New 50 Finally on the Way? [CR1]

[DB]

I sold my Ef 50mm f/1.4 USM this past summer as the constant focus-hunting really annoyed me, especially after experiencing the AF speed on my 24-70, but I'm now looking at older FD 55mm 1.2 lenses that I can use with an adapter (obviously will be MF) and this weekend I came across a Zeiss Planar T 50mm f/1.7 EOS EF conversion with fluid variable aperture (so great for video) in pristine condition for 30 euros less than I sold my 50 1.4 for.  If Canon release a new improved ring-USM or STM 50 f/1.4 for about €400 (around $500) price range then I might be tempted again.

[DB]

If the new 50mm is f/1.4 and has IS I would expect it to be at least as expensive, if not more, than the new 24 IS and 28 IS.

+1 I agree. Where I live the EF 28mm f2.8 IS USM lens is $1,150 (€899.99) http://www.connscameras.ie/canon-ef-28mm-f2-8-is-usm/4960999845746pd.html

So if Canon do make it IS, then it will cost a thousand bucks equivalent in Europe, and at that price, I'd rather buy old Canon primes and convert them (using EdMika kit or such like)

[Mt Spokane Photography]

IMHO, Canon can't price a new 50mm f/2 IS (& probably USM or STM) without practically killing either the existing f/1.8 or the new f/2 - people who care that much for a fraction of a stop would buy the f/1.4 anyway.

Somehow I doubt if a $900 lens would kill a $120 lens.

[EOBeav]

Give me a better build, a true ring USM and leave it at 1.4 with no IS,  I'll pay a few dollars more than the Sigma. ~489?

I tend to agree, although with Canon's recent price points for new glass, I think 489 is wishful thinking. The fragility of the 50mm f/1.4 is well noted, particularly with cheap plastic build of the crucial inside barrel. When it gets dinged a little too much, it will warp and can cause serious problems requiring some shop work. Build what they already have a little sturdier, and I think you've got a winner.

[Bob Howland]

I wouldn't put it past Canon to make a new EF 50mm f/1.8 IS USM intended for video.

If it's intended for video, my guess is that it would probably be STM, not USM, especially if the eventual goal is to allow lens focusing while recording video.

The new 24mm & 28mm have USM, rather than STM.

OK, do the 24 and 28 IS lenses focus quietly enough that a camcorder/video DSLR could continuously focus them while recording without the associated noise being picked up by the built-in mics or a mic mounted on top of the camera? My Panasonic HDC-TM700 Camcorder, with a built-in lens, can do that and I believe that the Canon XF 100/105/300/305 camcorders can do it also.

[Dylan777]

I wouldn't put it past Canon to make a new EF 50mm f/1.8 IS USM intended for video.

Or why not EF 50mm f/2.8 IS USM for $700, in line with recent trends.

-1....IS or no IS, I'll take fast AF and sharp at wide open(f1.4)

[timkbryant]

Ditto. I've been toying with picking up a 50mm soon. I think now I'll wait and see what the price and availability of this new f/1.4 is before making my move. Also, what the reports are on its quality, etc. will also sway my actions.

Of course, I could easily grab the f/1.8 anyway, and upgrade later. Decisions. Decisions.

In that case, I shall keep my hard-earned cash safely in my wallet.

[pj1974]

I am very much waiting, and looking forward to a new Canon 50mm. I had 2 copies of the 50mm f/1.8, and eventually got rid of both. AF was not quick enough, nor consistent enough for me on either of my DSLRs. While quite sharp stopped down a bit, it lacked absolute sharpnss & sufficient contrast wide open - particularly noticable in low light. The 50mm f/1.8 It also had poor quality bokeh.

Additionally, I've also used the 50mm f1.4 - but I don't like the 'el-cheapo' micro-USM, and the IQ wide open leaves a lot to be desired. I do realise that good shots CAN be had with either current f/1.8 and f/1.4 - but I want a prime lens that is consistent, quick (both in terms of AF and usability) and long-lasting.  I ended up using my 100mm f/2.8 macro for portraits and subject isolation more than my 50mm's, even though of course the composition / framing needs to be much different.  (I find my 100mm f/2.8 USM macro lens has quick and very accurate AF response).

So... what do I want in a/the new 50mm prime?

• between f/1.4 to f/1.8. (the f/2.8 of the new 24mm and 28mm lenses is a different category IMHO)
• sharp & contrasty wide open, so I can be confident of awesome IQ
• rounded aperture blades (pref 8 to 9 of them) for great bokeh
• study build (eg metal mount, good quality construction materials
• close minimum focussing distance (eg about 0.4m - 0.5m)
• super sharp stopped down
• USM (or... STM if it's a good implementation, though I'd probably prefer USM with FTM focus).
• IS... well, it would be a bonus - but it shouldn't affect any of the above... but I'll happily pay $100 - $200 extra for it.
• Eventual (hoping!) price: definitely below $1000 with IS and below $800 without IS.

Paul

[Pag]

I recently bought a Sigma 50mm/1.4 and I've been very happy with it so far. Fast, accurate focus, beautiful bokeh and very sharp. It did require AFMA, it's quite a bit bigger and heavier than the Canon 50/1.8 it replaced and it won't stop down more than f/16, but the upgrade was worth it.

[Chuck Alaimo]

I am hoping for an incremental evolutionary upgrade here.  if its the 1.4 they are working with here, I agree with most here - keep it 1.4, better optics, better on AF (yes, it does tend to hunt more than I'd like).

Other than the 85mm v2, most of the primes lately have been geared towards video (the new wide primes are examples, both being 2.8, both having Is and both costing way more than their previous models.) 

Hoping they intend to segment things like they do with the telephoto lenses - offer fast aperature, no IS (1.2, 1.4, 1.- then the IS versions at f2.0-4).

Everyone likes to complain that there is no stills only camera (the good old bodies cost more because of video arguement), but damn, this is almost worse if the glass upgrades are gonna more more for video than stills.

[pwp]

In that case, I shall keep my hard-earned cash safely in my wallet.  I was about to splash out on the Sigma 50mm f/1.4...

Yes I'd wait if I were you. I went through two Sigma 50 f/1.4 lenses after off-loading my EF 50 f/1.4. Neither Sigma was consistent enough to trust for commercial work. AF was far too hit-and-miss. I should have just kept the old EF 50 f/1.4! My money is on the new lens being an f/2is. Hope fully it's stellar wide open.

-PW

[RLPhoto]

Canon should simply make a better 50mm 1.4. Until then, 50L will be my choice.

[ddashti]

Would it be possible for Canon to add IS to a wide aperture 50mm at this point?

[Ellen Schmidtee]

IMHO, Canon can't price a new 50mm f/2 IS (& probably USM or STM) without practically killing either the existing f/1.8 or the new f/2 - people who care that much for a fraction of a stop would buy the f/1.4 anyway.

Somehow I doubt if a $900 lens would kill a $120 lens.

How many EF 50mm f/2 IS USM would Canon sell for $900? I think few enough.

[RGomezPhotos]

Totally.  I love my Zeiss 50mm but it could stand an upgrade.  Give me 8 to 9 diaphragm blades like the upper-end lenses....  And make it metal.  At 50mm, who needs IS....

Give me a better build, a true ring USM and leave it at 1.4 with no IS,  I'll pay a few dollars more than the Sigma. ~489?