amacklin Loc: New Hampshire

I currently have the Nifty Fifty from my very early years of shooting. I am torn between the 50mm f1.4 and the Monster 50mm f1.2L used mostly for portraits, weddings and some street shooting. Have always heard to play big or stay HOME, regarding the cost of the (f1.2L) I have also, rented the (f1.2L) for a wedding and was very impressed with the outcomes.

What version due you use and why?

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Read this side by side comparison.
https://www.slrlounge.com/canon-50mm-prime/

jim quist Loc: Missouri

If you have the money you might want to consider the 50 1.0
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/01/canons-ultra-rare-lenses-using-the-canon-50mm-f1-0l/

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

I don't have one. I use a 24-70 f/2.8 and zoom to 50mm if I want 50mm. f/2.8 is plenty shallow for me.

Robyn H Loc: MainLine PA

I use the EF 85 f/1.2 for portraits. If you're going for shallow depth of field and super bokeh, get the EF 50 f/1.2, you won't be disappointed.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I do not use Canon lenses, but your question took me back to the film days when I used Olympus SLR equipment. I worked my way through a 50mm f1.8, a 50mm f1.4, and finally a 50mm f1.2. What I learned was that there was much more difference among those lensess than just the maximum aperture. Each represented a different level of lens quality. The 1.8 was a nice introductory consumer grade lens, the 1.4 was a premium consumer grade lens, and the 1.2 was a full professional quality lens. Much better built, much less plastic, much better performance. There was no comparison in corner sharpness, for instance, between the 1.8 and the 1.2.

I cannot transfer this experience to the Canon lenses you are considering, but I can say that my recommendation is that you try one of each, if possible, and critically compare the difference in the images that you see. I'd do some testing wide open, in the center of the range, and with very small apertures. My guess is that if you compare carefully, you will see some significant differences that will help you make a choice. Watch also for the 'feel' of the lenses...one may just may feel more "right" to use. My guess is that you will see some differences that have nothing directly to do with the difference in max aperture.

Millismote Loc: Massachusetts

I have the 50 mm f1.4, very nice lens, had it for 10 yrs. I bought it because price was a factor and I don't think the nifty fifty was out then.

ltj123 Loc: NW Wisconsin

Only had 1.4 for some 30 years with couple camera brands, work well. Then changed to Canon in 2005 and sold all that stuff.

ltj123 Loc: NW Wisconsin

Now my only nifty fifty is an old 50mm 2.5 micro, this lens has worked great for me for many years. Most portrait work though is with 85mm 1.8 which seems to be getting more use lately.

Haymaker

I have just received my "black friday" gift to myself of a 50mm f1.2L after shooting for several years with the f1.8. Based on numerous reviews, I decided the 1.2 was the way to go. Some of the reviews I saw ranked the f1.4 lens BELOW the f1.8 in terms of overall quality (Canon only, so I can't speak for other brands) The first thing I noticed upon receiving the f1.2 (other than the difference in size and weight) was how close to the edge the rear element is. Extra care will be needed when switching lenses. I look forward to this lens getting a lot of use over the holidays.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I use the 1.4 cause it is lighter and in most cases sharper.

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

Obviously both are good lenses, with the L being the best. You say you’d use it for for street shooting. At 1.2 pounds plus the camera, that’s a lot of gear hanging around your neck. I’d rent the 1.2 for a day or two and take it for a walk to see what you think. What’s the point of having Proglass if you don’t use it.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The lens I use is the 50mm f/1.4 USM. It's a good compromise of size, background blur effects and aperture.... 2/3 stop faster than the little f/1.8 and 2/3 stop slower than the monster f/1.2. Focus speed is the best of the bunch, too (see note below about focus mechanism).

The 50mm f/1.2 is a truly fabulous lens... It's great for making dreamy shots at weddings and some other types of portraiture. But there is absolutely NO WAY I'd use it for street photography. It screams "Hit me over the head with something heavy and steal my expensive camera gear" or "HEY! I'm taking your picture!". The f/1.2 isn't a "candid" lens, by any means. Many people also find it a bit more difficult to work with... shallow depth of field requires very precise focus. And it's a little slower focusing than the f/1.4 (both are noticeably faster focusing than the f/1.8s).

The current 50mm f/1.8 STM is a nice improvement over the 50mm f/1.8 "II"... Metal bayonet mount, quieter/faster STM stepper motor focusing, added aperture blades for nicer background blur.

BTW, if yours is truly the oldest version of the 50mm f/1.8... not the "II"... it has some value. It's better built than the "II" that replaced it and the first version often sold used for more than the "II" sold for new! I don't know if this is still the case with the nicely improved STM now available.

Both the f/1.4 and f/1.2 have a distance scale, which the f/1.8 II and STM lack (the original f/1.8 has the scale).

