I split the difference on the RF mount and got the Sigma Art 50 1.4. I did comparisons and it's 99% as sharp and contrasty as the RF50 1.2 and actually focuses faster than the Canon, but it cost me 300% less than the Canon RF version. Highly recommended. Oh and the Sigma focuses 2x faster than the RF versions (both).

@apamacam4838

2 ай бұрын

@Jaquie Ohh You should try out the Sigma 50 as mentioned by 77dris. You won't regret it. I just find Canon RF 50 1.2 way overpriced for what it's offer, especially with the amount of flare it create.

@caffeinatedcameras

2 ай бұрын

The Art line is life

@charlessands3458

2 ай бұрын

The sigma lens could not have cost you 300% less than the RF lens because 100% of the RF lens is full price. 300% would mean that they gave you twice the lens's price back.

@Studiotek

2 ай бұрын

@@charlessands3458 lol I was thinking the same thing, how it was an odd way to phrase it

@John-Shutterlyphotos

2 ай бұрын

Sigma Art lenses cannot be beat!

this lens and the 85 1.2 produces soo much magic ✨

@themuzemedia

3 ай бұрын

That's the next one I'm trying!

@monkiflip15

3 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia I definitely love it soo much. I am really happy with both the rf 50 1.2 and the rf 85 1.2. Can’t wait to see your videos on them 🤩

I accidentally dropped my RF 50 F1.2L during a trip to Bangkok and had to spend $500 to get it repaired. I still believe that this lens is worth buying because of its exceptional performance. I am now eagerly waiting to see how the rumored RF 50 F1.4 compares to this magical lens.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Oh nooooooooo!!!!

@RayValdezPhotography

2 ай бұрын

i had one fall on the floor and the focus got stuck and made a weird noise. Did this happen to you?

@zenscape

2 ай бұрын

@@RayValdezPhotography Fortunately, the focus was working perfectly even after my camera fell. The B+W filter that I had installed took the impact and its glass shattered. The filter thread got twisted and as a result, Canon had to replace a few external barrel components. They also serviced the lens thoroughly to ensure it was back to its normal working condition. I hope your lens is working well now.

I did this same a few years ago on a 5D MkII with the EF50 1.8 and EF50 1.2. Sharpness was a factor, but mostly light and color was the big difference I was able to see. Cool comparison.

Thanks for your insights. I’ve shot with both and just don’t think I could ever sell/lose/forfeit/give up/or otherwise stop using the RF 1.2. It is almost magical. Plus, while bulky, it really is well balanced with bodies like the R6 II.

I bought the RF50 1.2 a couple of months ago. It's literally my favorite lens ever. Haven't taken it off the camera more than once since I got it. If I want something closer to the 85mm, I use the in camera crop factor which essentially renders an 80mm... close enough to 85 in my book without spending $2700 more to get there. 🙂

Great comparison video, thanks for sharing!

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching!

Hi jaquie ohh ~ I am check in out ~ Your next video waiting💕

I wonder if color remains the same after adjusting with gray card... Would be an interesting test...

As always, excellent content and honest comments about each! 100% agree that if it’s for social media you do not need that big lens. It’s a nice to have but not a must have. However, as you mentioned, if the images are being blown up you have to scale up your gear. Also if you have a client who wants to use just a portion (crop) of a shot, say sunglasses, and they crop out 70% of an image it will degrade in quality. Yes that has a lot to do with sensor size and megapixels as well. My advice would be that if you know your client needs “just glasses” or “just the jewelry” then take a lot more images of the items to fill the frame. Goes back to what you’ve said in the past about knowing what your client wants. But also predict their needs, right? :) Can’t wait to see your new DJI content 🤓🤓

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and for the feedback! DJI content is on the way!!!

Great video! The 50 is my preferred focal range specially when hybrid shooting.

@themuzemedia

3 ай бұрын

Thanks Marco! Yeah, it really is a magical focal length.

@gourami7

2 ай бұрын

I think I would have cried, that's a big repair bill

EF 50mm F/1.8 is known to focus a bit in front of the subject you want it to be focus on. Known problem almost with all of them. Cameras that have focus micro correction can compensate for it.

