Customer Reviews

Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras

5 star:		(64)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The reviews of the 50mm f/1.2L are useless. All you hear is "Spend your money on the 35L or 85L instead" or "the focusing issues make this lens unuseable". But something makes me think that people are just writing reviews based on what other people have said without actually ever using the product.

If you ever want to shoot snapshots of downtown without a flash at midnight WHILE walking, this is the lens to have. I'm so in love with this lens.

Pros:
* It's completely silent. Quieter than the f/1.4
* It has no problems focusing in the dark
* It's highly useable at f1.2
* It's sharper than the f/1.4
* Colors are more saturated than the f/1.4
* Images taken with this lens have higher contrast than the f/1.4
* It makes the f/1.4 feel like a hunk of plastic
* It comes with a hood

Cons:
* It costs 4 times more than the f/1.4
* It costs 18 times more than the f/1.8

Pros:
* You can comfortably shoot under conditions that would make the f/1.4 nervous.
* Produces a much higher yield of useable photos
* Aesthetically, it's the coolest looking lens I own!

For those who are concerned about the "back focusing" issue, I will let you know that I haven't experienced any backfocusing at all. I've let others shoot with it, wide open, within low-light environments and even the non-photographers were able to focus/shoot accurately.

This is my review from my non-scientific, real-world, situational testing.

I am not a professional photographer, or make living with taking pictures. I am just a person who loves to take pictures & enjoys good pictures. And, I know how expensive this lens is, and YES, I am very aware of "Back Focusing" issue with this lens that others worry. I have been using this lens for 3 weeks now, and have been experiencing good & bad about this lens. (I believe "back focusing" issue was way too much inflated.) I have EOS 5D, and wanted to take full advantage of FF factor, and this was why I took a plunge instead of getting acclaimed 35MM or 85MM.

Good:
Picture quality - from f1.2 thru f2.8, the lens works superbly. AF is fast & faster compared to 50mm 1.4. Above f2.8, the pictures become a touch soft, but it exceeded my expectation. In low light condition, this lens is virtually unbeatable.
Weight & Feel - Anoth factor that sold me to this lens is its overall feel. Very balanced & well weighted. And, its build quality is good.

Bad:
Back Focus - Yes, it does back focus in very (very) close distance. Within 20 inches, you may experience back focusing more than half of the time. (Others say within 30 inches or so, but I never experienced more than 20 inches far.) I asked myself how many times (in reality), I would try taking pictures within such distance.
Cost - Yes, this is expensive lens. 4 times more than very good 50mm 1.4.

I love to take portraits (especially for my new born baby) , and this was my main reason that I upgraded from 50mm 1.4 to 50mm 1.2. I would recommend this lens if you are into portraits. If you want more than what I am into, you may be disappointed. Did I make a good investment? Yes, I believe I did.

First off, in a previous life I worked as a portrait photographer. Nowadays it's more of a hobby, but I spend a significant amount of time involved in it, and have travelled to many countries specifically to take pictures. I know my way around a camera, but don't consider myself a pro.

I learned photography 'old school' in the film days; pick up a camera, put a 50mm lens on it, and shoot about 10000 pictures, then you can change lenses. Like a lot of photographers, the 50mm lens has a special place in my heart.

This still applies on the full frame 5D which I shoot with. I don't find the 50mm length useful on crop sensor bodies.

So in looking to fill this 50mm gap, over the last few years I have used the 50 1.8, the 1.4, and the 1.2. The 50 1.8 is actually pretty fantastic for the price. The focusing and build quality, along with the kinda crummy bokeh later led me to the 50 1.4 which I have been pretty happy with. The 1.4 has good bokeh, decent build quality.

What led me to try the 50 1.2 was that the 1.4 seemed to miss focus often enough (maybe 2/10 shots) that I ended up throwing away some photos that would have been quite good had it hit properly. Though the price is quite a bit steeper, I figured the 1.2 was probably going to be worth it, as I have been extremely impressed by most of the L lenses from canon.

