OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
I've just bought a Canon 50mm 1.2, though not yet taken delivery. These appear to be fairly contentious lenses from the research that I've done so I'm hoping that I get lucky and it fulfills what I want from it. Namely, to be an extremely cheap stand-in for a Noctilux/Hexanon that I can bash around and generally abuse, as I end up doing with most of my kit.
My first RF 50mm lens was the Canon 1.8 which I still have and is a great little lens, though I then bought the CZ f/2 Planar as a replacement. Both lenses still get used pretty much daily on different bodies but I fancied something that I could use either simply for effect or for low light shooting which I am starting to do more and more ( again, on a very low budget.)
I don't use anything over a 50mm so big lenses aren't something I'm used to on RF cameras. I also don't tend to shoot for pretty effects and until recently most of my pictures were taken with either fast film or in relatively good conditions. As such a Nocti or Hexanon would, in my eyes have been an expensive impulse purchase that may have proved costly if I discover that I don't get enough out of this type of lens.
I suppose the question in the title of this thread is less about whether I've done the right thing as thats irrelevant now, but whether you guys/girls out there that do own it genuinely find that little extra half stop or so vital or whether this is really a lens for getting some good looking images when wide open ( again, on a budget and not compared to the other two more expensive lenses.)
As I said at the start of my post, I know this can turn into a heated debate between owners of different lenses and I'm not trolling so please keep this to opinions on the Canon 1.2 without bringing the other two into it....if only because until I know whether this whole super wide open stuff is for me I certainly won't be shelling out that kind of money regardless of how good they may be deemed.
Thanks
My first RF 50mm lens was the Canon 1.8 which I still have and is a great little lens, though I then bought the CZ f/2 Planar as a replacement. Both lenses still get used pretty much daily on different bodies but I fancied something that I could use either simply for effect or for low light shooting which I am starting to do more and more ( again, on a very low budget.)
I don't use anything over a 50mm so big lenses aren't something I'm used to on RF cameras. I also don't tend to shoot for pretty effects and until recently most of my pictures were taken with either fast film or in relatively good conditions. As such a Nocti or Hexanon would, in my eyes have been an expensive impulse purchase that may have proved costly if I discover that I don't get enough out of this type of lens.
I suppose the question in the title of this thread is less about whether I've done the right thing as thats irrelevant now, but whether you guys/girls out there that do own it genuinely find that little extra half stop or so vital or whether this is really a lens for getting some good looking images when wide open ( again, on a budget and not compared to the other two more expensive lenses.)
As I said at the start of my post, I know this can turn into a heated debate between owners of different lenses and I'm not trolling so please keep this to opinions on the Canon 1.2 without bringing the other two into it....if only because until I know whether this whole super wide open stuff is for me I certainly won't be shelling out that kind of money regardless of how good they may be deemed.
Thanks