The EF Lenses that I have are for APSC and the Full Frame have the RF Lenses. That said I still use the 50mm f/1.8 Nifty Fifty and the 85mm f/1.8. Actually of the the 1.8's and I like them because of smaller size and weight. Plus great for the pocket book. Have you thought of the 100mm f/2.8 Macro or the 24-105mm f/4? Have not used the f/2.8 version yet. Cheers!

Thanks for sharing your experience in this video

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching!

Cool video. I remember a few years ago the equivalent EF 50mm F 1.0 was even going for above retail when Canon discontinued it a few years back. At the time though the trend in alot of photography was ridiculously shallow depth of field on everything. It is interesting to see what characteristics of those premium lenses are popular at different points in time. As for lens design impacting colour if you want to see how dramatic it can get try comparing the EF "nifty fifty" to a manual focus FD lens from the 70s or 80s. The old FD lens gives you really punchy colour that is almost oversaturated by most people's standards these days. The EF 50mm 1.8 has much flatter and neutral colours. I read an article years ago that Canon did that intentionally. The reasoning was that people would prefer a more neutral starting point to edit in software.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Thank you for this!!!

Interesting video and well done 🙂 I just bought my first L glass last week RF 24-70 and now have doubts if I should go for 50 1.2 instead for that extra dreamy look but I think overall zoom will be better for vacation with no need to swap lenses all the time. In the future I will add either 50/85 prime or rf 70-200 …

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Good choice! I have that lens also and it's been my work horse for years. Depending on what you shoot, the 50mm 1.2 may not be necessary. You could also experiment with some filters (like Prism FX filters) to get a dreamy look. There's nothing like a prime lens though!

We have the RF 85mm. It's our portrait lens mainly for the image compression which we find pleasing and of course the detail sharpness we need for our large prints. However, our studio space is small and we cannot get enough subject to camera distance for full length shots, so generally we take our portrait work outdoors (not so much in winter though as we live in northern Canada). That lens stays on the R5 while we keep the RF 24 - 70mm on the R for our sessions. Both lenses produce the same image tone, which is more to the magenta than the RF 50mm produces. Of course Bokeh is not the same across both of our lenses, but it's easy to match them in Lightroom or ACR so even the most discerning clients never notice. If you have the studio space, go for the RF 85mm - BIG, heavy, just like the price but potentially more rewarding for portrait work especially in low light and backlit situations.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

I have a small space too, so I only use the 50mm and the 24-70mm. I'm going to have to try the 85mm and give her a shot! Thanks!!

Hey Jaquie Ohh.. I love your videos on Instagram they are really helpful to someone just starting out. I was just wondering where you rent your lenses from??

@themuzemedia

3 ай бұрын

Hey Michelle! Thank you for watching :))) I rent from a business that's local to me or from LensRentals.com

@michelleg5185

3 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia thank you so much. I have always wondered where professional rented their lenses from, I really appreciate you so much for all the advice you share.

I just subscribed. Awesome video, thank you. I hate the 50mm 1.8, it's slow to focus and often misses focus (micro miss, like on 9:36 or 16:30, looks fine until you go to home, open photo on a bigger screen and then cry). It has great bokeh for its price, but that's all. The Sigma 50mm f/1.2 is a good choice if someone needs a really fast prime.

I love this video! shot out to the nifty fifty getting many photographers to feel confident enough to charge for their work. I can personally say I still love that little guy. Though I now shoot with only the art 85mm. But that bokeh from the little nifty I miss sometimes.

@themuzemedia

3 ай бұрын

Nifty Fifty is the VIP!!!!

I ended up picked up the RF 50 mm 1.8 its great! I messed up the trifecta pretty bad...i got some cine Lens from sirui for 700 bucks. Unfortunately they are super 35

Well, I like to add a few things from the view of an amateur. If your first camera is an RF camera than there is also an RF version of this 50mm f1.8 lens! If you switched from an EF camera there are a few RF adapters by Canon (the one shown in the video, one with a control ring and one with small filters)! I still think the 50mm 1.8 makes a great travel lens when you don't want to risk the expensive 50mm 1.2 lens! P.S.: I forgot to mention that it would be very interesting to see what an RF 50mm 1.4 will deliver and what it would cost. Perhaps this lens would be a choice for both groups amateurs and professionals alike ... There are still a lot of prime lenses missing in the Canon RF lineup compared to the EF glasses.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for this perspective!

