- This topic is empty.
The merit of very fast lenses?
-
Canon recently announced a 50mm f1.2 L USM at a price of $1600. I would really have to question the added value of that lens over its cheaper brother the 50mm f1.4 USM for around ?340. Ok i know that the L signature gives you better build quality, it has a better focussing motor and it is faster to the tune of f1.4-f1.2 (not sure what percentage of a stop that is) but can this price really be justified. I see this also in other focal lengths, 85mm for example. Can anyone out there justify this or is this Canon marketing at its usual tricks.
It really depends on what you field is. If you are taking pictures in any indoor sport you would appreciate even the drop from f1.4 to f1.2.
KeithJack wrote:
It really depends on what you field is. If you are taking pictures in any indoor sport you would appreciate even the drop from f1.4 to f1.2.
So are we really talking about the thin line between Professional and Amateur and maybe the less cost concientiousness (is that a word) of the Professional arena?
In a way, these things are just expensive Canon advertising. Yes, a 50mm f/1.2, if you can afford it, will do things an f/1.4 won’t. It’ll suck more light where there isn’t any, it’ll blur out more of the background, and do it in a more aesthetically pleasing way, but at that price they’re not making these things to sell in truckloads. They’re doing it to give the two fingers to Nikon and Leica and say “Beat that!” (although of course they already make similar products). And to give Canon owners something to aspire to and feel warm and fuzzy about.
Focussing with ultrafast lenses is tricky. You will have to compose and focus using your AF points carefully (focussing on the centre spot and recomposing is a no-no, you’ll be off when your depth of field is in the range of millimetres). Even then, you may often have to make fine adjustments manually. Even then, not every shot will be a keeper. Portraits will often show one eye in focus and one out, which is fine if that’s what you want, but could be annoying if you think you’ve held the whole head in focus from the finder or LCD view.
The f/1.2 Ls are actually not renowned for fast focus motors. I think it’s because they’re lower geared than standard lenses to try and make up accuracy. They’re certainly reckoned to be more useful for static subjects than fast moving ones. I doubt you’ll be seeing many newspaper guys with these, although I’m sure pro studio photographers and rich amateurs will love them.
You mean you really wouldn’t pay all that money for an extra half stop of light? Tut, tut tut… :D
I certainly wouldnt, it’s just that sometimes the difference is that half a stop between a picture and not. True also about the Canon marketing dept giving the 2 fingers to all the others. I have 2 lenses and both are fixed f2.8, it helps to have it when you need it.
I got the sigma 1.4 lens about a year ago ,the autofocus doesn’t always work and when your using 1.4 the dept of field is so small it’s almost impossible to manually focus (doesn’t always focus on the right spot) in low light.
I’d say the 1.2 focuses automatically no problem ,in lower light condition than the 1.4 I have and I can shoot in almost darkness.The lens is ?1292 at ac-foto so I don’t know where the 1600 Dollars is coming from.
_brian_ wrote:
The lens is ?1292 at ac-foto so I don’t know where the 1600 Dollars is coming from.
From the US :?: It’s unusual to see the prices so similar between the two continents (USD1600=?1244.62)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
