Hi I have just upgraded my old Sigma 1.4 (the one before the ART) to the Canon 50 1.2L, in short I am not happy with its performance. I have AFMA's the lens just a -1 needed but Focal did report higher than normal levels of Astigmatism...the lens is pretty soft wide open and stopped down it does sharpen up, at 2.8 I would say its pretty much a dead heat between it and my 24 70 2.8 zoom. 50m 1.2L at 2.8 24 70 mk2 K at 2.8 at 50mm Both are 100% crops from 5d mk iv, of this scene 50 1.2L wide open, I know I would expect it to be less sharp....but its a lot less sharp! I did intend to use it as a walk around as on long hikes the 5d4 and zoom lens can get a little heavy, (not as young as I used to be!), but i now find myself fast prime-less....I am thinking about the 85 1.2L but its not exactly light..I also notice it seems to have a lot of CA, even under normal lighting. Am i expecting too much from the 50 1.2L, or is it a Bad Copy? I am not normally one to shout bad copy, this would be my first time ever...but... ...further testing on focal says the quality of focus is excellent, but the astigmatism is between 7-8% wide open compared to a "normal range" of 1-2% for most users. Focal reports an large number of results to compare against. This is the first lens I have ever been disappointed in out of the box. Had anyone else got this lens? If so how does yours perform?