December 17, 2017, 04:27:59 PM

Author Topic: We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]  (Read 12221 times)

BillB

  • EOS 80D
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
Re: We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]
« Reply #75 on: November 11, 2017, 04:37:35 AM »

You've just described the upgrade I want - refresh the 50mm f/1.4 same as the 24-28-35mm and at the same price point.

As Canon didn't carry that upgrade forward, I can only guess sales weren't as strong as it hoped for.

The 24-28-35 lenses were originally rolled out at much higher prices, which were quickly reduced to current levels, after widespread and noisy opposition to the prices.  Even at the lower levels, I don't think Cannon has sold all that many of them.  Of course, the 16-35 f4 IS came out fairly soon after the wide angle primes were introduced and that couldn't have helped sales.  I know I wouldn't have got my 28 IS if the 16-35 f4 had been around.  All in all, I doubt that Cannon's experience with the three wide angles demonstrates that there is  much money to be made refreshing mid level primes.  I also doubt that the wide angles that were replaced were selling anywhere near as well as the 50 f1.4  or the 85 f1.8, so there more be may be more demand for the longer focal lengths.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]
« Reply #75 on: November 11, 2017, 04:37:35 AM »

Antono Refa

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]
« Reply #76 on: November 11, 2017, 09:20:25 AM »

You've just described the upgrade I want - refresh the 50mm f/1.4 same as the 24-28-35mm and at the same price point.

As Canon didn't carry that upgrade forward, I can only guess sales weren't as strong as it hoped for.

The 24-28-35 lenses were originally rolled out at much higher prices, which were quickly reduced to current levels, after widespread and noisy opposition to the prices.  Even at the lower levels, I don't think Cannon has sold all that many of them.

Yeah, I've heard that and tend to believe it.

Of course, the 16-35 f4 IS came out fairly soon after the wide angle primes were introduced and that couldn't have helped sales.  I know I wouldn't have got my 28 IS if the 16-35 f4 had been around.

I went through a similar process.

Thought of buying the 24mm f/2.8 IS USM, then thought the 16-35mm f/4L IS USM would be better, then took a good look at what I actually shoot and how, and went for a 16-35mm f/2.8L mkII (will upgrade to mkIII) for tripod & 35mm f/2 IS USM for handheld.

All in all, I doubt that Cannon's experience with the three wide angles demonstrates that there is  much money to be made refreshing mid level primes.

Which is why I think Canon will release the 50mm f/1.4 as an L, which would be too expensive to me, rather than a mid level prime.

BillB

  • EOS 80D
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
Re: We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]
« Reply #77 on: November 11, 2017, 04:54:18 PM »
I find myself wondering how much a refreshed 50mm could provide that is not being provided by existing lenses, particularly by the 35 f2 IS, but also considering the current 50mm f1.4 and the 85mm f1.8.  Are there ways to use these lenses to explore capabilities that a refreshed 50 might offer over those that  the existing 50? 

In a trivial sense the 35mm can simulate a 50 through simple cropping.  Coverage comparable to a 50 can also  be achieved with the 35 by zooming with your feet, at least to some degree.  The 85mm offers another approach by moving back from the subject rather than toward it.  The limitations of the current 50 are most obvious at f2.8 and wider due to the flaky AF, but there isn't much reason to think that a refreshed 50 will offer much more than the current 50 stopped down to f4 and beyond.

The 35 has ring USM and IS, and the 85 also has ring USM, but lacks IS.  It seems questionable whether a refreshed 50 would offer much more than these lenses at f2 and f2.8 other than field of view.

Again, I am not arguing that a refreshed 50 would not be useful, but I am wondering whether current lenses may offer ways to explore the opportunities that a refreshed 50 would provide in comparison to the current 50.




blobmonster

  • PowerShot SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
Re: We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]
« Reply #78 on: November 12, 2017, 04:01:23 AM »
@BillB I agree. The 50mm stm looks fine for low price, while the 50L is fine for good quality.  I don't see much of a gap.

Honestly I couldn't care less about coma or what have you regarding the 24L. I've never liked that focal length. I just want a 20mm that works in the sun without huge flare, since getting the sun in the shot is quite a typical use of an ultrawide.

I think the DSLR market is very mature already. We will start to see the holes in Canon's lineup vs Nikon filled is my prediction. At this stage in the game, where almost everyone ought to be satisfied with quality that is already available, they ought to be covering all bases for maximum revenue, then hunker down and reduce costs.

As much as I'd like to believe in a growth market for Canon in stills, the reality is smartphones and professional video are developing whereas dslr stills are already practically perfect.

I think Canon ought to bring out the 20mm since its a focal length that people love to use in a prime. I suspect they might also bring a new 50 with IS etc. Regarding profitability I think I would be looking at the 'long tail' type of sales, as in, primes don't have to sell in huge numbers to still sell a lot over the years, and help justify the business staying in the stills market, by bringing users into the Canon system and keeping them there. I don't really see any holes in the Canon lineup besides an ultra-wide prime. Will it sell hugely? Perhaps not, but it's not reasonable to keep producing the old one when they could just update it and sell for a higher price, given that lens design teams have already covered the other bases, wide L and smaller, slower L IS zooms etc, they can probably be spared a few months to work on the slow burners (sales wise) that are 30 years old, as we saw happen a few years ago. It's not reasonable for them (new primes) to all come out at once so I don't think that the delay since the new 24, 28 and 35 means Canon won't now bring out a 20 and 50 if it believes new and existing users expect them.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2017, 04:37:33 AM by blobmonster »

pch

  • Canonflex
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]
« Reply #79 on: December 06, 2017, 04:25:02 PM »
I was casually looking around to see if there was any news about a new 50 with IS since the 85 came out, and found this thread. It's been interesting to read because, as someone noted, the participants seem to mostly be enthusiasts and not professionals, and the analyses regarding why Canon would or wouldn't want to bother updating a 50 are from that perspective - and you can't argue with (most of) the arguments here, which basically sum up to "I can do everything I could possibly need to do with what's currently available so I don't see why Canon would bother". 

So I thought I'd chime in with the perspective of someone who uses this focal length professionally. The main thing my partner and I do is weddings, family and baby/child portraits, and things like that (we do also do corporate type stuff, where our equipment needs are a bit different). I do video - and we both shoot with 5d4s (we can share equipment and there's a more-or-less consistent look between the photos and the video for a wedding, for example, though our approach and style is different).

Now, you may be thinking, 50mm is not really a great portrait focal length on a FF body, and isn't wide enough for events. Well, my partner carries two cameras on a harness, the second with a 24 1.4 L - and I use the 35 f/2 IS for wider shots; anything wider than that I typically do with the 24 TS-E II on a tripod. 50mm is certainly a compromise, but a very good one - the problem with shooting with an 85 is that in a wedding, that actually gets you too close most of the time. During the ceremony and speeches etc. she uses a 70-200 2.8 IS - an 85 doesn't get you close enough in that case. The rest of the time, the best moments often happen in very tight quarters with the bride and groom and 85 just doesn't work. So the 50 1.2 saves the day - you get the shallow depth of field that clients love (and you don't actually have to shoot at 1.2 on a FF body to get it) and you can zoom with your feet even in tight quarters to get the framing you want. Likewise for family and kid portraits, it's great because it can be very difficult to track fidgety kids with an 85 or longer length, and with younger kids you need to be close to them to get their attention and to get them to engage with the camera (though she does use the 70-200 for these too occasionally depending on the situation).

So, it's actually the perfect focal length for that stuff. But, I also actually prefer it for a lot of other kinds of photography too, and plan to get the 50 TS-E for my other stuff including architecture and landscapes. I have the 24 II and the original 90 TS-E lenses; I find myself stitching together 90mm TS-E shots to get essentially a 50mm perspective - the increased resolution from stitching is not really worth it for what I do (I will probably sell the 90 because it's an awkward length for me, and eventually get the new 50 and 135 TS-Es). For me, the 50mm perspective is how I see things most of the time and is just ideal for my style of photography.

So that said, for video I primarily use the 35 f/2 IS - and I don't like it (though it's actually perfect for corporate type stuff I do as well where shallow DOF style is less important). I mean the lens is great, honestly, I just don't like how it looks for video You can get shallow depth of field with close-ups on a FF body, but for the most part the way it renders on video is just not my favorite - though it is not actually soft, for my purposes it appears "not crisp" in 1080p video compared to shooting with a shallower DOF (sharpness at this resolution being more about perception than technical specs). I vastly prefer using 50mm. I use the 1.4 for video because it's much lighter than the 1.2, and because we have two copies of it that weren't getting used since she got the 1.2 - and because I'm waiting for an IS version.

Here's what's key here - IS is a godsend for Canon video (even with a tripod, truthfully) since we don't get in-body stabilization (the stabilization in the 6D II is not good for professional results, at least for my style - it's digital processing, which I can do better in post if that's what I wanted, which I do do although as little as possible because it usually looks weird). If you haven't tried it, try a short clip with any recent-model IS lens you have - even a telephoto. It's amazing. I use a shoulder rig because the 35 is not the only lens I use but with modern IS, hand-held is legitimately just as good as a shoulder rig - and that's why I want a 50 with IS. I want to ditch the shoulder rig and instead have two bodies on a harness, one with a 50 IS and one with the 35 IS (with the 85 IS in a belt pouch for certain shots that I currently use the 85 1.8 for).

A 50 IS would be a game-changer for video. I shoot at or near wide-open most of the time (using ND filters outside) to get a "cinematic" shallow-depth-of-field look because that's what I like, and what clients like.

I would gladly pay $1600 for a 50 1.4 with IS, just like the 85. I would also gladly pay *significantly* more for an updated 50 1.2 with IS, no hesitation. I am far from the only one, too, although I will concede that most people doing this kind of low-level professional video are more than happy with their zoom lenses with IS (or their Sony or Panasonic cameras with in-body IS). I aim for something aesthetically far better than that - people like me buy these lenses to shoot wide-open with, and I care more about that (and IS) than the "versatility" of a zoom, or even of absolute technical sharpness (same thinking as e.g. Leica users - and e.g. I also shoot medium-format film wide-open with large-aperture lenses). Canon is *so* close to letting me realize that in really an amazingly easy way compared to what would have been required just a few years ago, and a 50 with IS would take me almost all the way there.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2017, 04:29:31 PM by pch »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]
« Reply #79 on: December 06, 2017, 04:25:02 PM »