« on: December 04, 2013, 11:11:43 AM »
An 85 f/2 IS would be the one of this group I would want, but if it's an "STM", and not even an L...what if it still costs $1k? If it's not an L, would it really be worth $1k? Would it be worth over $1k (seems likely it would be $1199 or something)?? If it's not going to autofocus as fast as a USM lens, and I wouldn't be using it for video very much...would it be worth the high price they're likely to ask, to me? Or do I not matter? Haha, don't answer that!
To me, were I to very crudely ranking the focus systems, on a scale of 1-10:
8-10 = Ring USM (yes, some are blindingly fast, and others not so much)
6 = Non-ring USM (like in the current 50 F/1.4)
3 = STM
1 = no designation at all, the squeaky noisy AF of the 50 F/1.8, the kit 18-55, etc.
But keep in mind that I am a still shooter, and STM is crap for most of us unless we are doing all-the-time-in-the-world-to-shoot photography like in the corny Nikon Df teaser videos. STM is a slowly focusing system that is better suited video AF for those that want/need it. I see STM as a nice little bonus for those who want to shoot video with AF on their Rebels, but it's not a best-in-class focusing system for still shooters at all.
This single distinction is why I don't use the super sharp 40mm pancake -- even the crummy 50 F/1.4 'hunt for a while' non-ring USM AF is faster to target than the pancake.
So I would bet the farm that any EF mount fast primes (L or non-L) will be proper ring USM... just like the other (24/28/35) refreshes.
I hope you are right, but if they aren't "L" lenses, isn't STM a likelihood?
Categorically: no. These lenses will be USM for certain -- again, just like the 24/28/35 refreshes.
USM has been on non-L primes for 15-20 years.