50/50 for 50?

[rmfagan]

Pretty simple question here. Please don't flame me with the "rumors are just that" or "you never know when..." stuff. I currently have a 50 1.8 II and want to upgrade it. I'm familiar with the current upgrade path options but...

What does the forum think of the odds that Canon releases a 50 update, either to the 1.4 or L, by the the end of the year?

I know relying on rumors to make upgrade decisions is bad practice and that I could be out making photos with either of the current iterations right now, but I'm not in a terrible rush. If either stand a solid chance of upgrade, it's worth it to me to wait.

So what say you, betters all, tellers of the future? 50/50? 75%? less?

[neuroanatomist]

The 50L won't be updated anytime soon.  I think a non-L 50mm with IS will come out soon, but slower than f/1.4.

[Sporgon]

The 50L won't be updated anytime soon.  I think a non-L 50mm with IS will come out soon, but slower than f/1.4.

+1,

Maybe f2 based on a more-or-less unmodified planar design - like the 40mm pancake.

Could be really good.

Could be alarmingly expensive initially

[rmfagan]

Ok. Given that possibility, how great of an issue have you found the back focusing on the L to be, and how have you adapted around it?

[SwampYankee]

50 1.8 II is a sharp, lens.  Spending more doesn't make sense considering the options. the 1.2L is fast, but much bigger, much heavier and really expensive.  The 1.4 supposedly has better build quality but breaks more often and is not as sharp.  Whats troubling you about the 1.8? only thing I think could be improved is the bokeh is a bit less than stellar due to the 5 blade design.  Heck, I'm on a 20+ plus year old 50 1.8 and I have not yet found a reason to upgrade

[Sporgon]

Ok. Given that possibility, how great of an issue have you found the back focusing on the L to be, and how have you adapted around it?

I think you mean focus shift caused by the uncorrected spherical aberration - which is what given the 50L its special bokeh.

I'm not a 50L user so can't answer that one. However colleagues that use it consider it a niche lens, rather than a 50mm 'standard'. 

[Dylan777]

Which 50 are you planning to get? The L is not that old. The f1.4 is not that expensive. I'm sure you can buy a used f1.4 on CL for $200-$250.

[mrsfotografie]

We've been here before, but I'll throw the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 into this discussion just for the hell of it. It is my quality 50mm, and it's nice that it shares the 77mm filter thread woth most of my other lenses. For travel I have a 50 mm f/1.8 Mk I. These are my workarounds considering the current offerings of Canon 50's.

[tcmatthews]

No idea when we will get an update.  I am just going to wait.  I would buy an updated Canon 1.4 or a Sigma Art 50 1.4.  I am just to accident prone to go for the current 1.4.

Personally I think it would be smart to release a 50 1.8 STM as a cheep replacement for the first prime most people buy.  But all the rumors are pointing to a 50 2.0 IS which would be fine by me if it is a macro.  If not I am not interested in a slow 50 with IS.

[7enderbender]

I agree with Neuro (how could I not). No new L any time soon (and why would they?), but potentially one new 50 with IS similar to the ones we've seen for the wide angles. Not sure though what that would replace. And having 4(!) 50mm lenses in the line-up when the "standard 50" is really the standard anymore seems silly.

Have to disagree with one poster claiming the 1.4 not being sharp. I had it and it was very sharp. There is a reason why that same exact lens design (dating back decades) has been considered THE reference lens for a very long time. It's still a lovely lens lest for the mediocre build quality on the EF version. In fact, it is a bit sharper than my 50L for some apertures. But then again: sharpness is overrated. My point and shoot and iPhone can do sharp. That's not a reason to carry around a fast 50 lens.

For "sharp" there is no reason to upgrade. The 1.8 is a great lens.

One thing that would be fun: if Canon went back to the old 55mm focal length with something

http://www.fdreview.com/pictures/lenses/large/canon-fd-55mm-f1.2-ssc-asph.jpg

[crasher8]

Odds are the next 50 will follow in the 24/28/35 path and will have IS and a slower Aperture.  I am betting 50mm 1.8 or f/2 IS at $749.00 in Fall or Spring. Will it be 4 stops? I personally would love a handheldable 1/20 1.8 with true ring USM but how much am I will to pay for it? I think this is a job for Sigma, not Canon.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

So far, CR has not published any rumors from knowledgeable people about a upcoming 50mm lens release, so you are getting speculation based on no actual knowledge or information.
 
Nothing wrong with that as long as you understand it.

[neuroanatomist]

So far, CR has not published any rumors from knowledgeable people about a upcoming 50mm lens release, so you are getting speculation based on no actual knowledge or information.
 
Nothing wrong with that as long as you understand it.

Good point.  While many (most?) patents don't become products, the recently-published patent for a 50/1.8 IS seems relevant, especially given the recent release of three wide angle primes with IS.

[Dylan777]

Odds are the next 50 will follow in the 24/28/35 path and will have IS and a slower Aperture.  I am betting 50mm 1.8 or f/2 IS at $749.00 in Fall or Spring. Will it be 4 stops? I personally would love a handheldable 1/20 1.8 with true ring USM but how much am I will to pay for it? I think this is a job for Sigma, not Canon.

For prime, I prefer bigger aperture over IS. Would be awesome if they could come up with f1.4 IS, sharp wide open to f5.6. Zero focus shift, solid build

[Chuck Alaimo]

I agree with Neuro (how could I not). No new L any time soon (and why would they?), but potentially one new 50 with IS similar to the ones we've seen for the wide angles. Not sure though what that would replace. And having 4(!) 50mm lenses in the line-up when the "standard 50" is really the standard anymore seems silly.

Have to disagree with one poster claiming the 1.4 not being sharp. I had it and it was very sharp. There is a reason why that same exact lens design (dating back decades) has been considered THE reference lens for a very long time. It's still a lovely lens lest for the mediocre build quality on the EF version. In fact, it is a bit sharper than my 50L for some apertures. But then again: sharpness is overrated. My point and shoot and iPhone can do sharp. That's not a reason to carry around a fast 50 lens.

For "sharp" there is no reason to upgrade. The 1.8 is a great lens.

One thing that would be fun: if Canon went back to the old 55mm focal length with something

http://www.fdreview.com/pictures/lenses/large/canon-fd-55mm-f1.2-ssc-asph.jpg

Define anytime soon...lol... looking at the updates to the primes, all the v2's, there is a 24, next is the 35, the 14 is v2, the 85 is v2...I'd say within the next year and a half they would update the 50 L.  With that said, glass holds its value, if you need the lens, waiting for an update is not the way to go.  Snag what you need now, then sell and replace down the line....