I hate to say it, but I am pretty disappointed. I have tried 2 different copies now. Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad lens. But I ended up returning both copies soon after getting them for a few reasons. First, there's the well-known backfocus issue that I will not go into except to say, both of my copies backfocused a bit, but not so much I couldn't live with it. It was about 2-4 mm.

The second reason I returned them is that it misses focus nearly as often as the 50 1.4. And don't mistake this for operator error in a very shallow depth-of-field. My real-world shots along with tripod test shots often were out of focus for no apparent reason. Taking 3 shots without moving the camera or subject would only yield 1/3 in focus shots. (and none of my other lenses have this issue so it can't be blamed on the camera: 17-40, 24-105, 85 1.8, 70-200/2.8, 135, 100-400).

Third, and worst of all, aside from a small improvement in bokeh at 1.2, there is very little difference in most comparison shots between the 1.4 and the 1.2. I suspect that the 1.2 would hold up better in flare situations and other times, but in my real-world shooting, my 1.4 is sharper and has the same color and contrast rendition. I'm not a photojournalist in Somalia so while the build quality is nice, I don't forsee breaking my 1.4 anytime soon and if it does I can pick up 3 more backup copies for the same price as the 1.2.

I really hope Canon comes out with a 50mm that befits the L standard someday. I'll be the first to buy it and try to hide the receipt from my wife. But for now, in my opinion, it's just not in this lens.

The build quality is outstanding. The lens ends up being a bit heavier than you'd expect, as a result. The DoF is razor thin at f/1.2. The bokeh is liquid smooth, and with my 40D I can't even hear the USM focusing in AF. I included a few pics for this product.

The 72mm filter/lens size is expectedly a big step up from the 50mm f/1.4's 58mm, and matches my other lens' threading. If you are a casual photographer taking pics of your kids, the f/1.4 will do fine. You probably won't see the difference. But if you blow up and print your shots, or have occasion to sell your photos, then you will most definitely see the difference. The f/1.8 has 5 blades, the f/1.4 has 8,and the f/1.2 has 8-but those blades are curved to produce silky smooth background/foregrounds when the lens is wide open.

The damped rubber focus ring lets me change focus (even in AF) predictably as it has a good "feel" to it compared to a ring with no resistance. I have heard all the comments about back focus, but honestly I haven't seen it. I've even setup a few tests, and it looks crisp down to a subject being 13" from the lens (which is the closest the AF will work). Maybe it's the new 40D (v1.0.5) I'm using?

And the biggest surprise was how dark it can be while this thing still functions. It's now really easy to be discrete in dark rooms, now!

Anyway... find a way to buy this lens.

I toyed for months over buying this lens. I was very happy with my 50 1.4, and was leery over purchasing this lens because of various focusing issues and mixed reviews I've read. One day, however, I decided to take the plunge and am so happy that I did.

Hands down, this lens is my favorite lens and is absolutely fantastic. I've now owned this lens for 8 months and it is on my camera 90% of the time (that title was perviously held by my 35 1.4L). Using this lens at 1.2 is amazing; it allows you to really hone in on a certain subject which makes the image really strong and powerful; not to mention, delicious creamy bokeh and super sharpness. I am a wedding and senior portrait photographer and when I use 1.2 for a single subject face close-up, eyes are super sharp and colorful. Most of the time I use the lens at either 2.0 or 2.2, and images at those apertures are super colorful and sharp (much more so than the 50 1.4). With this lens, images seem to come to life and look super sharp, yet creamy and smooth at the same time. It's definitely brought my portraits up to a new level, and playing with the 1.2 this lens has is really fun!

