Rumors > Lenses

Why is a 50mm the easiest fast prime to produce?

(1/4) > >>

LFG530:
Sorry for that "noob" question, but I can't seem to get an answer to that, I'm sure there's a quite simple physical explanation for that...

In other words, why is a 35mm/24mm 1.4 so more expensive/heavy/long than a 50mm 1.4 or 1.2 ? This seems counter intuitive since the aperture has to be about 24mm large on a 35 and 35mm large on a 50...

CR Backup Admin:

--- Quote from: LFG530 on April 24, 2011, 07:04:42 PM ---Sorry for that "noob" question, but I can't seem to get an answer to that, I'm sure there's a quite simple physical explanation for that...

In other words, why is a 35mm/24mm 1.4 so more expensive/heavy/long than a 50mm 1.4 or 1.2 ? This seems counter intuitive since the aperture has to be about 24mm large on a 35 and 35mm large on a 50...

--- End quote ---

I do not think your prices are quite, at least, not in the USA.

The simple answer is that the 50mmL costs more than the 35mm L, not less.  They are both old designs, so the tooling and development costs are paid off long ago.  The 24mmL is relatively new, so the tooling and development costs that must be paid for are still affecting the price.  The special nanocoating on the glass is expensive as well.

The 50mm f/1.2 has a MSRP of $1619 while the 35mm f/1.4 L has a MSRP of $1479.  The 24mm L MSRP is  $1749.
 Presumably the MSRP is related to the cost of production.  However, the street prices may be related to the law of supply and demand.

Street price for the 50mm f/1.2L is $1749, The 24mm L is 1749,   and the 35mm L is $1579 all are listed as available on Amazon.com.

As for the 50mm f/1.4L, it is a much cheaper and simpler lens and does not have the heavy duty construction, a true USM focus motor or the exotic glass that the "L" lenses have.  Its a bargain!

LFG530:
- _ - Ok nice price lesson, but that doesn't answer why the 35 and 24 are still longer and why there's no 14 1.4 on the market for example...

And why are the fastest lens ever always 50mms. (ex: noctilux or the 0.7 zeiss (I think it was zeiss))

CR Backup Admin:

--- Quote from: LFG530 on April 24, 2011, 09:18:01 PM ---- _ - Ok nice price lesson, but that doesn't answer why the 35 and 24 are still longer and why there's no 14 1.4 on the market for example...

And why are the fastest lens ever always 50mms. (ex: noctilux or the 0.7 zeiss (I think it was zeiss))

--- End quote ---

35mm and 24mm still longer??  I do not understand the question.

BTW, I am assuming you mean lenses for full frame.

Wider lenses are indeed more difficult to design and build.  A 14mm lens is much much wider than a 24 or 35mm lens, and is indeed difficult to build.  It is also a specialty lens, one that will include your feet in the image unless you are very careful.  I'm sure it could be built, but the existing lens is a expensive and slow seller, I doubt that Canon would invest the millions in development and tooling to make a slow selling lens.  Super wide lenses seems to have never been something that Canon emphasied, they have always excelled at super telephotos.  They get $10K plus for them, so they may have just made the right decision.

LFG530:
By longer I mean PHYSICALLY longer, they are longer like a giraffe neck is longer than your, get it? And that still doesn't anwer to why a 50mm is easier to build than a telephoto or a wide (there's never been anything else than a 50mm that has reached an aperture under 1.2)... I know the stuff about investment, but the question is WHY is it more difficult and WHY is 50mm the focal lenght that appears to be easier to build.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version