can I see your 50mm f1.2?

[msbarnes]

I've never had a lens faster than 50mm f1.4 but sometimes I want a speedster. It probably isn't worth the money but I feel that I have to get it out of my system...anyone have any samples that they are somewhat proud of at the f1.2 aperture?

Is focusing an f1.2 noticeably easier than f1.4? I believe it is 1/3-1/2 stop faster or something like that.

I only have an f2 lens (in SLR) and I am contemplating between an f1.4 or an f1.2 lens. I'll most likely get an f1.4 lens becaue it seems fast enough and ofcourse usually cheaper than f1.2 lenses.

 

[redisburning]

what system?

without more information my list of "would own" fast slr ~50s is short:

1. latest R-Summilux
2. 58 Rokkor 1.2
3. Contax/ZE/ZF 50/1.4 Planar
4. Nikon/Topcor 5.8 1.4

 

[j.scooter]

There is also the Minolta 50 1.2

 

[msbarnes]

50mm f1.2 in any system. I mostly want to see the effects of the DOF that can be achieved.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

I used to own the M42 screw mount Rikenon f1.2 (the one with the rear element cut away to clear the aperture coupling pin). It didn't get near to sharp until f8, then it hit refraction problems at f11. Not much use for dark conditions and little better for anything else. I was amazed to find, when I got the chance to try the f1.2 Nikkor, that the Rikenon's performance wasn't especially bad for an ultrafast lens.

I now own the Nikon 18-55mm VR zoom. At f3.5 it's sharper than I remember the Rikenon being at any aperture and the stabilisation is so good that it is effectively an f1.0 when required. Considering the price difference between a lens like the 18-55 and a speed giant, I've come to the conclusion that the superfasts are mostly fetish items.

This isn't meant to try and put you off, just by way of sharing my own experience.

 

[Rogrund]

Here's a few from the Canon RF 50/1.2 at full aperture. Leica M6, Tri-X.

 

[Rogrund]

And a few more, also wide open. Leica M2, Kodak BW400CN.

 

[Calzone]

I've never had a lens faster than 50mm f1.4 but sometimes I want a speedster. It probably isn't worth the money but I feel that I have to get it out of my system...anyone have any samples that they are somewhat proud of at the f1.2 aperture?

Is focusing an f1.2 noticeably easier than f1.4? I believe it is 1/3-1/2 stop faster or something like that.

I only have an f2 lens (in SLR) and I am contemplating between an f1.4 or an f1.2 lens. I'll most likely get an f1.4 lens becaue it seems fast enough and ofcourse usually cheaper than f1.2 lenses.

A while back I bought a Nikon Noct-Nikkor from B&H that was mispriced for $2.5K. This lens is now discontinued and features a hand ground asphercal lens and special low coma glass. The optical design is optimized for wide open and perhaps the first four F-stops, meaning that at F5.6 or F8.0 other 50's perhaps are sharper or higher performance.

Focusing is rather easy because of the added brightness provided by the speed of the lens over a slower lens, but DOF gets mighty shallow, especially the closer you close focus. At the Greenwitch Village Halloween Parade I made a head shot using the close focusing abilities of this lens, but I did not stop down enough. I focused on my subject's painted face using his eyes, but the tip of his nose is fuzzy in a bad way. Otherwise the lens is amazingly sharp with a ultra smooth out of focus that is kinda dreamy. Consider the faster lens better for focusing and with a faster focus because of the brighter VF'er, even if you never shoot wide open.

The rendering of the Noct-Nikkor is rather distict and different than a Noctilux. I find it renders like a 75 Lux (Noct-Nikkor is a 58/1.2) and does not have vignetting (light fall off in the corners) like a Noctilux wide open.

While the Noct-Nikkor does not have the light fall off in the corners, the corner sharpness falls off wide open, where a Noctilux has better corner sharpness wide open with light fall off wide open.

If you have a Canon SLR consider the new 50/1.2. A friend rates this lens as killer on a Canon 5D.

Also realize that I use my Noct-Nikkor on a F3P that has been specifically optimized for use with the Noct-Nikkor. I use a MD-4 motordrive for added weight to steady the camera; I use a Beatie Intenscreen for added VF'er brightness; I use a DK-17 magnifier for a 100% VF'er. It is an amazing rig that can perform magical things.

Cal

 

[furcafe]

I only have the Nikon 50/1.2 AiS (examples here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/nikon5012nikkorais2006/ ), but in my experience the answer is no, there isn't enough of a DoF (or brightness) difference to make a 50/1.2 noticeably easier to focus than a 50/1.4.

Is focusing an f1.2 noticeably easier than f1.4? I believe it is 1/3-1/2 stop faster or something like that.

