Canon 50mm 1.2

Mark Hahn · July 1st, 2009, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xavier Plagaro

Is there a way to correct this distortions in post??

A couple of weeks ago I saw some pictures taken with a digital Leica and a Leica lens, there was one of a bed and the bed was so fully undistorted that I couldn't believe it!!! Pretty sad thing to be touched by! ;-DD

The camera built-in correction for stills is not used for video. However I assume any good pp software can fix it.

Jon Fairhurst · July 1st, 2009, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xavier Plagaro

Is there a way to correct this distortions in post??

Correcting barrel distortion for photos isn't bad, but would be time consuming in post for video. The exact method depends on the NLE.

Here's an example of the 50/1.4 on a portrait aspect photo

Glen Elliott · July 1st, 2009, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad Dyle

Is this lens overkill for video? I can get the regular 50mm 1.4 less than $500, but I wanted some opinions first.

I've owned all the Canon 50mm primes. First the 50mm 1.8, then the 1.4, then I returned that for the 1.2. I love, Love, LOVE the 50 1.2. My favorite lens by far!

The 50 1.8 is great for the price but it doesn't have a standard focus ring (cannot use it with my follow focus gears). The 50 1.4 has a zoom ring but feels a bit sloppy. The 1.2 offers better IQ and incredible bokeh, not to mention the great dampening on the focus.

Here are some video stills from a recent wedding I shot with the 50 1.2L:

Xavier Plagaro · July 2nd, 2009, 05:29 AM

Greater than wonderful!!! ;-DD

Chad Dyle · July 2nd, 2009, 05:33 AM

Glen,

The stills from the video footage look great. How often do you find yourself shooting video at 1.2? It seems like getting the focus right would be difficult.
I have only had the chance to use the camera at 1 wedding so far. I was able to get the camera about two weeks ago. I don't even think I've taken pictures with all of the lenses I have so far.
My main concern is about pulling focus. I have a Varizoom 7" monitor that I plan on attaching to my rails for now. Its only 800x480, but I think it will do the trick. I was told that while you are recording, the camera outputs SD video, so anything higher wouldn't matter.
I was able to pick up a used 24mm 1.4 yesterday and from your pics, I'll probably go ahead and get the 50mm 1.2. I really appreciate all the help on this forum!

Douglas Joseph · July 2nd, 2009, 01:25 PM

I own the 50mm 1.4 lens. In all honesty, if you're deciding whether or not to buy the 1.4, or 1.2, go with the 1.2. You might as well go all out. The 1.4 is such a great lens. Probably the best feature about the 5fmii is the ability to create a super, super shallow depth of field that filmmakers covet, and been trying to create using 35mm adapters for so long... so yeah, man... go with the 1.2 and get that shallow depth of field going. The 1.2 is gonna be my next purchase. what's an extra 600 bucks or so? it'll make itself back in no time.

Mark Hahn · July 2nd, 2009, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Douglas Joseph

I own the 50mm 1.4 lens. In all honesty, if you're deciding whether or not to buy the 1.4, or 1.2, go with the 1.2. You might as well go all out. The 1.4 is such a great lens. Probably the best feature about the 5fmii is the ability to create a super, super shallow depth of field that filmmakers covet, and been trying to create using 35mm adapters for so long... so yeah, man... go with the 1.2 and get that shallow depth of field going. The 1.2 is gonna be my next purchase. what's an extra 600 bucks or so? it'll make itself back in no time.

Can you actually see the difference? 1.2 and 1.4 are a small fraction of a stop apart.

Marcus Marchesseault · July 2nd, 2009, 01:42 PM

"Here are some video stills from a recent wedding I shot with the 50 1.2L"

It's hard to believe those are video stills. HDV is useless for video stills but these look nice and they are downsampled. I know 1080p stills are not suitable for print, but who prints anymore?. I think 2 megapixel stills from 5DII video can make great digital snapshots that might even stand the test of time even though computer monitors will likely increase in resolution tremendously in the next several years.

Mark Hahn · July 2nd, 2009, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen Elliott

I've owned all the Canon 50mm primes. First the 50mm 1.8, then the 1.4, then I returned that for the 1.2. I love, Love, LOVE the 50 1.2. My favorite lens by far!

The 50 1.8 is great for the price but it doesn't have a standard focus ring (cannot use it with my follow focus gears). The 50 1.4 has a zoom ring but feels a bit sloppy. The 1.2 offers better IQ and incredible bokeh, not to mention the great dampening on the focus.

Here are some video stills from a recent wedding I shot with the 50 1.2L:

What shutter speed were you using? There is very little motion blur, much less than you'd see with 1/50 or other normal video.

Nigel Barker · July 3rd, 2009, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Hahn

Can you actually see the difference? 1.2 and 1.4 are a small fraction of a stop apart.

No they are not just a small fraction apart. F-stops are a logarithmic scale with each full stop representing a halving (increasing F number) or doubling (decreasing F number) of the light intensity from the previous stop. This is the scale in full stops - F/1, F/1.4, F/2, F/2.8, F/4, F/5.6, F/8, F/11, F/16, F/22, F/32 etc

Going from F1.4 to F1.2 is a half stop i.e. 50% more light is let through.

Evan Donn · July 3rd, 2009, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Douglas Joseph

In all honesty, if you're deciding whether or not to buy the 1.4, or 1.2, go with the 1.2. You might as well go all out.

