Canon 'L' lens challenge: 50mm f/1.2 'L' vs 50mm f/1.4 

What I love about your lens reviews is you always shoot the same spot do I really can compare lens even across multiple reviews. Great work

been studying hundreds of images from--and have owned--both lenses. time and time again i continue to be amazed at how little difference there is in the image quality for the price.

One thing that keeps being missed on these comparisons is the significance of the build quality differences. If you are using this professionally and long term, be prepared with the 1.4 version.I have owned the 1.2L for 5 years and use it professionally multiple times a week, and guess what? Looks and acts brand new. A fellow photographer friend of mine purchased the 1.4 version about the same time. After 2 1/2 years of daily use it literally came apart. So he purchased a second one, and after several more years use it is making bad noises during focus and he is going to have to purchase another one. So in five years he will have 75% of the money I paid and still only own a cheap lens. I can sell my 1.2L now and only lose the approximate cost of one of the 1.4 versions, and was able to use an L lens during that time. Money ahead.Want another example of the advantages of "L" glass? At the same time I bought the 50L, I bought the 24-70 2.8L version one. Nine months ago I sold it FOR THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT I PAID FOR IT, and purchased the new 24-70 2.8L II.

Felt a lot of envy for the 1.2 but after this video I appreciate my 1.4 more. Most of my favorite shots I've taken with it. I could use much better focusing speed but this video didn't show it for me.

Another fantastic video! I especially love how you objectively test things and don't give into the hype.

I see no real reason to spend for the 1.2 over the 1.4. I've carried the 1.4 for 15 years now and I could easily buy a 1.2, money is not an issue. However, I don't need the added weight and the benefits are minimal. It's a luxury item. If you want all your lenses to have the red stripe, then 1.4 is for you. I've only got one lens w/o a red stripe and it the 50/1.4!

1.4 with 5D user and very happy. Thank you for the video. Like.

You’re the Gordon Liang of lens reviews! Keep up the good work!

I have 1.8 lens and i love it and use it all the time for everything

@ 1:59 when You compare 1.2 vs 1.4 @ 1.4 I can clearly see that 1.2 version is much much sharper - especially looking at the bricks and 2nd window on the right from the doors, while when You zoom in to the doors they look reasonable the same .. I think You missfocus the 1.2 on the window instead on the doors, that is why in the middle of the frame it looks quite similiar, in fact 1.2 is a way much sharper than 1.4 ( all should remember that any point on the frame may not be compareable when missfocused )

First time I've come across your channel. Your comparison was really good. I've got the 50mm f/1.8. It's a really great lens for the money and I've got a lot of use out of it and learned a lot with it, but I want to upgrade now, mainly because of the cheap build quality and noisy and slow (not too bad though) autofocus. I couldn't decide whether to go for the 1.4 or the 1.2. Although the difference is subtle I think I will save up for the 1.2 because I really like shallow DOF and nice bokeh! I will subscribe!

This review aged well. It's been 10 yrs and people are still using this amazing review for reference.

Haha "Slightly slower brother" made me chuckle my ass off!

Great comparison! 50mm 1.4 is still a great lens and its a compliment to even challenge the 1.2 L.

Chris...your videos are amazing...thanks a lot!!! Greetins from Chile!!

The difference between them is minimal, the in focus range of the f1.2 can be too small for most user's and they'd get frustrated by it

Thank you so much for these kind of videos. It helps me so much in choosing a new lens 🖤📷

The presence of more CA in the 50 F/1.2 images is caused by the more curved front element.

Great comparison, I love my 50mm 1.4 its my most used lens, I don't think i will be upgrading to the 1.2 L lens any time soon after watching this, especially at such a big price increase

The sharpness bookeh and built quality is not 4 times better. But price of f1.2 is 4 times more expensive.

thanks for video i always enjoy your reviews. i wanted to ask which one the lenses has better color rendition and better micro contrast. thanks again

The 1.2 is massively overrated, totally not worth the money. The only good thing is the build quality. I have the 1.4 and it's a good little lens, but all the 50s are showing their age in light of new lenses Canon are bringing out to match the demands of new digital cameras. I once thought of buying the 1.2, then after much comparison felt it wasn't worth it. This video only confirms that. I have actually just put my 50 1.4 on eBay as I have replaced it with the new 35mm 1.4 L II, which is superior in every single way! THE 24-70 2.8L II is actually better at 50 than any of the 50 primes, just not with the same wide aperture. The 50 is a very good starter lens though when you are on a budget and a fabulous lens for taking on holiday. I'm now much more careful about buying L glass, as modern cameras show their flaws, considering many L lenses were developed decades ago and their design hasn't been updated. Canon seem to be gradually redesigning their lenses though.