I can’t lie, I subscribed as soon as I seen the eyes 😅. I haven’t used the 50mm 1.2 RF yet but I used to love the 50mm 1.2 EF. One of these days.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Welcome! :)))))

@izhilin

2 ай бұрын

These are two completely different lens bww. :-)

Which camera did you use ? On canons it is very important , using a r7 and on that one the nifty fifty has nearly the same bokeh as the L version on yours.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

I used the Canon EOS R

@loboptlu

2 ай бұрын

That makes the difference for the ef 50 , digic x processor has some improvements compared to the digic 8. image quality-based improvements include:[23] Improved noise-reduction processing. Sharpness-based image processing. But the r is still a great camera.

When you were comparing details in the eyes, it looked like you used images 9 and 16 instead of 10 and 16, which gives the RF the edge because that image is twice as close so its obviously going to be a lot sharper. I would be curious what 10 and 16 looked side by side for sharpness.

I have the RF nifty fifty, I was looking at the RF 24-70 you mentioned. I think you just talked me into buying it lol

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

The most versatile lens in their line up I think!

Great review! I just got the EF 50mm 1.2, I’m wondering how it would compare against the RF version

@themuzemedia

3 ай бұрын

Thank you! I'm sure it would be pretty similar in quality, and I'm guessing you'd be able to see the difference in color/hue like with the EF 1.2

@YoussefHallouly

3 ай бұрын

@@themuzemediaYeah, probably, btw nice videos, you’re really good and entertaining , keep it up :)

@themuzemedia

3 ай бұрын

@@YoussefHallouly Thanks! I appreciate it!!

@CrowPal

2 ай бұрын

If you put the EF 50mm 1.2 on an R-series camera with an adapter, you should find it performs better than on an EF DSLR due to the focusing method (higher number of tack-sharp shots). Nevertheless, the RF 50mm f/1.2 significantly outperforms it.

This was actually a really good review. Would like to see the rf85 f1.2 next. That would be great.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Will do!!

Such a great video. I would say that is a huge price difference for the amount of detail difference but I guess it depends on what the images are being used for. Highlight of this video for me is as you’re showing the inside comparison is that I can see the dog laying under the couch 👍🏾. Nice cameo

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching! LOL The pup always wants to be included in what I'm doing! Yah, you would see a bigger difference if I actually shot the RF all the way open at 1.2, but since the EF is only a 1.8, I wanted it to be a fair comparison.

@framedbydavinci

2 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia makes sense keep coming with the heat 🔥

I’m wondering from these photos in the comparison of the lenses inside your apartment before you went out had a very nice clean look which reminds me to some people who do wedding photography. Was that actually out of camera the raw file or did you use a preset or how do you achieve such a look? Maybe you can make a video in showing that if possible. Really liked the pictures and obviously the 50 mm RF 1.2 is a dream lens very high-quality video you got me follow this channel looking forward for new content :)

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching! Yes, the pictures I showed initially did have a few color corrections but when I compared them side by side at the end, those were raw files. I will make a video in the future about my editing and I'll also have presets available soon!

@CrowPal

2 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia If you were displaying uncorrected RAW files, perhaps that explains the colour difference. Try shooting JPEG under the same lighting, then comparing side-by-side. I have both these lenses, so might try it myself.

Very nice - and I loved the consistency and precision of the comparisons. I think that I'd check out something in between if I could like the Sigma f/1.4 Art. For me (retired product photographer), the EF just does not have the clarity wide open to get the job done. It's nice, but it's just not quite there. On the other hand, I shot thousands of commercial images with an EF 100mm f/2.8 macro that I bought used for $300 on e-bay. LOL - and you'd be surprised how close that 20 year old lens is to the RF 100mm f/2.8 L macro today. It loses out on contrast, but not on sharpness! And, it's well within the capability of a quick tweak in lightroom to make the two look essentially indistinguishable. Another interesting comparison is how crisp the RF f/1.2 is wide open vs. the EF f/1.8. Of course the background will be far more blurred and separated by the RF lens, but how IS the quality of the detail? In the past, I've typically gone with the f/1.4 50mm lenses on the theory that, when stopped down to f/1.8, they're going to handily outperform an f/1.8 lens run wide open.