Well, if you're really going to go all out, why stop at f/1.2? I'm sure you could track down a canon f/.95... now that's shallow DOF!

Mark Hahn · July 3rd, 2009, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

No they are not just a small fraction apart. F-stops are a logarithmic scale with each full stop representing a halving (increasing F number) or doubling (decreasing F number) of the light intensity from the previous stop. This is the scale in full stops - F/1, F/1.4, F/2, F/2.8, F/4, F/5.6, F/8, F/11, F/16, F/22, F/32 etc

Going from F1.4 to F1.2 is a half stop i.e. 50% more light is let through.

I understand that. I was wrong when I said a small fraction. It is actually somewhat less than a half stop.

Using 50mm and f1.4 the dof for a 10 foot distance is 1 foot. Changing it to f 1.2 changes the DOF to 0.86 feet. No one will notice that.

Chad Dyle · July 4th, 2009, 08:13 AM

I decided to buy the 50mm 1.2 and I was able to use it yesterday. I have to say that it is awesome in low light. The dof at 1.2 is pretty narrow though. It seems like a trade off that I'm willing to deal with though.

I love using the 5D, but my only problem right now is pulling focus (with any lens). The focus looks good on the camera, but later it isn't as sharp as I had thought. I have the Zacuto Z-finder coming in August, but I'm considering buying a small LCD to attach to the rig. I have an older Varizoom 7" (840x400), but it isn't that sharp. I was looking at a smaller Ikan monitor instead.

Tom Hardwick · July 4th, 2009, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan Mueller

Don't have any experience with the 1.2, but I do own the 1.4 and it is an amazing lens!

The original lens tests on the f/1.2 showed that it had been designed specifically to use that fast aperture, and that on stopping down the slower f/1.4 and f/1.8 performed rather better, the latter even more so. If you intend to shoot wide open, go for it. If you'd like more apertures to play with and don't mind working in 50% more light, get the f/1.4.

tom.

Ryan Morey · July 4th, 2009, 09:26 AM

1.2 alllll the way.It's my absolute favorite lens.I've owned the 1.4 version and it's not even close.The 1.2 is tack sharp wide open and you can pretty much shoot in the dark.....seriously:)

July 2nd, 2009, 05:33 AM	#20
Chad Dyle Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 410	Glen, The stills from the video footage look great. How often do you find yourself shooting video at 1.2? It seems like getting the focus right would be difficult. I have only had the chance to use the camera at 1 wedding so far. I was able to get the camera about two weeks ago. I don't even think I've taken pictures with all of the lenses I have so far. My main concern is about pulling focus. I have a Varizoom 7" monitor that I plan on attaching to my rails for now. Its only 800x480, but I think it will do the trick. I was told that while you are recording, the camera outputs SD video, so anything higher wouldn't matter. I was able to pick up a used 24mm 1.4 yesterday and from your pics, I'll probably go ahead and get the 50mm 1.2. I really appreciate all the help on this forum! __________________ www.chaddyle.com www.chaddyleproductions.com Last edited by Chad Dyle; July 2nd, 2009 at 06:04 AM.

July 2nd, 2009, 01:25 PM	#21
Douglas Joseph Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Zanesville OH Posts: 205	I own the 50mm 1.4 lens. In all honesty, if you're deciding whether or not to buy the 1.4, or 1.2, go with the 1.2. You might as well go all out. The 1.4 is such a great lens. Probably the best feature about the 5fmii is the ability to create a super, super shallow depth of field that filmmakers covet, and been trying to create using 35mm adapters for so long... so yeah, man... go with the 1.2 and get that shallow depth of field going. The 1.2 is gonna be my next purchase. what's an extra 600 bucks or so? it'll make itself back in no time. __________________ "Warriors... Come out to play..." www.importexporthd.com

July 4th, 2009, 08:13 AM	#28
Chad Dyle Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 410	I decided to buy the 50mm 1.2 and I was able to use it yesterday. I have to say that it is awesome in low light. The dof at 1.2 is pretty narrow though. It seems like a trade off that I'm willing to deal with though. I love using the 5D, but my only problem right now is pulling focus (with any lens). The focus looks good on the camera, but later it isn't as sharp as I had thought. I have the Zacuto Z-finder coming in August, but I'm considering buying a small LCD to attach to the rig. I have an older Varizoom 7" (840x400), but it isn't that sharp. I was looking at a smaller Ikan monitor instead. __________________ www.chaddyle.com www.chaddyleproductions.com

July 4th, 2009, 09:26 AM	#30
Ryan Morey Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Wildwood Crest, NJ Posts: 140	1.2 alllll the way.It's my absolute favorite lens.I've owned the 1.4 version and it's not even close.The 1.2 is tack sharp wide open and you can pretty much shoot in the dark.....seriously:) __________________ www.rhmphotography.com What you talkin bout Willis?

July 2nd, 2009, 05:29 AM	#19
Xavier Plagaro Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Rome, Italy Posts: 90	Greater than wonderful!!! ;-DD

July 2nd, 2009, 01:42 PM	#23
Marcus Marchesseault Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 1,961	"Here are some video stills from a recent wedding I shot with the 50 1.2L" It's hard to believe those are video stills. HDV is useless for video stills but these look nice and they are downsampled. I know 1080p stills are not suitable for print, but who prints anymore?. I think 2 megapixel stills from 5DII video can make great digital snapshots that might even stand the test of time even though computer monitors will likely increase in resolution tremendously in the next several years.