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

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

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!

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.

Bought from Amazon and it came soft. Couldn't focus with my 1DS Mk III, even at higher f-stops. So I sent it to Canon and it came back STILL soft below f4! I checked it with a 5D body and it was soft below f4. I called Canon and they said send it in, and they will bring it up to factory spec. I finally got it back from canon - more than 30 days after ordering - and the lens is only sharp at f1.8 and higher. Below that, it is UNACCEPTABLY soft for a lens that costs this much. I have tried various AF point configurations and used a flat dollar-bill test, and at f1.8 the lens is nice and sharp, but below that it's no longer an L lens. I asked Amazon for a full refund and they agreed, as I had spent most of the time waiting for it to come back from Canon. I don't know if it was this particular copy, but Canon claims they brought it up to full factory spec.

Moral: Test your lenses when you get them, and act in the first 30 days if you need to.

I spent weeks reading all of the reports about the focus problems with this lens. I still went ahead and bought it in September 2007. On my 30D, I immediately experienced the focus problems, but I knew what to look for so I didn't spend much time experimenting. Rather than sending it back and messing with the "I got a defective, bad copy" claims, I decided to send it right to Canon, days after I bought it. I didn't want to give up on it - I wanted this lens, and I wanted it to work right. Canon (Irvine) confirmed my claim that it "mis-focused" (I still don't understand that "backfocus" means). This was very gratifying, and I couldn't wait to get it back. After a seven-day turn around, and about $20 for shipping/insurance, I got the lens back, and I mean the lens I wanted from the beginning. I now have every confidence that my lens works how it's supposed to, but I still need to be careful about depth of field. I still get mis-focused pictures from time to time, but I know it's user error, not lens error. I believe the autofocus works well on my XTi and 30D, but I don't think these cameras are able to "nail it" when I pick a different focus point and shoot wider than f/2. I may not understand this correctly, but I am confident when I use the center focus point, and hopeful on the rest. I'm getting a 5D tomorrow, and I can't wait. In my opinion, the focal length of this lens on a crop camera is too long, narrow and tight. I bought this lens for my future full-frame camera. I'm expecting the auto focus accuracy to be even better, more accurate; even with various focus points selected. I hope I'm right and I hear that I may need different focus screens for the 5D for wider apertures.
If you want this lens, don't give up on it. Send yours to Canon for service, with a clear letter about the problem, and get it right. It was well worth it to me. I love this lens. It's my favorite.