The best 50mm for the 5D Mark 2

skatepreme

skatepreme

Active member
Right now I have a 50 1.8 and a 28 2.8 IS USM. I shoot about 90% music videos and 10% photos. I love my 50mm and I love the look of it on my 5d but the form factor is terrible. I want to upgrade to one that I'm not only getting a better form factor but actual noticeable better image quality. The canon 1.2 is out of my range but I'm deciding between the zeiss 50 1.4,canon 50 1.4 and the sigma 50 1.4. I like having AF but it's not a necessity. What would y'all recommend?
 
skatepreme said:
Right now I have a 50 1.8 and a 28 2.8 IS USM. I shoot about 90% music videos and 10% photos. I love my 50mm and I love the look of it on my 5d but the form factor is terrible. I want to upgrade to one that I'm not only getting a better form factor but actual noticeable better image quality. The canon 1.2 is out of my range but I'm deciding between the zeiss 50 1.4,canon 50 1.4 and the sigma 50 1.4. I like having AF but it's not a necessity. What would y'all recommend?
Click to expand...

If AF isn't an issue I would go for a Zeiss. I bought a Zeiss 16mm Distagon T2 Arri standard mount for $600 in 2001 for my Arri 2C. Of course 35mm film cameras went with the wind, but I sold the Zeiss 16mm last summer for $2,450 on Ebay. I was shocked and delighted. Zeiss is always a Zeiss and you will get your money back someday if you want.
I shot with a rented 5Dmk3 and a Zeiss 85mm 1.4 and compared to all the canon and 3rd party lenses it's a Rolls Royce like my old 16mm Zeiss lens. Zeiss lenses are beautifully made with great construction, focus movements, IQ and will also earn respect with clients. If you shoot music videos for sure the word will get around "His work looks so good, it must be cause he uses Zeiss lenses"
BTW I bought the canon 50mm 1.8 and used it along with the 85mm 1.4 rented Zeiss on the same shoot for Exxon. Image wise it actually held up very well, but for the last year my 60D and 600D cannot read the lens and say contacts must be cleaned, I cleaned the contacts every way I could and it still doesn't talk to the camera. Sharp lens, but still a really cheaply made and potentually unreliable product.
Get a Zeiss, you will never regret it.
 
Last edited:
That's what I was thinking. I've rented the zeiss 35 and 50 on two separate shoots before, but I didn't have that much time with it. How does it perform wide open? Also for photos is it a pain to manual focus?
 
Manual focus for stills is not an issue... depending on the kind of photography you are doing. Absolutely no problem for landscapes. Not a big deal with a model in a studio. Impossible with kids, animals, sports, etc.

In any case, I don't know much about the sigma, but both the canon f/1.4 and the zeiss are nice lenses, you can't go wrong with any of them. The zeiss will have a nicer feel for manual focus, that's for sure. As will a vintage lens, which, btw, is an interesting option too (I love my Leitz Summilux 50mm f/1.4 for the Leica-R mount).
 
How about going all the way and getting the new Otus 55mm 1.4 :) well, I guess you wrote the 1.2 was out of your range, but if you really want something nice (if not THE best 50ish lens) then the Otus should hands down win over them all...

Check out the reviews. Things such as sharp across the frame at 1.4, and a resolution at 2.8 that is higher than what other lenses can deliver at 5.6.

Basically all reviews are supporting Zeiss' own bold statement, that the Otus 55mm is THE best DSLR lens ever. And the best thing… this is just the beginning :) they are making a whole Otus series, next one in line will be the Otus 85mm 1.4. So start saving up…. :D I know I'm going to build up that series as I can get to it.
 
skatepreme said:
Right now I have a 50 1.8 and a 28 2.8 IS USM. I shoot about 90% music videos and 10% photos. I love my 50mm and I love the look of it on my 5d but the form factor is terrible. I want to upgrade to one that I'm not only getting a better form factor but actual noticeable better image quality. The canon 1.2 is out of my range but I'm deciding between the zeiss 50 1.4,canon 50 1.4 and the sigma 50 1.4. I like having AF but it's not a necessity. What would y'all recommend?
Click to expand...
I own a few zeiss primes. The 50mm 1.4 is only good in the set. Buying a 50mm by itself is another matter.

If you are looking for a good wide open low light lens, consider the Nikon 50mm 1.2, though that one seems to excel at low light. But the price performance for lowlight is nice. Can stop down to sharpen up, and still be wider than most lenses.

