Comparison of Canon's 50/1.2 vs 50/1.4 vs 50/1.8

[hwchoy]

truly considering price and performance, I would still have gone for the 50/1.4 as it gives the right performance at a reasonable price. the 50/1.8 simply has too intolerable a bokeh, even if you disregard the tacky built.

however if you have extreme conditions such as harsh lighting combined with a need to shoot close to wide open, then the 50/1.2L becomes a necessity. but I still shudder to think this one costs 20 times a 50/1.8 !

[hwchoy]

Cause it's more of a macro lens. I don't bother. 100mm the way to go...

what he mean is that he would like to loan you his 50/2.5M

[Michael]

i don't think the macro would be suitable for a review. macro's bokeh is very gao wei...

[hwchoy]

I still think you should have shot a row of bottles with all three lenses.

[Michael]

I still think you should have shot a row of bottles with all three lenses.

wait till u calibrated all of them.

[engrmariano]

is the price difference between 1.4 & 1.2 worthy?

may be yes between 1.8 & 1.4.

[hwchoy]

depends why you needed the 50/1.2

[deadpoet]

is the price difference between 1.4 & 1.2 worthy?

may be yes between 1.8 & 1.4.

What do u mean by worthy?

FYI, the 1.8 and 1.4, maybe got a good bang for the buck, the image quality is definitely sub par, especially in handling flare, color and contrast.

[evershine]

To a non-photographer, non-pro or amateur who can't tell the difference, it may not be worthy. Ask your wife or gf this question, you'll get a different answer. 

[Michael]

there is a big jump between 50/1.4 and 50/1.8, i'd recommend everyone to take the 50/1.4

but comparing between 50/1.4 and 50/1.2, it's all about the colour, contrast and the flare resistant coating of the L!

[hwchoy]

for most people the 50/1.4 is a really good lens, but if you need it for that last bit of oomph then the 50/1.2L is for you.

50/1.8 = a nice girl
50/1.4 = a good wife and a great cook
50/1.2L = a good wife, who is a great cook and a maneater in bed