Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

50 canon 1.4 vs 17-50 or 50 RED

greg filipkowski said:
50 canon 1.4 vs 17-50 or 50 RED

Is there any videos out there? comparing, Im thinking moving to PL, trying to decide if its worth moving to pl
Click to expand...

These are all very modern lenses, and will likely look relatively similar. The zoom won't be able to go as shallow, soft and "intimate" as the 50's can wide open.
 
I don't think you are going to optically see that much of a difference, going form Canon L to RPP or RPZ. Both are modern, clean lenses.

The cinema mechanics of the Red glass are obviously vastly superior, that's probably going to be the biggest difference you notice right away.
 
This is very funny Im thinking of going to Canon mount lenses....
Really starting to look for some Leica glass to have the adapter put on.
I own the 17-50.... its a work horse, I love mine. And I got a Century/Scheinder 2X extender and now unless I need more light it is a very good tool to have in the shed.
 
My experience with the RPZ 18-50mm is that the lens performs well up close. The RPZ 17-50mm is the later version of the same lens. Between two to five feet. My original does breath noticeably and is hard to focus on distant landscapes. Ridge tops in my case. The trees might be sharper with another lens. It's also slow T2.8 for what I want to shoot. Sunsets, dark forests.

Up close, however, the lens critical focus can be within inches, even Centimeters. If I get a chance tonight, I'll uploads some examples of my RPZ 18-50mm.
 
Last edited:
ScreenWritingREDUSER.png


See the details in the paper, you can see the grain.
 
Last edited:
ValiBath.png
 
GeomAdventureREDUSER.png


Notice how my eyes are in focus but not the tip of my noise is not? Pretty critical right? You can see it clearly in my facial stubble too, some area's in focus, some out.

This was shot at arms length.
 
Last edited:
greg filipkowski said:
50 canon 1.4 vs 17-50 or 50 RED

Is there any videos out there? comparing, Im thinking moving to PL, trying to decide if its worth moving to pl
Click to expand...

The RPP 50mm is the absolute BEST of them all, as it is even Sharper then the Master Prime 50mm, so if sharpness is important to you the RPP 50mm is your lens.

The Canon 50mm 1.4 is a nice lens but not even as close to be placed in the same line of even the RED RPZ 17-50, as it is a great performing lens especially up close, great close to Macro capability.

Fact is that even the 50mm f1.2 is not such a great lens, and does not performs as close as the 85mm f/1.2 the original, and the II smokes it completely, Canon needs to really make a 50mm f/1.2 II badly, never mind the super cheap f/1.4, but it is still a good little lens, just don't compare it to other in its range, as it will loose.
 
RichardHandREDUSER.png


Red Pro Zoom 18-50mm example of shallow DOF. It's just a hand, but there is something I absolutely love about this shot, it has an emotional vibrance to me.
 
Last edited:
Those are my examples of nice detail and shallow DOF using the RPZ 18-50mm actually. The earlier version.

Do you want some examples of the opposite side, the wide shots of scenic places that could use more detail? Or the noise picked up in low light situations?
 
Will Keir said:
RichardHandREDUSER.png


Red Pro Zoom 18-50mm example of shallow DOF. It's just a hand, but there is something I absolutely love about this shot, it has an emotional vibrance to me.
Click to expand...

Very nice fill indeed Will, and this shows that even with a slow lens, which even T3 is not so slow after all, but if the shot is well planned, and the distance from Subject to Lens and form Subject to Back Ground is calculated in the shot and properly distanced to achieve such look, then you do get it and you make look as if there isa shot taken at a much faster aperture.

Problem is that not always you have such luxury to dictated distance, and there for the need for Super Fast glass that you can shoot WO at T1.3... ;)
 
KETCH ROSSi said:
Fact is that even the 50mm f1.2 is not such a great lens, and does not performs as close as the 85mm f/1.2 the original, and the II smokes it completely,
Click to expand...
Hehe, was looking for a long time into the 85 but didn't pull the trigger... Until today, reading your comment and then finding a nice deal finally convinced me. Can't wait to get it ;)

Regarding the thread-starters question, am i'm the only one who finds that list of options a bit funny? I mean the cheap canon 1.4 on one side and then a RPP and RPZ on the other side. Why leave so many great options out of consideration? I like my Canon 50 1.2 a lot for example. Then there is the new 24-70 II zoom, which looks promising, and two zeiss 50mm-primes, a 17-55 2.8 EF-S zoom... And the whole Nikon and Leica-worlds are there too.

I see multiple questions here: 1.) still vs. cine 2.) pro vs. prosumer vs. consumer 3.) prime vs. zoom 4.) pl vs. ef-mount 5.) budget
That doesn't makes it easy to give good advices. ;)
 
Maik Müller Menendez said:
Hehe, was looking for a long time into the 85 but didn't pull the trigger... Until today, reading your comment and then finding a nice deal finally convinced me. Can't wait to get it ;)

Regarding the thread-starters question, am i'm the only one who finds that list of options a bit funny? I mean the cheap canon 1.4 on one side and then a RPP and RPZ on the other side. Why leave so many great options out of consideration? I like my Canon 50 1.2 a lot for example. Then there is the new 24-70 II zoom, which looks promising, and two zeiss 50mm-primes, a 17-55 2.8 EF-S zoom... And the whole Nikon and Leica-worlds are there too.

I see multiple questions here: 1.) still vs. cine 2.) pro vs. prosumer vs. consumer 3.) prime vs. zoom 4.) pl vs. ef-mount 5.) budget
That doesn't makes it easy to give good advices. ;)
Click to expand...


Make sure is the MK II on the 85 f/1.2 Maik, even so the original version is still better then the 50mm, the MK II is that much better.

But yes, of the 50mm, the f/1.2 still is the best form Canon line up of 50mm.
 
Yeah, honestly getting a headache, the canons are giving me this high end video feel, and yes 23.98 48 shutter and I think the reds or zeiss give you more of the organic feel. So at this point i'm even thinking 18-85.
 
Greg,

Post the footage of what your are seeing. Others are lurking, it's a good topic.
 
I was thinking about getting a Canon mount for my Epic for the following reasons.
I can focus with the auto focus fast without an assistant
So I can get more stable hand held shots using the IS on the lens
Are these the reasons that others on this forum shot with a Canon mount?
Has anyone used the new Tamron 24 70 with the stabilizer? How does it look?

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top