Complete Collection of Canon FD L f/1.2 lenses!

kathala · Joined: 13 May 2022 Posts: 128

It is with great pride and unmeasured joy that I can announce to be the owner of a complete collection of ALL f/1.2 lenses Canon ever made in their L series for FD mount!

#1

Downsides: the 5o is visibly less sharp than the 85, and the 85 has boring bokeh.
Upsides: well, they're Canon Ls!

For those interested, Marco Cavina reports of the prototype 24/1.2 SSC AL: https://www-marcocavina-com.translate.goog/articoli_fotografici/canon_fd_24_1,2/00_pag.htm?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp[/img]

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7553 Location: Hong Kong

kiddo · Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1120

Congratulations, that's an awesome pair you've got there . nFD lenses scare me because of bearings issues, maybe not all of them suffer it
That's sad to hear the 50 is less sharp, how would you compare it to 1.4 FD version in case you have it?
85mm 1 .2 boring bokeh???? Really? I thought bokeh would be the reason to get such a lens , I'm very happy with the 1.8 version though

caspert79 · Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 2922 Location: The Netherlands

Ultrapix · Joined: 06 Jan 2012 Posts: 551 Location: Italy

kathala · Joined: 13 May 2022 Posts: 128

Thank you all!

I don't recall if it was a stock trader or a nuclear power plant attendant whom I read saying that a "good" day at their work was "boring" (and vice versa). the 85 is perfect, and therefore lacking character. if one enjoys that, the lens is absolutely great - sharp, modern, great balance, a joy. but in practice, I find myself reaching for the 5o/1.4 more often, which has so much more character.

The 5o/1.2 L is as sharp at 1.2 as the 5o/1.4 is at 1.4. still great, in other words, just behind the 85 - looking through the viewfinder, you notice the difference in direct succession, not more, not less. it's just surprising that there should be a gap at all (which incidentally is still there today, through the EF and RF versions!)
The L, even at identical apertures, shows more separation, though, and again more perfect-ish bokeh. I'd say another 1/2-1 stops (i.e. you'd have the 5o/1.4 wide-open and the L at f/2ish to get the same level of background blur).

The 5o/1.2 non-L, btw, is as sharp wide-open as the 5o/1.8 - just with a stop of difference in what "wide-open" means. I tested them during covid, and following that realisation, parted with the latter two. they're both very decent, but the others just shine.