I realize you have history with the EF 50mm f/1.8, but I would have preferred you compare with the newer Canon RF 50mm F1.8 STM. From all reports, it appears to have much better autofocus and optics.

Nice comparison. I've been a professional for years and still use some of these inexpensive lenses. Subjects are nearly always pets. 😮I can rarely see much difference after post processing, even printed large. A lot depends on the background. It does take a little more post to get that creaminess. I love these types of primes for focal lenghts that I dont use that often. I can have a cheap 28mm f1.8 for that rare time I would use it because it doesnt break the bank.

I really like the 50mm, but the 85mm f1.2 is also pure magic. I used the Canon EF 85mm f1.2 for a while but the slower focusing was an issue. I have now moved to the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art lens and I used it a lot. Because of the focal length, the background compression and the "compression" of facial features is really great and aesthetically pleasing. Those extra 35mm do make it tough to work in tight spaces though. Looking forward to seeing more videos on your channel

@LeopoldoManuelRamirezMena

2 ай бұрын

Rf and stm are a bit slower focusing, but, for portraits that's not a problem.. Maybe por sports it could be, but i can't think of a use for 50mm for sports 😁 maybe chess hahaha😂

I don't think anyone so notice the sharpness on a billboard because when you see a billboard they are far away. You would use to get very close up to notice. The highlight roll off is better with the RF lens.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Oh, they would notice lol

@bigrobotnewstoday1436

2 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia Fstoppers made a video on this and unless you have to get up close you only need two megapixels. How Many Megapixels In A Billboard kzread.info/dash/bejne/h3eVvNZunse4h5M.html

@TunaSoda

2 ай бұрын

This is very true, arn't most of the billboards like 72 dpi?

My nifty 50 ef is my best friend. I think it just really depends on what you’re looking for image wise. A “softer” image isn’t really a problem for most situations. I will say if you have a mirrorless camera it would just make sense to get the RF version of the 50. The even have a nifty 50 RF version too.

Great job on the video, I noticed on the lightroom settings that u shot both lenses on f1.8. Maybe if u shot the rf at1.2 we could see more of that 2k dollar difference ;)

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

I kept all the settings the same in order to give a fair comparison. You would definitely seen a difference at f1.2 lol

@maturegents

2 ай бұрын

Agree. To show the capabilities of 1.2 lens, please shoot at 1.2

Thank you for the excellent comparison. The noticeable green tint was a big surprise and I can't quite get my head around it. Personally I think Canon has had the best value 50mm prime lens amongst manufacturers for decades and I dont mean the f/1.4.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

I agree! And yes, the green tint threw me for a loop. Maybe a film on the glass? Not sure but I'd be interested to know.

@johnhewick1145

2 ай бұрын

I have both the RF 50 1.2 and the 85. I don’t have that green tint in my images, the color is amazing. I’m wondering if you have a UV filter on your lens? I was told in a conversation with a Canon rep, a Canon engineer tech, and a well known photographer at a lecture at the Canon Learning Center to never put a UV filter over high end glass because it turns into a lower quality lens as your adding cheap glass over expensive glass and it’s only as good as the weakest link. They said it’s not expensive to replace the front element if you scratch it (under $100). They also said use the lens hood even indoors for protection of the front element, and because side glare affects both the color and contrast of the image. I never take my hood off and never put a UV filter on except if I’m in a windy desert or beach, then I might use one to be safe, but only then and only if it’s windy. If you were using a filter and no hood I would run your tests again. Also a color checker for white balance never hurts if you can remember to use it.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

@@johnhewick1145 No, I dont use UV filters when taking still photos for that reason! I wasn't using a hood outside or inside (I should have been for the outdoor shots, definitely). I think it would be a really easy fix with adjusting the white balance but since I was keeping all of the settings exactly the same in this example, the difference was noticeable. And I've heard from 2 others who own this lens that they've noticed a bit of a green tint as well when keeping the white balance the same compared to their other lenses. Again, it's an easy fix and NO one would notice except photographers LOL

Very beautiful self portraits 😊!!!! Myself i would just get the RF85mm its would be better for the client work you do. A For me the EF 50mm f1.8 is a great all round lens as a beginner but i am looking at adding 24mm or 40mm 10-18 EF lens just to have some variety in picture quality. And i did sub to channel not only for beautiful woman alsobut down to earth presentation you did..... no bs just your raw opinion about both lenses!! Well done looking forward to seeing more videos in the future!!!!

