# 50 f/1.2L problems applicable to 85 f/1.2L?



## Mitch.Conner (Oct 14, 2014)

Do the same focus shift related issues that make the 50mm f/1.2L "controversial" apply to the 85mm f/1.2L?

I don't see the same warnings on the rental page for the 85mm L lens (Lens Rentals) that I see on the page for the 50mm L lens.

Thanks!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 14, 2014)

Almost all lenses have some degree of focus shift, usually not enough to make an impact. It's not a problem with the 85L II.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Oct 14, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Almost all lenses have some degree of focus shift, usually not enough to make an impact. It's not a problem with the 85L II.



Do you think a "fixed" 50mm f/1.2 (ie: 50mm f/1.2L II) is on the way? 

The 85mm is on my list of things to get this holiday season if it's on sale. Thanks for the info.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 14, 2014)

The lens is designed for superior bokeh, any 'fix' would likely impact that design. The 50/1.2L is fairly 'young' as lenses go, I wouldn't expect a replacement soon. 

I do think we'll see a non-L 50mm with IS in the relatively near future.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 14, 2014)

The 85L / IIL both share a slight shift in DOF according to the aperture and point of focus. But with these two lenses, it's within the scope of the Depth of Field so it's rarely noticed, hardly an issue and very slight. The problem with the 50mm f1.2L is that it's focus shift is so dramatic, it's well outside the scope of the depth of field at the given aperture until f5.6 where the shift falls withing the aperture's depth of field. 
All lenses have a slight focus "wobble" at certain apertures, but most of the time it's not noticed because the shift is slight and within the depth of field.


----------



## Sharp (Oct 14, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 50/1.2L is fairly 'young' as lenses go, I wouldn't expect a replacement soon.
> 
> I do think we'll see a non-L 50mm with IS in the relatively near future.



2007 is old like a dinosaur in this digital era. I simply hope canon will, in a near future, answer the Otus 55.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 14, 2014)

Mitch.Conner said:


> Do the same focus shift related issues that make the 50mm f/1.2L "controversial" apply to the 85mm f/1.2L?
> 
> I don't see the same warnings on the rental page for the 85mm L lens (Lens Rentals) that I see on the page for the 50mm L lens.
> 
> Thanks!



No.



Sharp said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > The 50/1.2L is fairly 'young' as lenses go, I wouldn't expect a replacement soon.
> ...



Maybe for transistors, but not in the design of optics. Having said that I'll put my 2007 cameras up against anything you might have from anybody for my uses. As for optical design, the Otus is not a new design or previously unknown, it is very expensive to make because it has such a large amount of glass in it and the cost/precision equation is one all lens manufacturers make, Ziess choose to go the high end low number route without AF, Canon could easily make a $5,000 50mm f1.4, they just don't bother because they don't see the returns in it to justify making one.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 14, 2014)

Sharp said:


> 2007 is old like a dinosaur in this digital era. I simply hope canon will, in a near future, answer the Otus 55.



If 2007 is a dinosaur, I guess 1996 is primordial ooze? Shhhh...don't tell the 135mm f/2L, it might stop being such an excellent lens.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 14, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sharp said:
> 
> 
> > 2007 is old like a dinosaur in this digital era. I simply hope canon will, in a near future, answer the Otus 55.
> ...



I believe the EF 50 f1.2 is from the same family of lens design, Planar (but then most 50mm's are), as the FD 50 f1.2, which was a direct cousin of the FL 55 f1.2 which itself was a derivative of the Canon Leica screw mount 50 f1.2 from 1956. 

Coatings like the new generation Nano Coatings and glass production, particularly regarding low dispersion elements and 'moulded' aspheric elements have taken huge steps, but basic lens design, which has been understood well for a long time, really hasn't seen that many shifts. That is why so many old manual focus lenses are holding good prices for the video shooters.

Canon are known to target a 'look' from their premium lenses and will allow some complimentary aberrations to create that look rather than concentrate on pure resolution. Even lenses like the MkI and MkII 70-200 f2.8 IS have distinct differences that are deliberately engineered in, the MkI is a 'better' portrait lens as it has smoother bokeh, the MkII is the 'better' sports lens as it forgoes oof smoothness for outright resolution (and focus speed, improved IS etc).

I used to use the FD 50 f1.2 a lot, I never got on with the EF 50 f1.2 and prefer my modest EF 50 f1.4.


----------



## mwh1964 (Oct 16, 2014)

Fantastic lens at f1.2..... Regret I sold it. The F1.4 may be better above f2.8 but that is not the point with the 1.2 version.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Oct 19, 2014)

Why did Canon stop making an f/1 50?


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 19, 2014)

Mitch.Conner said:


> Why did Canon stop making an f/1 50?



There are a few ideas out there, who knows what is true.

It isn't actually a good lens, the way people moan about the 1.2 is nothing compared to the f1.0.

They only made a couple of production runs of it and stockpiled the lenses, this is not an uncommon thing, but it took years and years as the sales numbers were so low. 

It is a very expensive lens to make, not least because it sold so few, compared to an Otus, it isn't expensive, but that isn't the cost base enough Canon users move in to warrant continuing with it.

Canon made it as a loss leading 'look at we can do' type of headlining technology that is outdated.

The glass used needed now illegal amounts of lead to be used in production and a redesign was too expensive.


