrate? How is it possible to suck that bad at AF? I took 200 shots of random stuff in a hurry with very shaky hands, because I had a small window of time to test it in. Not ONE shot was OOF, and they were all at 1.2... 

Anyway, don’t pay attention to the 50% claim, it’s obviously highly dependent on the person using it


----------



## Act444 (Nov 1, 2018)

Viggo said:


> Didn’t he say he had 50% hitrate? How is it possible to suck that bad at AF? I took 200 shots of random stuff in a hurry with very shaky hands, because I had a small window of time to test it in. Not ONE shot was OOF, and they were all at 1.2...
> 
> Anyway, don’t pay attention to the 50% claim, it’s obviously highly dependent on the person using it



He is not the only person to mention mediocre hit rate at 1.2. I was thinking of this as a possible entry route to the R system but I’ve watched numerous reviews and experiences seem to vary. Again, polarizing camera. I feel I need to try the combo out for myself to be sure...


----------



## AlanF (Nov 1, 2018)

Viggo said:


> Didn’t he say he had 50% hitrate? How is it possible to suck that bad at AF? I took 200 shots of random stuff in a hurry with very shaky hands, because I had a small window of time to test it in. Not ONE shot was OOF, and they were all at 1.2...
> 
> Anyway, don’t pay attention to the 50% claim, it’s obviously highly dependent on the person using it


Is that depending on the skill of the person who is using it or their criteria of what is in focus?


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Nov 1, 2018)

eyeheartny said:


> I just got my 50 1.2 yesterday. First time I've used a super-speed lens like it. How legit are Tony's concerns seem about the lack of IS in this lens? From a few minutes of messing around in my apartment the lens seems sharper and with better resolving power than the 24-105 I am still renting. I am on a plane right now to New Orleans and I have both the 50 and the 24-105 with me. Will be eager to get it out in some nice light and some challenging conditions as well.



Well, I've been a long time user of the 35 f1.4L and 85 f1.2L and i've never ever once wished I have an IS unit on either of them. A 50mm f1.2 lens can shoot at F1.2 @ 1/50th sec...at iso 6400...this is darker than most of us can see in. I've photographed weddings in cathedral crypts by candle light with this combo...it works and who needs IS with f1.4/f1.2?


----------



## Larsskv (Nov 1, 2018)

GMCPhotographics said:


> Well, I've been a long time user of the 35 f1.4L and 85 f1.2L and i've never ever once wished I have an IS unit on either of them. A 50mm f1.2 lens can shoot at F1.2 @ 1/50th sec...at iso 6400...this is darker than most of us can see in. I've photographed weddings in cathedral crypts by candle light with this combo...it works and who needs IS with f1.4/f1.2?



I don’t miss IS to much either, but I wish the EOS-R had it. It is a benefit with the 85 f1.4 L, over the 85LII. I own both, and it is no doubt that even at 1/200 shutter speed, you will gain sharpness wise in many photos, due to the IS.


----------



## Viggo (Nov 1, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Is that depending on the skill of the person who is using it or their criteria of what is in focus?


I can say for 100% sure no one is more critical of that than me... there might be equally critical people, but not more.

And 50% is ridiculous, the only camera lens combo I’ve used with 50% rate is moving subjects and MF lenses or Sigma Art.... the EF 50 L is one of the worst performers from Canon and I never had as low as 50%.

If you shoot bees in flight, then sure...


----------



## BillB (Nov 1, 2018)

Act444 said:


> He is not the only person to mention mediocre hit rate at 1.2. I was thinking of this as a possible entry route to the R system but I’ve watched numerous reviews and experiences seem to vary. Again, polarizing camera. I feel I need to try the combo out for myself to be sure...


A 50% hit rate at f1.2 might or might not have much to do with IS or shutter speed. There just isn't much depth of field to work with.


----------



## Viggo (Nov 1, 2018)

BillB said:


> A 50% hit rate at f1.2 might or might not have much to do with IS or shutter speed. There just isn't much depth of field to work with.


Agreed with that.

And there’s also a huge factor what focusing modes and otherwise settings being used. If one just uses some sort of area and tracking no wonder it’s not 100% hit rate.

I used single point, no issues.


----------