The Zeiss 50mm f1.4 is not a sharp wide open lens. It also does not have very straight lines. Shot some buildings wide open and there was some barrel distortion. But overall it renders a beautiful look. The focus ring is a pleasure, and having half f/stops rather than only full f/stops on the iris is nice (thigh, some people prefer the full stop clicks because they can get 1/3 stop increments but riding the clicks. So, depends on your shooting style.). There is purple fringing when there is a strong back light on a sharp dark foreground object (as there is with many lenses), but slightly more than I'd like. Basically, it is a beautiful lens, but it is not a specs king. I like using it. Even wide open, I have learned to like the ethereal glow, because it maintains a snap and sharpness within that oddly(but it is not a benchmark of sharpness wide open). Whereas the Nikon aid 1.4 seemed to get a touch more defocussed looking. But I do avoid shooting f1.4 on the zeiss because of that, generally stop down to f2.

I very very very much hate the Canon 50mm 1.8 $100 lens. Hate it. Hate it. If I only hated one lens, it would be that one. Would go for a Nikon 50mm 1.8 Ais, any day.

However the Canon 50mm 1.2, in my limited use was a delight. Rendered nice colors, and I believe it to be sharper and perform better than the Zeiss in a "chart testing" situation. It also has the magic and mojo. Just none of the vintage flaws.

The Nikon 50mm f1.4 or f1.8 Ais, are great cheap routes. The Nikon 50mm 1.4 is rather sad at 1.4, but comparable to the Zeiss 50mm 1.4. I prefer the zeiss.

You may consider the Rokinon cine 50mm, I have never used them. There are many 50mm out there in that budget range. Above are the ones I have used personally and my experience. Of course there are many more expensive ones, but sometimes a 50 is a 50.

The Zeiss has some quirks, but I think the slight barrel distortion also lends to better bokeh characteristics. At least a more complex look. I do not over analyze bokeh, if it works it works. (i may add, the zeiss may not have many iris blades, but the shape of the blades are nice and rounded, so there is never a stop sign look to the bokeh orbs of spectral highlights)

Manual focus is an issue for stills shooting. Calibrating the OVF to your eye is vitally important. Manual focus is fun, but you for every shot that is better and more rewarding because of it, there will be several fudged ones.
 
Last edited:
legrevedotcom said:
How about going all the way and getting the new Otus 55mm 1.4 :) well, I guess you wrote the 1.2 was out of your range, but if you really want something nice (if not THE best 50ish lens) then the Otus should hands down win over them all...

Check out the reviews. Things such as sharp across the frame at 1.4, and a resolution at 2.8 that is higher than what other lenses can deliver at 5.6.

Basically all reviews are supporting Zeiss' own bold statement, that the Otus 55mm is THE best DSLR lens ever. And the best thing… this is just the beginning :) they are making a whole Otus series, next one in line will be the Otus 85mm 1.4. So start saving up…. :D I know I'm going to build up that series as I can get to it.
Click to expand...
If I was shooting ff35 with only one focal length, the otis would be a worth while investment.

Any one who wants to shoot one focal length their whole career should consider that one. There is something to really knowing your lens, and all these zooms and primes really slow down that learning process.
 
James0b57 said:
If I was shooting ff35 with only one focal length, the otis would be a worth while investment.

Any one who wants to shoot one focal length their whole career should consider that one. There is something to really knowing your lens, and all these zooms and primes really slow down that learning process.
Click to expand...

Well… considering that Zeiss most likely will turn Otus into a full range, there's another reason to start collecting them, you wont necessarily be stuck with a 55mm.

Although I wish they would bring out a wide angle first before they put out the 85 :(
 
You're going to say I'm crazy but I LOVE the Canon 50mm f2.5 macro.

It's great for macro photography and great for very tight shots in video or ECU inserts.

Also, it's dirt cheap and sharp as a tack!
 
This shows the fifty wide open and stopped down a bit. this is an extreme crop and does not reflect the look of a whole image. You can see the sharpness through the halo-ing @ 1.4, and after f2, everything clears up.

(I also apologize, I shot this handheld. So, perhaps I could have had sharper results on a tripod. THis is a 100% pixel to pixel crop from an 18megapixel sensor. The purpose of this it show the 'Halation' with inherent detail in it. I recall, using the Nikon AIS 1.4, that it actually lost sharpness, as well as the halo. The Zeiss to me, is not a wide open lens, wide open it has character, but it is not a clinical high end chart test lens.)


crop from this scene...

original jpeg, straight from camera, crop is original 100% resolution, full frame is resized

So over all, really nice look to me, great contrast and nice colors. f1.4, is ethereal, but from f2 through f11 it is what you'd expect.

NOTE: Camera was Canon EOS 1D-C, Neutral picture style: sharpness 0, contrast -2, Saturation -2, hue shift 0
So, those familiar with this picture style know that colors are slightly cooler and muted, especially when contrast and saturation are reduced. A typical Canon/Zeiss image is much snappier and bright.
 