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Thanks so much, I appreciate the feedback! I think the 85mm is a beautiful lens but not as versatile as the 50mm, which is why I went with it. I have a home studio that I use a lot and there isnt enough room for me to stand far back enough with the 85mm lol Lots of lenses out there we just gotta figure out which one works best for us! :)

I wonder if that green tint on the RF is the coating on the lens being exaggerated due to the sun blowing into the lens. Great video.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Could be, but it also did it when I was shooting indoors. It's a mystery!

@RayValdezPhotography

2 ай бұрын

Its just greener. I used it for video before on a 2 camera set up and the colors dont match the 28-70.

Very educational video! But I'd look for a cheaper lens considering the results.

Frankly surprised by the integrity and veracity of your review. I used to own the RF 50/1.2L and the EF 50/1.8 and RF 50/1.8 and agree almost unanimously with your findings. Personally, I get vastly more use from the 35/1.8 because the slightly wider field of view lends itself to more compelling compositions and renditions. I’ve shot events, weddings, editorial assignment with just a 35mm and an 85mm. YMMV, of course.

Very nice! FYI the Adobe Color profile is awful for Canon R bodies. I recommend trying the camera matching profiles in Adobe software.

Sidenote, her vibe is super calming

if you are spending over $2000 it would be sensible to examine different L lens focal lenths to make sure the first lens you buy will give you the most use and thanks i loved watching this as well

Thank you! I think the 1.8 would get a sharper if stepped down a bit, just like the 1.2 was stepped down. For the sharpness comparison only, mind. . But of course and hopefully at that price difference the RF will still be sharper….

Definitely take the leap! You will have no regrets!! 😉😁

@themuzemedia

3 ай бұрын

Already bought and received! hahah

@servo.images

3 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia hell yeah!! Haha

try sigma rf lenses in the future

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

I will be!

If you have an R-series body, instead of spending 200 for the EF version of the 1.8 and the adapter, you can just get the 50mm RF 1.8 version for only 100 (I got mine for like 90 so it was even cheaper) then you won't have to get the EF to RF mount adapter. Save money and now you can use that lens on any R-series body.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Correct, if you have an R-series body, that would work. Some people, especially beginners, may not go straight for the R-series body and in that case would need an adapter to use any RF lenses.

@MusikPiratCH

2 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia You mean if comming from an EF body you'd need an RF adapter to be able to use your EF glass on an RF body, right? The other way round isn't possible! You cannot use RF glass on any EF bodies!

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

@@MusikPiratCH Correct

I still have the older 50mm 1.8 lens. Still making me money.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Love this!!!!

I'd say this the image quality is not that much compared to the two 50mm lenses. But the build quality is excellent on the rf 50mm f1.2L like the weather sealing and metal parts of the lens are more durable and will last a few decades with proper care and maintenance, Which for a pro photographer is more important. I wouldn't dare take the ef or rf 50mm f1.8 lenses to shoot at the beach or on a sandy desert. That's why the "L" lenses cost so much more. Any pro will tell you that with more expensive and well built lenses and cameras will give more confidence to the user that they are well prepared to face any challenges or jobs that one might encounter in the future. You can't really be declining clients cos your gear is too fragile and might just break during a shoot. All my RF lenses the 28-70 f2, 15-35 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 and the 85 f1.2 are all reliable and have all been through alot of challenging situations. That gives me confidence to tackle any job that has come my way. Anyways love your opinion and your channel. You've earned a new sub. Cheers.

