# Canon 50 f/1.2L versus Zeiss 50 MP ZE f/2



## myocyte (Jan 11, 2012)

Just wondering if people had any thoughts on the IQ of the Canon 50 f/1.2L versus the Zeiss 50 MP f/2. I currently have the Zeiss lens, but have been on the fence to add another 50 mm lens to the list of equipment. I love the IQ of the Zeiss, but there are times where I just can't manually focus quick enough. I can live with a few missed shots here and there, but having AF would be nice. I just wonder if people have any thoughts. 



5D Mark II, Canon 16-35 f/2.8L II, Canon 35mm f/1.4L, Zeiss MP50 f/2, Canon 85 f/1.2L II, Canon 70-200 f/2.8L II


----------



## JR (Jan 12, 2012)

I dont have any experience with the Zeiss 50, but I am quite happy with the 50mm 1.2L from Canon. Its AF is fast and it is a killer lens for portrait and color rendition. Do you have a few sample shots using your Zeiss 50 you could share?

If your main goal is to add AF, the 50 1.4 might be another option, at smaller aperture it can actually be sharper then the 50 1.2 in the corner, however I still prefer the 50 1.2 overall. more then 50% of all my pictures are taken with that lens.


----------



## myocyte (Jan 12, 2012)

Here are some miscellaneous pictures I took from a recent vacation.


----------



## branden (Jan 12, 2012)

I'm in the same spot -- have the Zeiss 2/50 makro-planar, but sometimes I just need auto-focus (usually around children). 

I hemmed and hawed and ended up getting the nifty fifty. For $100, it's about the same price as a filter for the Zeiss, and it's tiny and practically weightless, so I don't have gear bloat. 

I already had a great 50, so why bother wasting money on another top-of-the-line 50?


----------



## willrobb (Jan 12, 2012)

I have to say I really love my 50mm f1.2L as well. It's got good AF (I can't say it's amazing compared to other L lenses, but at f1.2 you can't ask for much more), it's built like a tank, weather proofed and the IQ is great...seriously great.

Again, here are some pics with it.


----------



## willrobb (Jan 12, 2012)

Also, from a previous posting on another thread, a few people were saying that the Sigma 50mm f1.4 is a pretty good lens. Some people say it's better than the canon 50mm f1.4, also not too far off the canon 50mm f1.2L, some even say it's better than the canon 50mm f1.2L. I think it's all very personal in what you are looking for in a lens, but if the Sigma is as good as they say it is, for the price tag it might be a good addition if you already have the 50mm Zeiss?


----------



## D.Sim (Jan 12, 2012)

Cheap alternative: Nifty Fifty.
Slightly faster, I'd go with the Sigma 1.4 over the Canon 1.4, unless Canon updates that lens (PLEASE!)...
If you can afford it though, the L is pretty awesome, can't say much about 1.2 other than... well... 1.2
These lenses all have the speed advantage over the Zeiss, and also AF...


----------



## JR (Jan 12, 2012)

myocyte said:


> Here are some miscellaneous pictures I took from a recent vacation.



Very snappy indeed! I especially like the bokeh of your dog shot. Very creamy! Zeiss does make some amazing lens. I just wish I would be better at focusing manually myself! If you look at the sample from willrob from its 50 1.2 you will see it is preatty much on par with your Zeiss. So if it fits on your budget, you would not regret this 50mm L lens!


----------



## A vd vorst (Jan 12, 2012)

Read this forum message, its on a dutch forum. Is called the battle of the fifties. It compares some 50 mm lenses.
http://gathering.tweakers.net/forum/list_messages/1452930///Battle


----------



## kennykodak (Jan 12, 2012)

what's the bottom line, in English?


----------



## bigblue1ca (Jan 12, 2012)

As best I can make out thanks to Chromes' translate feature, the article doesn't draw any hard and fast conclusions. It only presents a look at all the different types of 50mm lenses and examples of their vignetting, sharpness, colour rendering, bokeh, highlight bokeh, flare, and chromatic aberration.


----------



## lang (Jan 12, 2012)

Indeed, there is no conclusion, which is done deliberately as the topic starters are from the opinion that the "perfect" lens differs per person (e.g. preference to colour, bokeh, flares, prices, weight, contrast etc.)


----------



## kolossal (Jan 12, 2012)

The 1.2L is a very fun lens to use. I find it reliable, fast and well designed. I wouldn't go for the Sigma if I were you. I had one and sold it after a couple of months to get the 1.2. It was unreliable at best, the AF wasn't precise at all and it was big and heavy. 

I do agree that a Nifty Fifty would be a great alternative. It will never be on par with your Zeiss but for the few times you actually need AF, it will work. But, if you have the budget and can spring all that dought for another 50mm with AF, go for the 1.2L, it's a great lens.


----------



## myocyte (Jan 13, 2012)

Thanks guys! My wife is a very big fan of the nifty-fifty based on financial reasons, and I'm a fan of the f/1.2L for obvious other reasons. I'll sleep on this one for awhile since I'm in no rush to pick up another lens, and I'm waiting to see if Canon announces anything else over the next couple of months.


----------



## lunar (Jan 16, 2012)

comparing canon 50 L vs zeiss 50MP is like comparing nissan gtr vs MB s-class sedans

different purposes and features


want 50 L MK2


----------



## akiskev (Jan 16, 2012)

lunar said:


> comparing canon 50 L vs zeiss 50MP is like comparing nissan gtr vs MB s-class sedans



Easy. Zeiss 50 + GTR for me.


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 16, 2012)

myocyte said:


> Here are some miscellaneous pictures I took from a recent vacation.



The 50L could easily take those. Maybe even the 50 1.4.

The thing is is doesn't matter how sharp the lens if, or how it renders colour but how you apply it to an image. AF always wins for me unless you are on a tripod shooting landscapes with a TS-E lens.


----------



## sanjosedave (Jan 17, 2012)

How is the Canon 50 different from the Zeiss 50?


----------



## branden (Jan 17, 2012)

The Canon auto-focuses and is a stop faster. The Zeiss can focus at 24cm whereas the Canon can only focus as close as 45cm. The focus plane on the Zeiss is flat, the Canon has a slightly curved field. And they look a lot different.


----------

