There are several conflicts here.
One is 'love/hate'.
Plenty neither love nor hate the lens; they regard it (as I do) as relatively inexpensive, quite fun, but deserving neither exaggerated praise nor exaggerated contempt. But those whose opinions are violently polarized are inclined to place the middle-of-the-read brigade in the opposite camp. If someone declares it less than perfect, its uncritical fans accuse them hating it. If someone else declares it as better than worthless, they run a (rather smaller) chance of being accused of overrating it.
The second is post-processing. Yes, you can get a lot more out of any lens with post-processing. So? that doesn't alter the fact that some lenses need a lot of post processing, while some need little or none.
The third is that there are enough people who do find it soft and flary -- even with beautifully cleaned or apparently flawless examples -- that there are two possibilities. Either there is vastly more sample-to-sample variation than seems reasonable in a lens made by a manufacturer of Canon's calibre, or different yardsticks are being used. It's not too bad for a very fast lens, but it's never going to be in the class of a good f/2 or even f/1.5.
The fourth lies in web comparisons, as I have said before. A good picture is a good picture, whether it's on a monitor or an original print, just as a good piece of music is a good piece of music whether it's heard live or on a high-end hi-fi or on a tinny wireless. I'm just not going to make many judgements on recording quality if I'm using a monitor or a $15 Walkman.
The fifth is well illustrated by the title of the thread. A story from a friend of mine, a very high-ranking Tibetan incarnate lama:
Two western nuns came to him and said, very respectfully, hands folded, "Rinpoche [a term of respect for incarnate lamas], we feel we're not getting the respect that is due to us as nuns."
"Ah," he said, "Did you become nuns to study the Dharma [the body of Buddhist teaching] or to gain respect?"
"Oh, to study the Dharma, of course, Rinpoche," they both said.
He speaks very good English, so his reply was, "WELL F*** OFF THEN!"
You don't buy a 50/1.2 Canon to gain respect; you buy it to take pictures. If it takes pictures you like, that's great. If others like them too, that's even better.
Look at others' pictures -- probably on the web, because that's one of the few places you'll find people making a real point of using these lenses -- and if they look like the sort of pictures you'd like to take, then by all means buy a Canon 50/1.2. But if it doesn't turn out quite as you had hoped, especially at full aperture; well, bear in mind what others said about its performance wide open...
Cheers,
Roger