What do I think? I think you should take a serious look at the Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 to see if that fits your needs. It's not just the EF 50mm with an RF mount - it has an aspherical element (first time ever in a Canon 50mm lens), and no distortion. It's a complete redesign. The price works out about the same as the EF 50mm plus RF adapter. Low price, high performance! There's a Canon RF 50mm f/1.4 about to be announced (an expensive-as-L model, only just cheaper than the RF 50mm f/1.2, but smaller). If you can afford it, you won't regret buying the RF 50mm f/1.2 - providing you don't get tired of lugging it around. The RF 85mm f/1.2 (even bigger and heavier) is a dream lens for portraiture, plus you get the choice of that, or one with "defocus smoothing" (DS) for even better bokeh, at an even higher price, with some light loss. Pronouncing bokeh as "bouquet" is a western thing, but not the way the Japanese say it (they have two pronunciations). There's a whole KZread video on how to say it.

The real difference is focus speed. Coming from another system, both lenses are slow, even compared to the the EF 1.4's. Do you feel it's slower?

the problem with rf1.2 is that it's that sharp even on f1.2 :)

I bet one of the questions you get asked the most is what's your phone number? Lol😂

I have f1.8 (good enough for everyday shot in a room, but hate the chromatic abration in outdoor shiny day),, love the bokeh of f1.2, but can't buy it.. sooo, lets wait for f1.4 🙂

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

The 1.4 would be enough to get the job done and look great!

@rt1998

2 ай бұрын

I shoot with a 90D ( I know everybody looks down on the crop sensor, but I really still like it) and I love the 50mm 1.8 . I borrowed a friends 1.4 and didn't see enough difference and his AF seemed a little slower

Interesting video but I wonder why you didn't compare the RF50mm F1.8 with the RF f1.2? The RF 50mm f1.8 is superior to the EF version so I am not sure you are comparing like with like!

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Fair point! But like I said in the video, the EF was the first lens I started with so I already had it.

To have a complete comparison you should have included the EF 50/1.2 😬🙂 It's known for a dreamy bokeh and "only" costs ~1200€/$ 😯😵‍💫👍🏼

You don't test it at f1.2 ? I understand it's interessant to have a 1.8 vs 1.8 comparison but why not show a pic or 2 at 1.2?

It's not Bokeh it's Toneh ;) Also, yea I couldn't really tell sometimes which is which, it seemed to me like 1.2 have more detail in shadows, but then I got fooled like twice when I was not looking at LR info, so yeah xD

Between my RF 35 1.8 and my 85 f2, my 50 1.8 has been getting reallll neglected lol. I would buy the 50 1.2 also if I had it in me (aka in my bank)

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Yah.. it'll be ramen noodles for the next few weeks LOL jk jk

@CAMphotography_

2 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia 😂

Are you gonna try the RF50 1.8?

why is the RF 50mm massive? That is probably as large as my 200mm f/3.5.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Hahaha! It is a big boy! Better glass + bigger motors for the stabilizers = big-ol lens

You are a portrait pro. I think you already know the answer if the 1.2 is worth it. I personally think glass is more important than bodies. Great comparison btw

Ackshuwally, it's BOW-keh like kettle (just commenting for the algos)

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Hahahahaha

But is it 2000 USD sharper?? And will anyone who is running around with a phone really know the difference?? I don't like the EF 50 1,8. I have one....I don't have the money for the 1,2. So I have an EF 50 1,4. I don't use 50mm much anyway. I almost use just a Sigma 24-105 F4 ART or an EF 85 1,8. I only shoot portraits. And FF DSLR's. Can't afford newer bodies...but it works. :)

no, I suggest not to invest in the RF. True, it is the better quality lense. But the price, weight and size doesn't justify what occurs in the bottom line of the calculation: the result between the nifty 50 and the Rf lense is marginal. Offtopic: instead RF 50mm, go all in and select the RF 28-70 mm f2.

If you wear white clothes it puts a catch light in the models eyes.

Huh, so a $2300 lens is better than a $100 lenes. Who fckin' knew?

I kept telling myself, RF 50 1.2 is probably the best investment I got as a hobbyist who wants to create high quality, timeless, pleasing memories of my family, so not cheaping out is the best decision I ever made for photography. Even with all the latest 50 1.2 from other systems there is just something captivating about the images this lens produces

Def dont buy an EF Lens if your on RF. They make the same lens but RF. I got one for $97. Of course Unless you have more EF glass. Use that 100 to get another cheap lens or ND filter

I carried the Sony A1 on 50 1.2 on the Long Trail in Vermont...going up and down mountains.... anyone who complains about the “weight” is a snowflake

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

hahahahaha

As your pronunciation guide shows, it is BOW-kay. You are saying bow-KAY.