Construction is beautiful! It's solid and heavy, as every L lens should be. I once (gasp!) dropped this lens VERY hard on concrete while trying (and apparently failing) to do a quick lens change. It fell face down, without a filter, and I was devastated to pick it up and inspect the damage. I was SO happy and relieved to see it survived the fall without any damages to the external structure or internal function. Believe me, I did several focus tests to make sure the focus was still accurate and nothing was "bumped" out of place for the fall, but have not noticed any changes in focusing speed, color, or sharpness since the fall 7 months ago.

I have not experienced the infamous focusing issues reported on some other reviews. I'm not sure if it was just my luck with a good copy, but it has not had any focusing issues on my 5D or 5D MK II. Focus was tack-sharp straight out of the box, and have not experienced any focusing issues since. Focus zips into place both quickly, and quietly.

Overall, this is a fantastic lens and is worth every penny. Image quality and lens durability is more than worth the price. I only wish I would have bought this lens sooner!

I'm a professional wedding and portrait photographer who has been using this lens extensively for about 3 1/2 years. Combined, I use this lens for about 70 weddings/portrait sessions per year and am intimately familiar with it's image quality and nuances.

Let me start off with the weaknesses.
- The lens loses edge sharpness on a full frame quicker than longer focal length, or slower aperture lenses. Don't even think about shooting a full width group shot at anything faster than F2.0.
- Purple fringing will be apparent when shooting at large apertures under harsh lighting conditions. This is even more true at longer subject distances. Shooting that backlit portrait subject at 20 feet? Expect ugly edges.
- Close up performance is relatively weak. This lens employs what's called a fixed rear element design vs a floating rear element. The fixed rear element design results in superior bokeh and background blur, yet somewhat weakens the closeup performance of the lens. At moderate to longer distances, the lens is super sharp. Near minimum focusing distance (much closer than what you would use for portraits), images are not as sharp.

And honestly, I'm struggling to come up with anything else. The whole "focus shift" issue is so overblown its hilarious. Whatever tiny effect their may be (in 3.5 years I've yet to confirm it - seriously), it is VASTLY overshadowed by the fact you're using an F1.2 lens and focus accuracy by the user and camera is critical. You absolutely cannot have sloppy technique when focusing this lens. It requires precision or you're wasting your time.

Now, for the strengths of this lens - the reason why anyone would buy it.
- Image quality below F2.0 is the best of any AF 50mm lens you can buy from any brand - period. Take that to the bank.
- Bokeh, contrast and color saturation from this lens are outstanding - far better than other Canon 50mm lenses. The bokeh is far smoother and less busy than the 50/1.4 at similar apertures. The color and contrast are also superior. In harshly backlit environments, the 50/1.2 L delivers vastly superior image quality than the other 50s.
- Build quality is top notch - typical of Canon "L" lenses. This lens has been dropped multiple times (repaired once). It's even sustained a drop that completely smashed the lens hood. To this day it focuses smoothly and is razor sharp. Believe me when I say this thing is built to last.
- Focusing is reliable. This lens requires zero microadjustment on my Canon 5dII bodies and is worlds more reliable than my Sigma 85/1.4 with accurate focusing.

So there it is. In short, you have a less than perfect lens from most objective standards. If you are looking for clinical sharpness (ie: resolution charts), go elsewhere. If you are looking to shoot at F2.8, there are better choices. If you want the best fast 50mm for Canon you can buy, this is the ticket. It's very expensive, but it's a golden goose and it will retain it's value very well over time. Right now the retail price of this lens is $300 more than when I bought it. I expect that trend to continue in the future.

Why get this lens over a 35/1.4 or 85/1.2? That's like asking why buy a screwdriver when you could buy a hammer or band saw. These are high end professional tools with very specific usages. Each focal length has a very nuanced perspective and image rendering that is unique. If you need 50mm, then a 35 or 85 won't do. FWIW, I do have a Sigma 85/1.4 (and before that a Canon 85/1.2) and while both of them are from a strictly objective standpoint sharper, I use the 50/1.2 three to four times as much as I use the 85s. The perspective is just more comfortable and natural for me. You can move closer to your subject than you can with telephotos without getting the exaggerated perspective distortion that you get with wide angle lenses. For me, 50mm is the golden focal length and this lens is the best 50 you can get.

