Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,331   Posts: 1,537,262   Online: 1003
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025

    Anyone used the Canon 50 1.2 L on Film?

    There are tonnes of comments online about focus/softness issues with this lens used on pixel boxes. I would be interested to know the comments of anyone who has used this on a film body, such a 1 series or an eos 3, both with regard to focus, speed, image quality etc.

    Anyone here done so?

    Rgds

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Evanston, IL, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    646
    Images
    17
    I'd fatham that there isn't much of a difference between the results on a CMOS and AgBr.

  3. #3
    ben-s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    443
    Images
    11
    If anyone wants to supply me with one, I'd be more than happy to test drive it on my 1N...
    Seriously though, Have a look on flickr. there may well be something there.
    Lens caps and cable releases can become invisible at will. :D

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    Quote Originally Posted by reub2000 View Post
    I'd fatham that there isn't much of a difference between the results on a CMOS and AgBr.
    The issue is that some have commented that the lens has focus errors on some digi bodies, which has resulted in wildly varied comment on performance, esp wide open where DOF is so slim. This issue has occurred on a numer of eos lens - canon digital bodies. Some commenting are aware of the prob and some just dismiss the lens. It is hard to figure out what is focus issues and what is good/bad inherent optical performance wide open. Therefore, as I shoot film and these compatibility probs have not been widely reported to my knowledge with film bodies with any canon lenses, someone who has used one on a film body will be able to comment on what the lens is really capable of and what it would do for me on my eos 3! So come on, someone here must have put one on a canon filmd body!!??? Maybe not

    I'd also be keen to hear if these focu errors have applied to film bodies too in the case of this lens!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    258
    DoF for the 50mm 1.2L is much thinner on a film camera compared to a 1.3 or 1.6 cropped Canon digital body. I already find the DoF of the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 too thin when shot wide-open for mistakes on my EOS 3 body that shooting at 1.2 would result in too many out of focus shots.

  6. #6
    Chazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    South Bend, IN, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,849
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by film_guy View Post
    DoF for the 50mm 1.2L is much thinner on a film camera compared to a 1.3 or 1.6 cropped Canon digital body. I already find the DoF of the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 too thin when shot wide-open for mistakes on my EOS 3 body that shooting at 1.2 would result in too many out of focus shots.
    I'm probably not seeing this clearly, so help me out. Why would the same lens have greater depth of field on a digital body than on a film camera body? Granted that the digital camera may crop the 24x36mm frame of the film camera, but what does that have to do with depth of field? Thanks.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Evanston, IL, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    646
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Chazzy View Post
    I'm probably not seeing this clearly, so help me out. Why would the same lens have greater depth of field on a digital body than on a film camera body? Granted that the digital camera may crop the 24x36mm frame of the film camera, but what does that have to do with depth of field? Thanks.
    A digital user with a 1.6x crop sensor will have to take a few steps backwards to get the same subject in the frame. The larger distance between the camera and subject will result in a large depth of field.

    Therefore, as I shoot film and these compatibility probs have not been widely reported to my knowledge with film bodies with any canon lenses, someone who has used one on a film body will be able to comment on what the lens is really capable of and what it would do for me on my eos 3!
    The digital bodies use an autofocus system based on prior autofocus systems in 35mm cameras. The auto focus used in current digital cameras has been developed further from what was used in film bodies. But I hardly doubt that they have introduced anything significant. The reason that you will hear d users complain about auto focus is something known as pixel peeping. You can see a lot more detail than what you can see with an agfa loupe.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    Quote Originally Posted by reub2000 View Post
    The reason that you will hear d users complain about auto focus is something known as pixel peeping. You can see a lot more detail than what you can see with an agfa loupe.
    This issue arose with a number of Canon lenses which were well known to front or back focus with certain models of Canon camera but not with others (Canon 70-200 f4 L being one). Some had cameras and bodies sent off to be matched and were then happy, some returned the lenses. I have not heard of any issues relating to film users and I believe this is not a physical focus issue but somehow related to how the cameras actually do the electronic thingy! as for pixel peepers, some have confirmed that their cameras consistently focus perfectly with lenses ABC but rear focus by a certain amount with lenses XYZ (which all are prefect with a differnt digital model). There also seems to be consensus across the posts as to which lens/camera combos are the culprits. I have read a number of very respectible reviewers also coming to the same conculsion,a lthough I still dont understand why this is happening.

    As there are so few film shooters left, I just dont hear how people are getting on with some of these newer lenses on óld'film bodies. My 70-200 f4 is great on the film bodies I own, but I am not at all convinced it is right on my Rebel XT...it is very soft wide open and well outside of 'normal'softeness expected wide open bearing in mind this lens is very, very sharp wide open (I spose it is an F4 rather than 2.8).

    as the above issues could be far worse with a very, very fast lens, I would want to hear from a film user (or shoot some test film) before even considering such a lens (although I doubt I can afford one any time soon!)

    Rgds

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Evanston, IL, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    646
    Images
    17
    It's a very expensive lens. I wonder how many people own it in total, let alone own both the lens and an EOS 3 and wish to test it.

    Since the 1D(S) series uses an autofocus system based off of the one in the EOS 3, it might be that any issues are shared. This is just a guess and I know nothing.

  10. #10
    tony lockerbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Bega N.S.W. Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,307
    Images
    373
    Hi Tom, I regularly use my Fd 1.2L on my F1 or FTb and can confirm that it is a superb lens at any aperture. Also very compact for a lens of this speed. I can't comment on it's performance when attached to an EOS body though and I guess that the new version costs an arm and a leg, I only had to give up one arm for the FD version!
    Tony

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin