A New 50 Coming Soon? [CR1]

[drjlo]

I'll tolerate f/1.8 instead of f/1.4 if it's pretty sharp at f/1.8 wide open.  High price..not so much. 
I do hope there is a EF-M 50 mm f/1.8 IS coming that's smaller.

[gmrza]

f/1.4 allows you to get shallow DOF at longer focal distances. Not all shallow DOF photography and videography is headshots, in which 1.4, or even 2.8, on FF can be too shallow.

What also needs to be considered is that almost universally lenses suffer from some degree of light fall-off towards the fringes and are also less sharp wide open.  A f/1.4 lens stopped down to f/2 will usually be very sharp and suffer from minimal/less light fall-off at the fringes.  Depending on your application, this may or may not be an issue.

[cellomaster27]

Okay canon, give me this lens with good construction, metal mount, sharp at 1.8, and under 500 and I'm sold.  hopefully that's not asking too much.     Pretty excited about this rumor. 

I really like lenses that can go wide.. but it seems that wide just is more of bragging rights than actual use.  Sure there are AMAZING photos taken at f1.2, 1.4... but most are just fine/better at higher f stops.  Just my opinion.

Time to sell my 50 1.8 fast before this comes out... to the people not on canon rumors.  XD

[verysimplejason]

Time to sell my 50 1.8 fast before this comes out... to the people not on canon rumors.  XD

It's too cheap to sell the 50 1.8.  Just keep it as a backup.    However, if you can exchange it with some good lighting equipment, then why not?

[GMCPhotographics]

Okay canon, give me this lens with good construction, metal mount, sharp at 1.8, and under 500 and I'm sold.  hopefully that's not asking too much.     Pretty excited about this rumor. 

I really like lenses that can go wide.. but it seems that wide just is more of bragging rights than actual use.  Sure there are AMAZING photos taken at f1.2, 1.4... but most are just fine/better at higher f stops.  Just my opinion.

Time to sell my 50 1.8 fast before this comes out... to the people not on canon rumors.  XD

I have an original ef 50mm f1.8...back from the days when the EF mount was new and the only ESO camera was the EOS 650...it has a mental mount and is pretty sharp wide open. It's a realy pity that Canon haven't created the perfect 50 yet. I've owned every 50mm canon have made in the ef mount (and a few of the FD's before that) and they are all deficient in some way. The best is certainly the 50mm f1.2 L but it's a lens which is far from perfect. As much as I'd lke a better 50mm lens, I'm more of a 35/85mm kind of guy. My 50' is very rarely used.

[BRNexus6]

Finally the lens I've been waiting for.  I love the look of 50mm when shooting video, but there are so many shots where IS would have really helped.   I don't want to have to bring a rig for stabilization.  A 50mm 1.8 IS will be my favorite lens by far. It won't take much to improve on the 50mm 1.8 which has its roots all the way back to 1989.  7 circular iris blades with also be welcome.

Price likely won't be higher than $399.99.   I mean its a 50mm 1.8 which is a pretty easy lens to design. IS will just make the lens slightly bigger. 

[BRNexus6]

Save "IS" for 135mm or longer, so we can shoot 1/60ish

Where is f1.2 or f1.4ish 50mm prime?

Video benefits IS equipped lens regardless of the focal length.

[Sella174]

Make it an EF 50mm f/2.5 USM IS Compact-Macro with the same 1:2 magnification, and perhaps weather-sealing, then I'll be interested. Otherwise, what's the point of it either not being f/1.4 or super-cheap? It's one or the other.

[Woody]

Make it an EF 50mm f/2.5 USM IS Compact-Macro with the same 1:2 magnification, and perhaps weather-sealing, then I'll be interested. Otherwise, what's the point of it either not being f/1.4 or super-cheap? It's one or the other.

The difference between f/1.4 and f/1.8 is merely 0.67 stop. Change in DOF is not significant.

Now, between f/1.4 and f/2.5, the difference is 1.67 stop... that is significant. I will not get a 50 f/2.5 lens, useless to me.

[Sella174]

Now, between f/1.4 and f/2.5, the difference is 1.67 stop... that is significant. I will not get a 50 f/2.5 lens, useless to me.

Depth of field isn't everything to everybody.

[Woody]

Depth of field isn't everything to everybody.

Then, why get FF? The EF-S 60 mm f/2.8 macro is just as good.

[Lichtgestalt]

Depth of field isn't everything to everybody.

Then, why get FF?

really?

[Marsu42]

I wonder why they don't just give the 50 1.4 proper USM high-precision AF.

They obviously don't want to tackle the Sigma heads on. Canon might not have a better iq after a Sigma 50/1.4 refresh, but surely would loose a price war with any 3rd party manufacturer...

.. imho that's why they always try to sidestep the competition and create something else - prestigious and/or unique like f1.2 lenses, ultra-lowlight af (6d), the recent IS primes.

They use an out and out faulty design on that, why do they never fix it?

It keeps selling and is cheap to produce.

[Sella174]

Then, why get FF? The EF-S 60 mm f/2.8 macro is just as good.

A 50mm lens is kind of a standard lens on "full-frame" cameras and the Compact-Macro can be used for both macro and ordinary photography. Personally, I find the current (or should that be discontinued) version much more versatile than a zoom. Not so the EF-S 60mm macro lens, which is first restricted to "crop" cameras and second the focal length is more in the portrait equivalent range.

[Sella174]

Depth of field isn't everything to everybody.

Taken with a 5D and the EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact-Macro ...