This lens is Awesome...if you know how to use it. This is the second time I've bought this lens. I've had all versions of the 50mm, f/1.8, f/1.4 twice, and f/1.2L twice. The 1.2 version is in a class of it's own! I shoot with a 1D Mark III and had to micro adjust the lens +9. Now I can shoot wide open at f/1.2 all day long and get sharp pictures. There is no way I could do that with the f/1.4 version. Even after microadjusting it I would still get very bad focus shifts.

Manual focus on the f1.4 is very difficult due to the play on the outside focus ring. You need to turn it 1 or 2mm before the lens would actually focus. Not with the f1.2 version. When you turn the focus ring it will react instantly, no lag. It's a pleasure to manual focus.

I have a 24-70mm f/2.8L, 17-40mm f/4L, and 70-200mm f/2.8L IS. They are now collecting dust on my desk. The 50mm has not left my Mark III since I calibrated it. It's so small (compared to my other lenses) I can carry it everywhere. The f/1.2 allows me to shoot pretty much anywhere I want so I don't even need to carry a flash. This thing can see in the dark!

So if you're deciding between the f/1.4 or the f/1.2, just go borrow or rent the lens and try it out first. Online reviews don't mean anything. Shoot with it for a week and you'll be hooked. Hands down my favorite lens! If I had to pick one lens to cover my weddings it would be the Canon 50mm f/1.2L!!!

I have owned/tested several copies of this lens from 2006-2008, the most recent one having a date code of UW07xx and have found that all have the infamous focus shifting issue.

Focus Shift Issue:
When shooting from within 4-5ft from the subject and closer all the way to MFD, at an angle (say 45 degrees), and between the apertures of f2-f4, even f5.6, as you stop the lens down, the focus plane shifts towards the back. For the lack of a better description the lens progressively back-focus as you stop the lens down from f1.2 to f5.6 so what was in focus at f1.2 is OOF by the time the lens is stopped down to f2-f5.6. At f8 the shift is hidden due to widening DoF. What this means is that focusing on the left eye will result in an OOF left eye and the left ear being in focus. Completely unacceptable.

Again, I stress the point that this is situation specific. When you are further away from the subject, the problem is still there, but is "hidden" by DoF limits.

But the problem is very real. Canon have known at least since May of 2007, promised to "take a look into it". Over a year later, nothing.

Good luck sending in the lens to Canon for calibration. They don't have the medicine for this illness! Granted my copy came back a little better than before (used to backfocus very badly and not even the Micro Adjust feature of my 1DMKIII could compensate for it). I sent mine in 3 times and grew tired of this exercise.

On the seldom occasion that the lens nails the AF, it can be as sweet as the 85L, which makes it even more frustration. So much potential...

I would recommend purchasing this lens from a place you can easily return it. If you are lucky enough to find a copy that's acceptable (again, the shift problem is inherent in the design of the lens, so you cannot completely avoid it) then hang on to it for dear life.

This lens receives a ton of negative reviews, mostly dealing with focus problems such as back focus or focus shift. However, this lens has been locked on my 5D for over a year and I have NEVER experienced any of these problems. I haven't shot a brick wall or a test chart with this thing; nonetheless, I'm very picky with my real world shots and have just been blown away by the results.

Every lens is designed for specific purposes and the 50mm f/1.2 is certainly no exception. Consequently, the negative aspects of this lens should be expected if you are familiar with ultra-fast 50mm's:
1. Significant chromatic aberration wide open. Easily fixed in post-processing.
2. Lots of vignetting wide open. No surprise here. It's beautiful for some shots, is fixable in PP for other shots.
3. Hard to focus wide open. The numerous reports of back focusing probably has to do with the limited skills of most users (myself included) or slight variations in lens/body combinations. I've never experienced this problem. The special Canon focusing screens (optimized for fast lenses) certainly help in this regard.
4. If you shoot mainly above 2.8, the much less expensive 50mm f/1.4 will likely give you great results as well. Even below 2.8, the 50mm f/1.4 is quite good.

