November 26, 2014, 04:31:05 PM

Author Topic: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS  (Read 23799 times)

insanitybeard

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #75 on: July 25, 2013, 05:25:12 AM »
How about light weight and compact size? No, I wouldn't do landscapes at 1.8, but IS gives me the option to shoot in lower light, maybe at a lower ISO or at a smaller aperture for DOF. Carrying a tripod isn't always practical or possible when hiking etc.

Adding IS will not make the lens lighter or smaller.

Maybe not, but the new 24 and 28mm 2.8 IS lenses are still compact and light relative to zooms or their faster aperture equivalents, is this not true?
7D / EF-S 10-22 / 17-40L / 70-200 f4L IS / EF-S 60 macro

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #75 on: July 25, 2013, 05:25:12 AM »

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #76 on: July 25, 2013, 05:30:21 AM »

To be a bit pedantic, camcorder manufacturers were putting OIS into camcorders a good decade before anyone put video on their IS-capable DSLRs.  I had a Sony TRV-9 with OIS way back in '98.  I know it hit still camera lenses a few years earlier, but it didn't take very long at all for it to trickle down to video use.

As a result, I suspect that at least a hundred people use some form of IS for video (on camcorders) for every one person who uses it for stills.  So yeah, it's mostly used for video—which is not to say that it is only useful for video, just that statistically, it is mostly used for video.  :D


They are different systems.  For a start the video image device on your TRV9 is probably 1/4", and the lens will be tiny as well.

The system developed over the years and on my last compact camcorder (Sony Z1) you could specify how smoothly the IS operated.  This is a feature that DSLR lenses just don't have.  My SX230 lets me choose whether IS is on all the time, or just for the shot, maybe this is what we need on EOS bodies, if the mount protocol exists (which I doubt, as the switchgear is on the lens)


Also, I don't agree that serious video requires a support system.  Sometimes it does, but not always.  I've shot a fair amount of serious video without a tripod.  Sure, you can't survive shooting for hours at a time that way, but if you're just trying to grab a few seconds of B-roll, you can get it a heck of a lot faster if you aren't having to drag a tripod around, in my experience.  It's a compromise, yes, but often it's the right compromise.

A trv9 is a different prospect, ergonomically, size, distibution of weight, to a DSLR.  My old TRV-900 could be hand held with OS on, but it was desgined to be held that way, unbraced.  DSLR's really are designed to be braced against the eye... not the way folk use them in video mode.

I've got various grips, from a simple L bracket, to a shoulder rig to full ENG tripod.  And I always have a superclamp and microball head in my kitbag.  I love tripods for wide establishers and interviews.  More often than not my camera is on my shoulder, or a monopod.

The form factor of a DSLR is just wrong when held away from the 'brace against face' position.  So IS isn't a bad thing, just so far Canon haven't got it right for video, in their EF lenses at least (the XL lenses had a nice implementation, that said)

IMO, some form of IS is critical for long still exposures and for video for very different reasons.  For long exposures, it is needed because otherwise you get double images.  For video, it is needed because otherwise you get seasick.  Either way, it isn't always useful or necessary, but when it is, it's a godsend.  Just my $0.02.

For long exposures you really want a tripod.  There are limits.

I look forward to seeing what the proposed nifty fifty 2 offers.  If it's a well implemented contiguous IS with a smooth mode that doesn't cost the earth I might be interested.

Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1311
    • View Profile
    • Zeeography (flickr)
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #77 on: July 25, 2013, 05:48:18 AM »
All this IS debate is totally moot.

The only thing some (including me) can say is that we are pissed paying for IS that we don't want/need due to our style orientation. (+carrying the weight and bulk).

That's cool I see your point ... but a cheap fifty without IS already exists. Why would you be pissed if a more expensive version became available? No one is forcing you to buy it. In fact the 50 1.4 offers good value too. That's 2 cheap 50 primes. Now what Canon need to do is simply improve the 50L and we will all be happy! Btw I am convinced there is nothing wrong with the 50L and most of the hoo ha is all baloney. What is an issue is the price.
6D | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | SY 14 2.8 | Sigma 50 1.4

EOS M | 11-22 IS STM | 22 STM | FD 50 1.4

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3227
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #78 on: July 25, 2013, 06:25:39 AM »
Why are so many lenses being fitted with IS?

Because as sensor pixel densities go up, without it you would need to shoot at 1/150 to get a sharp shot with a 50mm lens.

Is the penny dropping yet?

Viggo

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2112
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #79 on: July 25, 2013, 06:49:57 AM »
Why are so many lenses being fitted with IS?

Because as sensor pixel densities go up, without it you would need to shoot at 1/150 to get a sharp shot with a 50mm lens.

Is the penny dropping yet?

+1 I saw it very clearly going from the 1d3 to the 1d4, I had to go from 1/1000s to 1/2000s to get sharp action shots. And now with the 1d X, it's somewhere in between, but I set my min.speed to 1/2000s anyway.

And for low light it's the same, it's very seldom I go under 1/250s with a lens shorter than 100.
1dx, 24-70 L II, 50 Art, 200 f2.0 L

vscd

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 185
  • 5DC
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #80 on: July 25, 2013, 07:01:19 AM »
...and do you really need the pixelcount? Doubling the Pixelamount just gives you minor resolutiondifference in x/y, but you gain a lot of negative effects. That's the reason why I still use the 5DC... it's a lightgathering beast with 12 MP on a FF-Sensor.

And yes, the new Canon 24 IS or 28 IS are not that big, but they have a whopping Price around 700$. For a normal 2.8 prime... I think this is way too much. Without IS ist would be 200$ less, I think.

