Pulled the Trigger

[corkyg]

I used the code list provided on 24 Dec by Deadtrees Codes and placed an order for subject lens. That saved $185 off of the catalog price. Been lusting for that lens for over a year!

 

[OdiN]

I'm not sure how much more it can offer over the 50mm f/1.4 - I love that lens and have taken some of my best pics with it.

 

[corkyg]

I like my 1.4 as well, but one more notch for low level is useful to me. Lots of inside work in churches where flash is a no-no.

But - the main reason is that my 1.4 EF does not work right. Had it repaired once, but it's back lame again. And then, there is always the aspect of pure technolust.

 

[Kelvrick]

So jealous, but luckily my 1.4 is still serving me well.

 

[alfa147x]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick
So jealous, but luckily my 1.8 is still serving me well.

^ my case

 

[kalster]

wow, the depth of field is so small with 1.2 , its gotta be hard to control
is this lens supposed to be sharp wide open

 

[corkyg]

That should make it a good bokeh lens.

DPR

 

[teatime0315]

Nice! 1.2 lol I still need to pick up my 1.8

 

[ucdbiendog]

Originally posted by: kalster
wow, the depth of field is so small with 1.2 , its gotta be hard to control
is this lens supposed to be sharp wide open

sharp as a tack in the focus plane (which happens to be paper thin heh)

 

[Shimmishim]

POTN has a thread about the worst L lens and a lot of people say the 50 1.2L.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=433321

I don't own one so I have no idea.

I've only owned 2 L's and they are/were both aMAZing (70-200 f/4L IS and 24-105 f/4L IS)