IF you opt for the f/1.4, be aware it uses a hybrid form of USM that can be a little fragile. Be certain to get the lens hood for it and use it at all times. Damage to the focus mechanism seems to come from the front of the barrel getting bumped or the focus ring knocked about while in your camera bag. The lens hood protects the front of the lens while shooting and when reversed for storage covers the focus ring. I bought my 50/1.4 used at least 10 or 15 years ago, it came with and I've always used the hood... and never had any problem. Other folks who were less careful with theirs have had to have the focus mechanism repaired... which costs about $160 per instance.

The f/1.4 and f/1.2 use USM ultrasonic focus drive, which is faster and allows "full time manual override". You can manually focus (or defocus/refocus) at any time without concern about damaging the lens. This can also be done with the current STM stepper motor version of the f/1.8, however it's a "fly by wire" lens, so needs to be "powered up" before the manual focus ring will do anything. Both the other, micro motor f/1.8 versions MUST be turned off at the switch before manually focusing them, or the focus mechanism WILL be damaged. All three of the f/1.8 have narrow little focus rings that aren't very "manual focus friendly". Both the f/1.4 and f/1.2 have much nicer and more usable manual focusing rings.

Note: Some users feel that manual override of the f/1.4's hybrid USM might lead to earlier failure of that system. Personally I've never had any problem with mine. I don't manual focus it a lot, but also don't hesitate to do so.

The f/1.4 lens is a little soft wide open. IMO, it's usable - or at least my copy of the lens is - but don't look for absolute sharpness when using it at f/1.4. I usually try to stop down to f/2 or f/2.2 at least, because it sharpens up nicely while still rendering a strong background blur effect. (The f/1.8 lenses do this too, require stopping down further to truly sharpen up.)

I have never closely compared the f/1.4 with the latest f/1.8 STM, but in comparison to both of the earlier f/1.8 versions... the f/1.4 has nicer background blur (more aperture blades for a more truly round aperture)... better control of internal flare makes for slightly better color saturation and contrast. These differences are subtle, hard to detect unless you do careful side-by-side test shots for comparison. The f/1.2 has great color and contrast, as well as an even lovelier background blur, of course.... at 4X the price and almost 2X the weight and size!

The f/1.2 is an L-series, so it comes with lens hood. It uses 72mm filters.

The f/1.4 doesn't come with hood, it's sold separately (but strongly recommended!). It uses 58mm filters.

The f/1.8 STM and the earlier, slower/noisier focusing micro motor "II" both have rather recessed front elements, so may not need lens hood, although they are available if wanted. (The "II" requires and adapter to fit the hood!)

If you are using a full frame camera, all these Canon 50mm are full frame capable.

If you are using an APS-C crop sensor camera, an alternative you might want to consider is the Tamron SP 60mm f/2 macro. It doubles nicely for portraiture, thanks to it's f/2 aperture. It's sharper wide open than either the 50/1.4 or 50/1.8s are (but of course the f/1.4 is a full stop faster, while the f/1.8 lenses are only 1/3 stop faster). The Tamron 60mm f/2 is NOT fast focusing. It uses a micro motor and a long throw focus mechanism for accuracy, instead of speed... typical of macro lenses. It's internal focusing though... doesn't increase in length when focused closer, the way some macro and the 50mm Canon lenses do (though not a lot, since they aren't anywhere near as close focusing). It's nice that the Tamron 60mm can serve both macro and portrait purposes (better than other macro lenses, IMO).... and has a focal length nestled in between my two favorites for portraits on APS-C (50mm and 85mm).

There are several other 50mm available that are full frame capable (and of course work on crop sensor fine, too)... Sigma's f/1.4 "Art" has it's fans, is sharper than the Canon wide open, same at f/2.2, gets softer at f/5.6 & smaller. It renders colors "differently"... (I wouldn't say it's better or worse, depends on the subject and situation). There were one or two earlier "pre-Art" versions of that Sigma, too. Tokina has recently introduced their Opera 50mm f/1.4. And there are some manual focus from Zeiss, Rokinon and others. Tamron has their relatively new 45mm f/1.8 which seems to be getting good reviews. And of course there is Canon's own TS-E 50mm f/2.8L "Tilt Shift", which is rather hefty, pricey and manual focus only.

gordone Loc: Red Deer AB Canada

I had a 50mm F1.4 and ended up selling it right away. The 24-70 F2.8 ii is a lot sharper at 50 mm. The 50 mm F1.8 usm is supposed to be a lot sharper than the F1.4 and about 1/3 the price. The F1.4 is susceptible to focus ring damage if dropped when the lens is partially extended. The repair price is more that buying a new F1.8. If you can afford it the F1.2 is supposed to be good and the new RF lens even better. A lot of fast lenses have to be stopped down to get a real sharp image. By the time you do that, the 24-70 at F2.8 becomes an attractive option for me.

tropics68 Loc: Georgia

Have both and the 1.8 outshines the 1.4 in every way. One of these days maybe I will trade the 1.4 in on a 1.2. Maybe.