this is my absolute favorite lens

---

Product Description

The EF 50mm f/1.2L USM is a peerless new standard lens featuring an ultra-large aperture for a narrow depth of field and soft background blur so loved by photographers everywhere. The EF 50mm f/1.2L USM is suitable for any shooting situation; its lens coating and construction are optimized to minimize the ghosting and flare that frequently occurs when lenses are used with digital cameras. This high-performance, weather-resistant lens delivers all the superb image resolution and contrast you expect in a Canon L Series Lens.

---

Product Details

• Brand: Canon
• Model: 1236B004
• Released on: 2006-12-05
• Dimensions: 6.00" h x 6.00" w x 6.00" l, 3.00 pounds

Features

• High-performance, weather-resistant standard lens
• AF with full-time manual focus
• 50mm focal length
• f1.2 maximum aperture; 72mm filter size
• UltraSonic Motor (USM)

From the Manufacturer
The EF 50mm f1.2L USM is a peerless new standard lens featuring an ultra-large aperture for a narrow depth of field and soft background blur so loved by photographers everywhere. The EF 50mm f1.2L USM is suitable for any shooting situation; its lens coating and construction are optimized to minimize the ghosting and flare that frequently occurs when lenses are used with digital cameras. This high-performance, weather-resistant lens delivers all the superb image resolution and contrast you expect in a Canon L-Series lens.

---

Customer Reviews

Solid, fast, incredible build quality.
I now own 4 "L" lenses (see below). This Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Lens is so fast, quiet, and just feels great. The quality of the images I've taken is fantastic. At 1.2 you need to focus carefully as there is virtually no depth of field. On my 40D with a 1.6 multiplication factor this lens has a 35mm equivalent of 80mm which makes it great for head and shoulder shots. I think of this lens as a telephoto (because of the multiplication factor). Highly recommended.

Canon Digital EOS 40D
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
Canon EF 1.4X II Extender

I bought the f1.2 instead of the f1.4 and I'm happy I did!
Before buying this lens, I'd struggled between this one and the f1.4 which is so much cheaper. I'm sure a lot of other people are struggling with this decision too, so I'll address that. Take a look at any forums on the internet and you'll find the f1.4 commonly has auto focus issues - people love the lens until the autofocus suddenly stops working altogether and it costs a couple of hundred dollars to get fixed. It has happened to hundreds (or thousands) of people, a friend of mine being one of them. He recently upgraded to the f1.2L and he said although the f1.4 had previously been his favourite lens, the f1.2 was superior as it was noticeably sharper. Having also read in forums that the f1.2 was supposedly sharper at the larger apertures, which I planned to mainly shoot at, I chose the f1.2.

I also have the 28-70 mm f2.8L and 70-200mm f2.8L so I was wondering did I really need this expensive lens? After all surely there couldn't be too much difference between f2.8 and f1.2. But there is! For children photography it is the perfect lens! I love it wide open, that beautiful shallow depth of field where only the eyes are in focus and the rest drops off.

I actually don't know when I'll take it off my camera now. It's so small and light compared to my other two lenses which also makes it a treat when you're out and about. To be honest if I had purchased this lens first I probably wouldn't have purchased the other lenses and saved myself a packet, as its now my favourite lens. (BTW Americans may think this lens is expensive but you should try paying Australian prices ... $2,500 as opposed to $1,300! And our dollar is almost worth the same as yours!)

I'm glad I got this lens over the f1.4 (although the price really shouldn't be so expensive, which is the only thing I can fault about this lens). But because I'm using this lens at the widest apertures I just didn't want to take the chance that it wouldn't be sharp. Although you aren't going to get every photo at f1.2 sharp anyway cause you have to be so precise with your focusing. But if what you want it as a general lens and you're not frequently shooting at wide apertures, I'd go the cheaper f1.4, just take out an extra couple of years warranty and be aware that you may have to spend a few hundred dollars on it at some stage in the future!

I love this lens - I really think its the perfect portrait lens. If you want your photos to look better, buy this lens and shoot wide open! You will instantly appear to be a better photographer!

Hit or miss
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.