Now, the pros:
1. If you live below f/2.8 and especially f/2.0, this lens is astounding. That's why I use prime lenses.
2. If you can nail the focus, this lens is sharp at f/1.2. I can see individual eyelashes when I nail the focus.
3. The lens is even more sharp starting f/1.4 and above.
4. Sharpness isn't everything. This lens produces out of focus areas that look like paintings. Much, much better bokeh than the 50mm f/1.4.
5. Colors are out of this world. Just a lot of work with... Post-processing becomes much easier, your results are of a higher quality.

If you are a skilled photographer who needs this lens, just go ahead and get it. The limitations are greatly exaggerated and don't inhibit the creative process much at all.

I am revising my review after ordering a second one and learning much more about these lenses.

The first one I got was soft. I sent it to Canon twice and it was still soft, so I returned it for a refund. Recently, I bought a new copy and tested it and it was also soft in certain circumstances and brutally sharp under others. I was wrong. It's not soft. The lens, in fact, is extremely sharp and renders color almost magically. The problem in 2 nutshells is: 1. spherical aberation, and 2. focus shift, which is caused by spherical aberation.

1. Spherical aberation. This lens, like almost all other lenses, isn't as sharp wide open as it is down a few stops. It is sort of sharp at f/1.2, but it is not as sharp as it is at 2.8. Anyone shooting this lens at f/1.2 is getting creamy bokeh and creamy faces as well. Don't kid yourself - you can't take razor sharp images at f/1.2 because of spherical aberation, but you can take photos where the background is SO blurred that the difference is what makes the photo. At f/1.4 I believe it is MUCH sharper than the 50mm 1.4 and it takes wonderful photos. Shoot this lens at 1.4 and you won't get winners every time, but the keepers are killer. I shoot it at f/1.4 and f/1.8 often and love the results.

2. Focus shift. This lens is aspherical but does NOT have a floating element, unlike the 35mm and 85mm L lenses. That's why this lens is smaller than the 35. Canon *could* design this lens with a floating element, but it would be bigger, heavier, more expensive, and probably would be a smart move. But they didn't. So this one has much more focus shift, while the other two have very little. Focus shift is complicated. (Lloyd Chambers explains: [...] ) The bottom line is that this is clearly the best autofocus lens you can get for shooting at 1.4 and SHOOTING THIS LENS IN THE 1.2 - 2.8 RANGE INSIDE OF ABOUT 2.5 METERS IS TRICKY!! You'll have to learn to compensate for focus shift, and still you'll throw away a lot of shots. It's a tradeoff between the focus shift of this lens vs the manual focus of a Zeiss (no focus shift). Once you are at 4.0 the focusing is back on track.

Please keep in mind that soft images do NOT mean the lens is soft. It means that focus shift causes the focal plane to go back behind where you focused, and it's dependent on APERTURE, so setting the microadjustment won't work.

Canon refuses to acknowledge focus shift, which is a bit strange. As others have noted, they could fix this in firmware by allowing the user to take test shots and dial in the back-focus at each aperture and distance, but they don't show any signs of doing that. Perhaps some clever person will hack it and we'll all be happy. Or perhaps Canon will release a II version with a floating element and then we'll all sell our I versions and buy that.

After trying a series of about 200 portrait photos with this lens under controlled conditions with a child as a subject, I got one razor-sharp keeper. The rest had too much focus shift to make the eyes sharp. Sadly, I'm returning it. I could learn how to compensate, but I prefer to wait until Canon acknowledges the problem and makes a 50mm lens with a floating element.