Why does everyone think IS is *the* masterkey to filmmaking? Every serious filmmaker uses manual lenses and If you want to have steady shots you can even get a gyrostabilizer for the whole camerasystem.

Don't get me wrong, If canon would make both versions, everyone would be lucky... but this won't happen, so everyone has to pay the higher price for the demands of a few.
5DC, 24-85, 85 1.2L II, 80-200 2.8L, 100 2.8L IS, 14 2.8, 35 1.4, 75-300 IS, 40STM

insanitybeard

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #81 on: July 25, 2013, 07:35:31 AM »
And yes, the new Canon 24 IS or 28 IS are not that big, but they have a whopping Price around 700$. For a normal 2.8 prime... I think this is way too much. Without IS ist would be 200$ less, I think.

Why does everyone think IS is *the* masterkey to filmmaking? Every serious filmmaker uses manual lenses and If you want to have steady shots you can even get a gyrostabilizer for the whole camerasystem.

Don't get me wrong, If canon would make both versions, everyone would be lucky... but this won't happen, so everyone has to pay the higher price for the demands of a few.

I don't disagree with you about the price, but can you substantiate that 'everyone has to pay....for the demands of a few'? Opinion on here may be divided, but I disagree that a majority don't want it, especially as the posters here are a fraction of Canon's market.

In any case, I think the bigger issue here is not that Canon is implementing IS on their new lenses, it's the price premium they see fit to levy for the privilege. But that is their direction as a company, like it or not.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2013, 07:41:18 AM by insanitybeard »
7D / EF-S 10-22 / 17-40L / 70-200 f4L IS / EF-S 60 macro

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #81 on: July 25, 2013, 07:35:31 AM »

Viggo

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2112
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #82 on: July 25, 2013, 07:58:43 AM »
Yes, because much better IQ, build, focusing accuracy and speed is 0% of the price increase of the new models. ::)
1dx, 24-70 L II, 50 Art, 200 f2.0 L

crasher8

  • Guest
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #83 on: July 25, 2013, 08:03:22 AM »
A 4th choice from Canon? Come on Sigma…...

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5114
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #84 on: July 25, 2013, 09:29:52 AM »
IS on a 50mm? Why?

Because their fast zoom in this range doesn't have IS, so rather than go f2.8+IS they do it the other way around: 1.8+IS :-\ ... and they'll probably also design and market these as video lenses.

That's cool I see your point ... but a cheap fifty without IS already exists.

But w/o a decent af system...

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4276
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #85 on: July 25, 2013, 09:38:42 AM »
How about light weight and compact size? No, I wouldn't do landscapes at 1.8, but IS gives me the option to shoot in lower light, maybe at a lower ISO or at a smaller aperture for DOF. Carrying a tripod isn't always practical or possible when hiking etc.

Adding IS will not make the lens lighter or smaller.

Maybe not, but the new 24 and 28mm 2.8 IS lenses are still compact and light relative to zooms or their faster aperture equivalents, is this not true?

Most Canon non-L prime lenses are quite out of date. Tech changes fast - smaller and faster. Still, adding IS will not decrease the lens size. I'm sure you recall cell phone sizes 5-7yrs ago. I still believe primary reason buying prime is fast aperture & shallow DOF. IS was introduced to prime due to video feature in DSLR. Again, I can't speak for everybody else. I prefer f1.4 with or without IS. and yet, sharp @ wide open.
Bodies: 1DX -- 5D III
Zooms: 16-35L f4 IS -- 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Primes: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3525
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #86 on: July 25, 2013, 11:02:42 AM »
How about adding IS to a lens that really needs it. Take the 135L for example....  ::)

insanitybeard

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #87 on: July 25, 2013, 12:19:20 PM »
Most Canon non-L prime lenses are quite out of date. Tech changes fast - smaller and faster. Still, adding IS will not decrease the lens size. I'm sure you recall cell phone sizes 5-7yrs ago. I still believe primary reason buying prime is fast aperture & shallow DOF. IS was introduced to prime due to video feature in DSLR. Again, I can't speak for everybody else. I prefer f1.4 with or without IS. and yet, sharp @ wide open.

Regarding lens size, there are limits to how small in size and weight a lens can be made to cover a particular size of sensor, regardless of the march of technology, as long as we are using glass optics. I am not disputing that IS makes lenses bigger and heavier than a non stabilised equivalent, however the point I was trying to make is that the new primes (or old ones for that matter) offer a  compact and lighter alternative to a zoom, whether they have IS or not. To me, the IS is another tool for helping get a shot under certain circumstances where I could not have done so previously, it's not the solution to everything, nor do I expect it to be.
7D / EF-S 10-22 / 17-40L / 70-200 f4L IS / EF-S 60 macro

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #87 on: July 25, 2013, 12:19:20 PM »

drjlo

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #88 on: July 25, 2013, 12:32:11 PM »
How about adding IS to a lens that really needs it. Take the 135L for example....  ::)

Or 85L III IS.  That would enable me to sell my 50L, maybe even 35L.

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #89 on: July 25, 2013, 12:47:10 PM »
Let's not forget the other unforgivable reason they may well put this lens out.  Profit.   Canon is a profit center first and foremost.  That is there duty and they will sell thousands and thousands of these lenses with the IS feature included, making??? Profit... Good plan...  ;)
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400L, 70-200 2.8L II, 24-105L, 16-35L IS, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, Samy 14mm 2.8,  600 EX-RT, 580EX II, 430EX II, 1.4X III, 2.0X III

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« Reply #89 on: July 25, 2013, 12:47:10 PM »