----------



## Khalai (Oct 19, 2014)

Mitch.Conner said:


> Why did Canon stop making an f/1 50?



Price and supposedly lead used in its glass elements...


----------



## BL (Oct 27, 2014)

Mitch.Conner said:


> Do the same focus shift related issues that make the 50mm f/1.2L "controversial" apply to the 85mm f/1.2L?
> 
> I don't see the same warnings on the rental page for the 85mm L lens (Lens Rentals) that I see on the page for the 50mm L lens.
> 
> Thanks!



I wonder if having floating elements in the 85 and none in the 50 have anything to do with it...


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 6, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sharp said:
> 
> 
> > 2007 is old like a dinosaur in this digital era. I simply hope canon will, in a near future, answer the Otus 55.
> ...



And the Otus / Sigma isn't much more complex than the 135L either. It's comparably sized and contains simular amounts of glass. So I assume Canon's drive when designing the 50L and 50 f1.4 was a size and weight reduction over the 50mm f1.0 L. lets face it, the 50mm f1.4 USM is small and light. The 50L f1.2 is comparibly small and light....the otus is actually quite big and heavy and pretty much the same size and weight of the 135L.


----------



## Hill Benson (Jan 6, 2015)

Mitch.Conner said:


> Why did Canon stop making an f/1 50?



Check out the comments at the start of this video for Kai's reasoning behind the stop of 50mm f/1.0's by Canon.

http://youtu.be/-O5rLW0zY7w


----------



## RLPhoto (Jan 6, 2015)

Mitch.Conner said:


> Do the same focus shift related issues that make the 50mm f/1.2L "controversial" apply to the 85mm f/1.2L?
> 
> I don't see the same warnings on the rental page for the 85mm L lens (Lens Rentals) that I see on the page for the 50mm L lens.
> 
> Thanks!


The 50L shift is pretty bad at the closest focusing distance at apertures f/2-f/4. It was OK to use as long as you shot wide open.

The 85LII, if it does shift, would be so minor I couldn't see it.


----------



## Nitroman (Jan 6, 2015)

I own the 50mm f1.2 L and the 85mm f1.2 L. Both lenses are awesome, but it's always hard to nail perfect focus at f1.2 due to the autofocus not being 100% accurate 100% of the time. 

Focus errors are more noticeable at wider apertures due to extremely shallow depth of field. The closer you get to your subject, the more tricky focus becomes. This is when afma (autofocus micro adjustment) is useful at a set shooting distance.

Personally, and if possible, i always shoot three similar pics with the f1.2 when using wide apertures. The af on your camera will undoubtably be more accurate and consistent than manual focus using viewfinder (without live view magnification) as the human eye is not always perfect either. The Otus is no doubt a great lens but i bet nailing perfect focus every time is a b*tch without extra special care and a soft pic is useless even with a sharp lens !  

I love the 50mm f1.2 so suggest you try it. If not, i think the 50mm f2 (?) IS will be out this year.


----------



## Maiaibing (Jan 6, 2015)

Mitch.Conner said:


> Do the same focus shift related issues that make the 50mm f/1.2L "controversial" apply to the 85mm f/1.2L?
> 
> I don't see the same warnings on the rental page for the 85mm L lens (Lens Rentals) that I see on the page for the 50mm L lens.
> 
> Thanks!



The two lens designs are different and the 85L does not suffer from focus shift accordingly.

The problem with the 50L is that it does not have a floating element to correct the focus shift. The 85L also has focus shift (as so many other lenses) but its floating element takes care of this by correcting as needed. In fact its very difficult to give any explanation to why Canon made the 50L without a floating element. I consider it a serious design flaw.

Citing bokeh does not make sense to me as many excellent lenses with great bokeh have a floating element.

I have used the 50L a lot. But it is really more than anything a portrait lens. The problem is however, that at the distance were you want to take shoulder/head portraits - you have the focus shift. This is why I never bought it myself - and never will. Note that outside this limited range the focus shift will not affect you. If you take landscapes - no problem.

There may be "work-arounds". I could not be bothered, so don't take my word for it. But some claim that using the outer focus points help. 

I always recommend people to rent the lens before buying it to avoid disappointment. When it nails the focus the picture IQ is great.


----------



## zlatko (Jan 6, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> I have used the 50L a lot. But it is really more than anything a portrait lens. The problem is however, that at the distance were you want to take shoulder/head portraits - you have the focus shift.



It's a great lens for portraits. and the focus shift is so easy to avoid. It only affects focus up close and only around f/2.8. When shooting near closest focusing distance, use f/2 or f/5.6 and there's no problem. With subjects farther away, using any aperture is OK.


----------



## Maiaibing (Jan 6, 2015)

zlatko said:


> the focus shift is so easy to avoid



Great that you are happy with the lens. For the price I'm just not as forgiving. 

Happy shooting!


----------



## zlatko (Jan 6, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > the focus shift is so easy to avoid
> ...



Yes, I'm happy with the lens because it has an exceptionally beautiful way of drawing. It was good enough for Mario Sorrenti shooting the 2012 Pirelli Calendar (NSFW) -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjjF5yQmVw4 -- He used it along with the 24-70 and a Hasselblad. It's good enough for photojournalist David Burnett and others.


----------