 

[mfogiel]

I have a few not very expensive 1.2 lenses, and I find them to be useful for pushing the bokeh a bit when you need it, although I prefer the 55-60mm range for portraiture ( somehow it works better than "pure" normal - this is why Hasselblad Planar 110 works so well too.)
In terms of performance:
MC Rokkor 58/1.2 PG - a gem, and easily justifying a purchase of a dedicated Minolta body.
Pentax 50/1.2 - good performer.
Olympus 55/1.2 - OK wide open, nice closed down.
Nikkor 55/1.2 - a bit of a dog wide open, particularly in the corners, but has its charm in portraiture.
You will also find Nikkor 58/1.4 ( a bit rare) Rokkor 58/1.4 ( very inexpensive), and Pentax 55/1.8 (cheap).
In terms of pure best bang for the buck, the choice has to be Pentax M 50/1.4.

MC Rokkor PG 58/1.2 wide open


201211501 by mfogiel, on Flickr
and at f 2.0


201213725 by mfogiel, on Flickr

Nikkor 55/1.2 wide open


201213102 by mfogiel, on Flickr


201211726 by mfogiel, on Flickr

Olympus 55/1.2 stopped down

20130208 by mfogiel, on Flickr

 

[YYV_146]

It's not going to be much. Half a stop of dof, much less than the jump to a 85mm f1.4.

Maybe the Canon 50 f0.95 or Nokton 50 f1.1? Both aren't perfect lenses, but if razor-thin dof is the main concern...

 

[GaryLH]

If we are talking about slr from the 60s to late 70s, everyone seemed to have a 1.2 around
- Minolta
- Canon
- Nikon
- Konica
- Olympus

The early ones were 56-58 focal lengths, later on they went to now more traditional 50..

W/ more light they tend to be easier to focus but also a 58 was also a help there as well given the dimmer focusing screen early on.

Gary

 

[Nokton48]

58mm F1.2 MC Rokkor on my Minolta XK.

58mm F1.2 MC Rokkor on my Minolta XK.

I would like to second the 58mm F1.2 MC Rokkor. It is rather a cult lens, even has it's own Flikr user page!


Here it is on my Minolta XK body.

Pix samples here: http://www.flickr.com/groups/805805@N25/

I got mine to replace my 50mm F1.2 Canon LTM, which I sold. The Rokkor is a better lens IMO.

 

[ferider]

I've tried several, and the only one I kept is the Nikkor-S 55/1.2, that I AI'ed myself. Big lens, but I love its character ....

In the real world I find 50/1.4 plenty fast, and - with respect to focusing ease and low light abilities - prefer an M3 + 50/1.4 over any other fast 50 + camera combo, including the different SLRs I used.

Roland.

 

[Calzone]

BTW a Beattie Screen with F1.2 is mucho bright VF'er, but realize that there is a loss of contrast that removes some of that snap.

I find that the Beattie Intenscreen works great with the Noct-Nikkor, but works poorly with wides. Seems to prefer longer lenses.

Cal

 

[John Hermanson]

what system?

without more information my list of "would own" fast slr ~50s is short:

1. latest R-Summilux
2. 58 Rokkor 1.2
3. Contax/ZE/ZF 50/1.4 Planar
4. Nikon/Topcor 5.8 1.4

And Olympus Zuiko 55mm f1.2 and 50mm f1.2

of those 2 the 50mm is stellar!

John

 

[collum]

Nikon 50mm 1.2

 

[ChrisN]

Here's one from the Pentax 50mm f/1.2, wide open. I've cropped this for width. The lens is delightfully soft wide open, and sharpens up nicely by f/4.


Patience by Another Chris, on Flickr

 

[raid]

I have a Canon 50/1.2L that I like using. It is small, using 52mm filters. The Pentax SMC 50/1.4 is also a great lens.

 

[redisburning]

most of the later f1.2 lenses (Olympus, Minolta, Nikon 50s [NOT 58s]) have reasonable center resolution wide open. enough to make up for the lower contrast with photoshop, for certain.

you have to really want to use it in the <f2 range though, the two sharpest 50mm SLR lenses at f2 afaik are the Zeiss 50/2 MP and the Zuiko 50/2 Auto-Macro. I own the latter it's definitely better than the Rokkor I owned at f2 and my copy of that lens was certainly in the top half of copies Ive seen.

the contax 50/1.4 runs about 300 dollars for a decent used copy. I think you will find it to be the best buy in this space unless you can pony up for the e60 summilux. good character from f1.4-f4, immense resolution starting at about f2.2, and designed less for terminal resolution than for overall gestalt (if you want the opposite, you can get the f1.7 planar). I think either of those are a better option than the super speed lenses.