Ibelux 40mm f/0.85 vs Canon FL 55mm f/1.2+Speed Booster

Bokeh

For the bokeh comparison, 100% crops were taken from the neck of the crystal decanter in the background, and the top of the crystal glass in the foreground.  As with the sharpness crops, click on an image, then click the green arrow at the bottom of the screen to enlarge the image to full size.

100% Background Bokeh Crops
100% Background Bokeh Crops
100% Foreground Bokeh Crops
100% Foreground Bokeh Crops

Here things shift a bit.  In the more important background bokeh crops, the Ibelux shows significantly smoother bokeh at wide apertures.  So smooth it’s actually hard to see where the blur discs begin and end, though there is a slight outline on the left edge of the specular highlights.  The Canon shows a much harsher rendering, with prominent bright ring outlines on specular highlights.

Once the lenses are stopped down a bit, the bokeh becomes quite similar between the two. The Ibelux maintains slightly rounder highlights due to the 10 bladed aperture (vs. 8 on the Canon), but also shows much more prominent green outlining from longitudinal chromatic aberration at smaller apertures.

In the foreground bokeh test, the Canon is clearly superior, with a softer rendering overall that continues through the aperture range, though again the lenses become quite close once they reach f/2.8.

Conclusion:

Well, it’s not a fully clear-cut win, but I’d say overall, the Canon 55mm f/1.2 + Speed Booster takes the crown.  It’s sharper in the center and the edges at all apertures, has better foreground bokeh and similar background bokeh from f/2 onward.  Combined with the better distance performance (not shown here), the significantly lighter weight and the massive difference in cost, it’s the much more sensible solution for those wanting a 40mm ultra-fast lens on APS-C.

That said, the bokeh on the Ibelux combined with the soft glow produces a really beautiful rendering that the Canon can’t match.  In that situation, the Ibelux proves superior, but I don’t think very many people would consider that advantage worth the other disadvantages and the $1400 cost differential.  However, look for my full review of the Ibelux 40mm f/0.85, which will be coming up very shortly, to see how it handles all sorts of different situations.

Tags:

Comments

8 responses to “Ibelux 40mm f/0.85 vs Canon FL 55mm f/1.2+Speed Booster”

  1. […] Ibelux 40mm f/0.85 vs Canon FL 55mm f/1.2+Speed Booster » […]

  2. db Avatar
    db

    The Canon looks pretty good. Is it one of those radioactive lenses?

    1. Bille Avatar

      >Is it one of those radioactive lenses?

      It is not. The optical formula matches the later FD 55/1.2 (non-aspherical).

      http://billead.com/canonFL

  3. […] « Ibelux 40mm f/0.85 vs Canon FL 55mm f/1.2+Speed Booster […]

  4. […] in Japanese at dcfever (translation) / Ibelux 40mm f/0.85 vs Canon FL 55mm f/1.2+Speed Booster at admiringlight / FULL REVIEW of the IBELUX at admiringlight […]

  5. Nejra Avatar
    Nejra

    What if you would have used another Canon classic, the 55mm 1.2 aspherical?

  6. Gabriel Avatar
    Gabriel

    Due to how the current sensor technology you do not get the full stop gain from 1.2 as you are implying here. Do the test and you will see that after 1.4 or so you are no longer getting a full stop gain and 1.0 or a bit over that is where the limit is.
    Still I love my canon fd lenses and this was a great test
    Thanks

    1. Phil Avatar
      Phil

      That’s why he uses SpeedBooster :(. Read Jordan’s other article about SpeedBooster.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Search


Categories


Recent Posts


  1. Actually it is better image quality depending on the subject. It’s not “just bigger” when it’s on a bigger sensor.…

  2. The Sony A7c/ii is full frame with higher resolution and other benefits too, so it’s not somethign to evaluate on…

  3. I too was at a loss regarding the inclusion of such a dated subpar EVF. I hadn’t thought of the…

  4. The stacked sensor gives usability benefits for the various computational modes so it is not completely wasted.

  5. 40Mpx isn’t “better image quality” than 20Mpx. It’s just bigger. And not all that much bigger in area. And bigger…