Last edited:
I find, I end up liking the lens I use the most. I was using a beat up Nikon pre-ai scalloped 35mm f2 lens. The thing is in poor shape, and the only lens I don't provide a lens cap for, but after I used it for 2 weeks straight, I wondered why I needed any other lens. Right now I am using Zeiss' and I am feeling like I like them the best. Doesn't mean I believe they are flawless performers, but I definitely love them.
 
Well, most lenses have to be stopped down if you want a sharp image, specially in the corners. Here are my sharpness tests on a 5D2: for stills, and at video resolution (from a downsampled still image). My lovely Leica is sharp wide open in the center, but needs to be closed down to f/2.8 to get sharp corners too.

(what's a bit of a letdown is that the pic you posted is not even a corner crop, it's mid-frame at most)
 
ROCKMORE said:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth/photography/hands-reviews/zeiss-otus-55mm-f14-apo-distagon

Just need this one lens and all different format cameras to go with it to change FOV
Click to expand...

Exactly… I saw some examples of its sharpness, and this is as sharp as a DSLR lens will get. EVEN INTO THE CORNERS and at 1.4. The resolution of this lens at 2.8 is the same as the best lenses at 5.6. It's corner sharpness at 1.4 is the same as the new Nikon G 58mm 1.4 in the center...

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/11/otus-is-scharf

So I'd gladly pay the price for the zf.2 version and the Otus 85mm 1.4 as well when it arrives in 2014.
The bokeh is not as circular as the cp.2 lenses, but the seperation of the subject in the Otus is better and looks better imo.
 
I also needed a 50mm for my 5d recently, was mostly using the Samyang 35mm f 1.4 for video. However, I found an old pentax PK mount 50mm f 2.0. Not the fastest 50mm lens, but for under 20.00 in mint condition, it was worth a try. It looks like a pancake on the 5d2, but it's sharp wide open, and gets razor sharp at 2.8. It required a slight mod. I used a dremel and ground off the little metal pin, and pin guard which was plastic. If you don't grind it, it will slightly hit the plastic inner edge. So it's a must. This lens is a fantastic piece of glass with an incredibly long throw. It's almost two full rotations from infinity to the other end. I really like shooting with it. give it a shot, it's about the price of a good 12pck of beer:)
 
Samuel H said:
Well, most lenses have to be stopped down if you want a sharp image, specially in the corners. Here are my sharpness tests on a 5D2: for stills, and at video resolution (from a downsampled still image). My lovely Leica is sharp wide open in the center, but needs to be closed down to f/2.8 to get sharp corners too.

(what's a bit of a letdown is that the pic you posted is not even a corner crop, it's mid-frame at most)
Click to expand...

I cropped for the mid frame on purpose, few lenses are sharp wide open in the corners.

Yeah, while I like the Zeiss 50mm 1.4, it I think the name "zeiss" creates an unrealistic sense of expectations. There are limits when budget and size are considered. The Otis looks amazing. Since I shoot video hand held, I rarely need to be at f1.4, and prefer to be in the f2-f8 range, anyways. Also, I do not think majority of lenses should be critiqued about their 'max aperture' performance. I would rather have the option of f1.4, then have a lens only have aperture values that are sharp.
 
Last edited:
Samuel H said:
Well, most lenses have to be stopped down if you want a sharp image, specially in the corners. Here are my sharpness tests on a 5D2: for stills, and at video resolution (from a downsampled still image). My lovely Leica is sharp wide open in the center, but needs to be closed down to f/2.8 to get sharp corners too.

(what's a bit of a letdown is that the pic you posted is not even a corner crop, it's mid-frame at most)
Click to expand...
I just looked at your test. That leica 90mm is fantastic.

(Though the Leica 50mm never gets as sharp as the Canon 50 1.4, it is certainly better wide open.)
 
Last edited:
Yes, my sweet, sweet Leicas! And they're even better on the bokeh tests.
Need to pet them now... :)

(I got the elmarit 35mm f/2.8 and 90mm f/2.8 because they are sharper than the faster -and more expensive- summicron 35mm f/2.0 and 90mm f/2.0)
 
If you can hold off a little longer, Sigma has announced they are making a new 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | Art. If it is anything like the 35mm 1.4 Art, or the 18-35mm Art, it should be worthy of your consideration. They claim it is a total redesign not based on the current 50mm 1.4. Let us hope it can auto focus properly on Canon bodies. It may end up being the second or third best 50mm available in EOS mount.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/50mm-f14-dg-hsm-art

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/art-lenses
 
Yeah... Just saw that as well... They actually said in an interview that they didnt care about Canon or Nikon but were going in direct competition with Zeiss Otus! Now thats a bold statement.... But seeing how dxomark has measured the Sigma 35 1.4 to be the best 35mm lens around for the Canon it will be intersting to see what comes out of it.

But keep in mind the trade in of focus rotation on an AF lens vs a manual lens. Thats why I love the Zeiss ze /zf... Thry are so damn easy to pull focus on compared to my canon zooms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top