The OP can't stand the slow af on his mamiya so he won't like the con tax system either although I rarely us the AF on mine.
Originally Posted by TimmyMac
The con tax 645 is fairly beastly also but handles well. Lenses are exceptional.
I have a 1V, 1N, and had a 3.
If I were going for a canon portrait rig I would say the 85L over the 50L but them we have those pesky slower af issues with the 85L.
Any super fast lens is gaining to present compromise.
If you can handle a 135 fl the Canon 135L is outstanding even at f/2.
I just opted for the 135L but will inevitably get an 85L when I win some money somewhere.
Something else to bear in mind if you've been a user of Nikon AF cameras, is that Canon's control layout is different from Nikon's. Canon's control wheels, for example, are vertical while Nikon's are horizontal. I've used both systems a fair amount and much prefer the Canon layout. Your preferences may be different, of course. The issue is that if you do have strong preferences, it can be awkward to own both types and need to keep switching from one to the other, especially if your work depends on quick and intuitive control adjustment in fast-changing situations.
There is virtually no portrait situation that warrants a 1V and a 1.2L lens. The 1V was designed mainly as a superb speed machine with up to 10fps shooting with the appropriate grip/battery combination. I have currently or have used the 1, 1N, 1V, and EOS 3 and they are all nice cameras (although my EOS 3 is currently dead) but they are simply overkill for portraits. With that kind of money I'd opt for digital and get a 5D, because with a film camera you'll end up with far more than you really need. I'd stick with the Nikon bodies you already own and look into getting some of the high end Nikon glass, a film freezer, and a boatload of film, paper and chemicals.
In life you only get one great dog, one great car, and one great woman. Pet the dog. Drive the car. Make love to the woman. Don't mix them up.
Also the wheel under the forefinger is different; Canon = shutter speeds, Nikon = Aperture values.
I really don't see much difference between the Canon 50 1.2L and the Nikon 50 1.4G, certainly not to justify the money you'll be paying, and while the 1V is an awesome camera, the F100 can certainly hold its own against it. Save your money.
And, yes, I am a life-long Canon user.
Seahawks won Superbowl XLVIII.
Next year's Superbowl is XLIX. Easier to pronounce than XLVIII. Sounds like XLAX.
I hope that doesn't mean we won't be able to stop the run...
There are many threads on the net where people favor the 85/1,2 far above the 50 for your purpose. Just noting...
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Thanks for the input!
I know the 135 or the 85 are more "classical" FL's, but i'm really not that interested in them and I would use a 50mm far more often. I owned the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 and sold it last year because in 2010 I only used it a couple times, and it had nothing to do with the optics. It just felt inappropriate most of the time for what I wanted. 85's and 135's are the lenses I rent once or twice a year, for the once or twice I need them.
I also like the suggestion of the Contax, and it's a beautiful camera don't get me wrong. But at about $3500 for a kit (if you can find one) with zero parts availability, and considering I've already got a 645AFD, 80mm f/2.8, and 4 backs..I think i'm ok. Not to mention, it still wouldn't change the fact that I'd be shooting 35mm when it gets dark anyway.
I was looking at the 1N and wasn't thrilled with its AF layout or flash system, the EOS 3 looks interesting, and if I decide to switch completely i'd get one for a backup, but 1V's are so cheap, I might as well pay an extra $100-$200 for the very best Canon can offer in 35mm. I would also feel better with something that had good weather seals and an AF system comparable to my D700. Here in Portland it rains what seems 300 days out of the year, and i've shot at weddings where I have had drinks spilled onto my gear. Damn near guaranteed a 1V would be OK, a 1N probably, a 3..not sure.
I'll take the suggestion to rent, for sure. Pro Photo here has both the 1V and the 50L available and might pick it up tomorrow to play around with. I'll report what I think about it and will post images if I think they're any good
I'm sure it sounds Overkill.. and I know for "technically good" portraiture, you should never shoot 50mm let alone at f/1.2..but I don't want "technically good". That's why i'm not shooting weddings/portraits digitally unless necessary. I want soft, bright, warm, organic. I shoot wide open just about 90% of the time when shooting people and am really interested in a Camera/Lens combination that will let me shoot Ektar 100 or 400h in most situations without a tripod or a flash. The Mamiya can't do it, The Nikon can get damn close.
As much as I would like to use the Nikon 50mm f/1.2, the Canon 1.2L is optically much stronger, my MF skills suck, and (I know this is retarded) but I can't show up to a wedding with a manual focus camera like an FE/F3 and not expect to be second guessed by the attendees. You can't just act the part, you have to look it too. Using equipment designed 30-40 years ago does not come off as professional to the layman. Even though all of us on here know better, joe-blow can't tell the difference between an FA and a disposable :\
The appeal of the 1V + 50L is a lens that has gorgeous rendering for a 50mm, and a camera body that can reliably support f/1.2 in fading light, all the while I don't have to worry about anything breaking while I work it. The F100, as great of a body as it is, can get iffy in darker situations in regards to metering and AF and i've already worn one out from use.
I'll rent the combination for sure this week and i'll let you all know what's up, again THANK YOU for your opinions, I love it!!!!
I might be selling my 1vhs in the very near future. Comes with charger and 2 nicad batteries. Also have st-e2 and 3 430ex speedlites...
Go all out and get the 50mm f/1.0L instead
Also, if you aren't a prime insister (if that's a word), I have loved my 70-200 for portrait work. It's in fact the ONLY Canon lens I have left (and in turn the only auto focus as well).
While the other options are very very good (3 and 1N), I agree with you. If you've got the extra $200 or so, go for the 1V.
Originally Posted by F/1.4