@themuzemedia

3 ай бұрын

😂

@BenKickert

3 ай бұрын

@@themuzemedia Perfect response.

You can't compare a consumer level lens thats $100 to a $2300 pro grade lens. Plus on top of that, you did not test the lens for the most important aspect, and that is dimensionality to a street scene. You've confined yourself to the Canon brand which has BLOCKED 3RD PARTY LENSES. So whats your choices: Canon cheapie and Canon ridiculous priced lens. Plus a whole lot of mirrorless lenses in all the brands have lost their dimensionality, as they reach for immense sharpness, that no woman wants to expose all her wrinkles and skin flaws. Now with a super sharp lens you'll have to spend 3 hours minimum cloning out pimples, wrinkles and blemishes in portrait images - pardon the pun but sharpness is a double edged sword. What is arguably the best 50mm lens is the Zeiss Otus 55mm 1.4 because of the dimensionality, but its manual focus. At least in the Sony system you can get a Carl Zeiss 50mm 1.4 with auto focus. The Sony system is by far the better system as the lens mount is virtually open to all comers and has a number of Carl Zeiss as native lenses, and the are more dimensional. Most photographers on youtube are talking about two dimensional portrait images of a face or body with background blur and this idiotic "Background separation" which makes the image look 2 dimensional. Then they yack on about "Subject Isolation" where you blow out the background into creamy buttery blur and have a sharp as a tack person/subject that looks like it plonked down into butter and cream and theres no context to the image. Your self portraits in your lounge room had context and had a story, but the head shots of your brunette friend had no context and was 2 dimensional with sharp faces and blurry backgrounds. A good example of a dimensional images is one presented in a video by Matt Osborne using the Leica M camera with a Leica 90mm f2, and the lens costs $4000 new and is just another dimension in the space time fabric: kzread.info/dash/bejne/n4uOt6WDgay5Z6w.html

When dealing with female clients of a certain age,the nifty fifty is going to give a more flattering image (no-one likes to be reminded of their ageing body).The price difference is too large,confirm that my looking at used vs new and you may be surprised and lucky...............................

Ha LOL I got mine for £1,579.99 new [Import] I wouldn't even pay £2,300.00 for my partner's funeral, let alone a lens.I Never buy lenses in the UK, I always get imports wth warranty. Not gray market but imported lenses from a business here in the UK which provide warranty for lenses at a cheaper price.

1.2 vs 1.8 why not apples to apples. Not a fair comparison

@HikingWithMartin

2 ай бұрын

It’s not meant to be fair, it’s showing the difference not the same.

@caffeinatedcameras

2 ай бұрын

She shot them at 1.8

This video has been done 1M times. 🤦🏻‍♂️

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Really? BC I didn't see too many RF 50mm 1.2 compared to the EF 50mm 1.8 but thank you for contributing to the algorithm with your positivity!

@caffeinatedcameras

2 ай бұрын

But not by her

There's something funny happening with your audio. It's not very good.

Not sure what lens is perfect but you certainly are.

canon shooter in 2024? wtf? hahaha i'll pass.... kidding :P

Your obsession with sharpness is ridiculous. I would get a 50 1.4 and not waste money on a 50 1.2

@JaredRibic

2 ай бұрын

I have the 50mm f/1.4 and it does not compare to the EF 50mm f/1.2L or the RF 50mm f/1.2L.

Canon is releasing a 50mm f1.4 so maybe just wait. Personally I don’t think it’s worth it, however as a professional it makes sense to be able to shoot in dark conditions at lower ISO and get sharp results at f1.2. For portraits too much sharpness can be a bad thing and shooting the EF at f1.8 would probably improve stopped down to f2.8. Colour grading, lighting and pose would make more of a difference.

@themuzemedia

2 ай бұрын

Exactly! It all depends on what you need it for and if it makes sense for you. You can get amazing results with 1.4 or 1.8 lenses