Well shit, the house comparison definitely demonstrates the increase in micro-contrast on the L side despite the lower corner sharpness. You notice the microcontrast in the subtle tone and nuance shifts on the bricks and the green grass. Had the 1.4 usm get the L coating, it would have nicely matched the L... Don't get me wrong, some of the world's best images were done with the 1.4usm. But since I'm shopping Canon from a Nikon user perspective (no clear gap between gold rings and non-golds), there's a clear gap of quality between both for sure. Canon, the premium fullframe system.

Get the 1.4 and use the money saved towards getting a full frame camera or accessories for your current camera such as a battery grip, fluid-head tripod, flashgun & remote trigger unit etc.

hey ! the best lens between 40 pancake, 50 1,4 canon ??

Very helpful video, as always :D

for that price you'd really expect the L lens to have a huge gap from the 1.4...but its not

Great thanks...looking for great prime 16 for video vlogging on the move...hard to find

Thanks man

Great video ,thanks!

Could you do the Sigma 18-250 HSM OS on a Canon EOS 60D? :)

The lenses that put me off Canon for life. Switced to Sony and never looked back. Terrible image quality on both, very unsharp and low contrast. No nostalgica, just bad memories and many, many bad pictures.

ONLY lets in 33% more light? Did I hear that correctly? That's a LOT!

Could you compare the Sigma 50mm f1.4 with the Canon f1.4 please. They're in the same price range so it seems logical

I've had them both. I didn't find the "L" version to be much better, so I sold it.

I like your detailed head to head comparison, can you guide me to get an upgrade to my canon kit lens. I am considering between canon 50mm f 1.4 vs Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 vc or non-vc, Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. My priority is get sharper pictures, low light and portrait photography, thanks

Does purple fringing exist n film pictures?

I need the 70-300 crisssss!

Lee Strobel!

Would have been a lot more interesting if you had tested it for portraits since at least the 1,2 is a very popular portrait lens. But that is just me.

Nice! thank u for the info

can you make review on sigma - 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 ii dc os hsm , or sigma - 18-250 mm f/3.5-6.3 ii dc os hsm on canon 60d

The f1.2 lens has design flaw, my lens has front and rear focusing issues also known as ' backward focus shift '. I bought a new lens and it cant focus very well, most people who i know who own this lens shoot above f2.2. Elements taken from 85m f.12 and totally F***** up by canon! Had it recalibrated and still not sharp! Prefer the EF f1.4 but too slow in dark conditions. Wasted over £1000 and reclaibration on the f1.2, what a joke! So if shooting on the f1.2 i now use say 2.0, if i focus on the eyes the chest or forehead is in focus. SO now i have to figure which part to shoot on a person's body rather than the eyes!

I've unfortunately owned both of these lenses and can honestly say they didn't impress me. Especially paying 1600$ for the 1.2. I recently got the sigma 50 1.4. I am completely floored by it's performance wide open and stopped down. The canon lineup of 50mm lenses just needs to be updated.

THX!!! I will buy non L for my Mark 4 :3 Thx you a lot for safe my money

hey can you make a review video of Zeiss ZE Planar T* 50 mm f/1.4.. please make video review of it. if possible compare with the canon 50 mm f/1.2 l lens

its pretty much a pissing contest for 1.2 vs 1.4.

where's the bokeh?

Whe dont want sharp corners bud creamy bokeh.

I used the 50 1.4 once at the beach and somehow sand got inside the lens. Waste of money.

Please don't compare L with non-L's. The 1.4 is a crude intruder (ugly people hate it) and renders mere photos. The 1.2 in this case composes, paints and frames canvasses for you. You look at the image and think, ooh my masterpiece I painted and then the Canon 50mm 1.2L USM lens laughs at you, HA HA HA. That's how mine treats me, anyways.

who needs friends?

Bad comparison since the price ranges are so far apart! What the heck?! No bueno!

Thanks a lot for the video.