![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Here's an example of the 50/1.4 on a portrait aspect photo http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...reedompark.jpg |
Quote:
The 50 1.8 is great for the price but it doesn't have a standard focus ring (cannot use it with my follow focus gears). The 50 1.4 has a zoom ring but feels a bit sloppy. The 1.2 offers better IQ and incredible bokeh, not to mention the great dampening on the focus. Here are some video stills from a recent wedding I shot with the 50 1.2L: http://www.msprotege.com/members/Laz...5/grungo01.jpg http://www.msprotege.com/members/Laz...5/grungo02.jpg http://www.msprotege.com/members/Laz...5/grungo03.jpg http://www.msprotege.com/members/Laz...5/grungo04.jpg http://www.msprotege.com/members/Laz...5/grungo05.jpg http://www.msprotege.com/members/Laz...5/grungo06.jpg |
Greater than wonderful!!! ;-DD
|
Glen,
The stills from the video footage look great. How often do you find yourself shooting video at 1.2? It seems like getting the focus right would be difficult. I have only had the chance to use the camera at 1 wedding so far. I was able to get the camera about two weeks ago. I don't even think I've taken pictures with all of the lenses I have so far. My main concern is about pulling focus. I have a Varizoom 7" monitor that I plan on attaching to my rails for now. Its only 800x480, but I think it will do the trick. I was told that while you are recording, the camera outputs SD video, so anything higher wouldn't matter. I was able to pick up a used 24mm 1.4 yesterday and from your pics, I'll probably go ahead and get the 50mm 1.2. I really appreciate all the help on this forum! |
I own the 50mm 1.4 lens. In all honesty, if you're deciding whether or not to buy the 1.4, or 1.2, go with the 1.2. You might as well go all out. The 1.4 is such a great lens. Probably the best feature about the 5fmii is the ability to create a super, super shallow depth of field that filmmakers covet, and been trying to create using 35mm adapters for so long... so yeah, man... go with the 1.2 and get that shallow depth of field going. The 1.2 is gonna be my next purchase. what's an extra 600 bucks or so? it'll make itself back in no time.
|
Quote:
|
"Here are some video stills from a recent wedding I shot with the 50 1.2L"
It's hard to believe those are video stills. HDV is useless for video stills but these look nice and they are downsampled. I know 1080p stills are not suitable for print, but who prints anymore?. I think 2 megapixel stills from 5DII video can make great digital snapshots that might even stand the test of time even though computer monitors will likely increase in resolution tremendously in the next several years. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Going from F1.4 to F1.2 is a half stop i.e. 50% more light is let through. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Using 50mm and f1.4 the dof for a 10 foot distance is 1 foot. Changing it to f 1.2 changes the DOF to 0.86 feet. No one will notice that. |
I decided to buy the 50mm 1.2 and I was able to use it yesterday. I have to say that it is awesome in low light. The dof at 1.2 is pretty narrow though. It seems like a trade off that I'm willing to deal with though.
I love using the 5D, but my only problem right now is pulling focus (with any lens). The focus looks good on the camera, but later it isn't as sharp as I had thought. I have the Zacuto Z-finder coming in August, but I'm considering buying a small LCD to attach to the rig. I have an older Varizoom 7" (840x400), but it isn't that sharp. I was looking at a smaller Ikan monitor instead. |
Quote:
tom. |
1.2 alllll the way.It's my absolute favorite lens.I've owned the 1.4 version and it's not even close.The 1.2 is tack sharp wide open and you can pretty much shoot in the dark.....seriously:)
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:09 PM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network