A New 50 Coming Soon? [CR1]

[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 ...

 

[Marsu42]

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

I was very near buying this very good iq lens when I wanted a macro with *less* working distance (100mm on crop is rather long) - but the "80's" build quality and the horrible af motor scared me off... but I have to admit I have some sympathy for this oddball lens, other than the "just crappy" 50/1.8.

 

[Sella174]

... the "80's" build quality and the horrible af motor ...

My current EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact-Macro lens ... still working after a drop in a muddy river ... the mud dried in the lower, mechanical part of the lens ... still need to replace the rusted ball-bearings with new ones.

 

[J.R.]

If this new lens has 8 aperture blades and USM autofocus, I'll throw the 50mm f/1.4 straight into the fire and get this new lens.

Cheers ... J.R.

 

[Marsu42]

My current EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact-Macro lens ... still working after a drop in a muddy river ... the mud dried in the lower, mechanical part of the lens ... still need to replace the rusted ball-bearings with new ones.

Nice to meet a CR member that doesn't "just get a new one" like most people here have a hard time deciding between buying two 5d3 or one 1dx ...

... and I have to take back my comment about the build quality, there's actual metal in there - I was talking of the "plastic" 50/1.8, though the 50/2.5 indeed shares the outdated af motor.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Said it before when this rumor first came out, and will say it again...I don't like this new trend of lets slow down all the non L primes but add IS. I guess it makes sense from a pure marketing perspective - with the 1.2, 1.4 and 1.8, and especially when you consider how many people buy the 1.4 instead of the 1.2, removing the 1.4 option will force many into the 1.2. Sorry, if your going prime in this range you want bokeh, and if you are a still shooter, and you shoot people, there really isn't much need to shoot below 1/30th because IS won't stop motion blur on your subject, for that you need higher SS and in many lighting conditions, that's where you want a fast lens. this rumor really only makes me glad I have a 1.4...now come on canon, lets have at a new 50mm 1.2!!!!! (or will sigma beat ya to the punch?)

 

[Twostones]

There is one thing Canon could do on all new lenses that would make everyone happy. Canon please put a rubber seal on the mount of all new lenses to help keep dust and moisture out of our cameras. Canon would only need equipment to make one mount if they did this. Another thing they could do is put the rubber seal on the new Canon 7D mark 2 body. That way any non sealed lenses would benefit from dust control.

 

[Sella174]

There is one thing Canon could do on all new lenses that would make everyone happy. Canon please put a rubber seal on the mount of all new lenses to help keep dust and moisture out of our cameras. ... Another thing they could do is put the rubber seal on the new Canon 7D mark 2 body. That way any non sealed lenses would benefit from dust control.

Nothing, as in nothing, can keep out Kalahari sand.

 

[Marsu42]

there really isn't much need to shoot below 1/30th because IS won't stop motion blur on your subject, for that you need higher SS and in many lighting conditions, that's where you want a fast lens. this rumor really only makes me glad I have a 1.4...now come on canon, lets have at a new 50mm 1.2!!!!! (or will sigma beat ya to the punch?)

Lenses of f1.2 are fine for thin dof, but on *digital* they don't gain much speed over f1.4 because the iso has to be raised even more (without telling the user) to compensate for the light being lost .. and higher mp sensors will worsen this effect.

1+1 = Canon won't update the f1.2 lens, and Sigma won't produce one as they design for multiple systems and wide appeal and not a very special high-budget crowd like Canon the the 50/1.2

 

[EOBeav]

I'm hanging on to my 50mm f/1.4, as quirky as it is.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

there really isn't much need to shoot below 1/30th because IS won't stop motion blur on your subject, for that you need higher SS and in many lighting conditions, that's where you want a fast lens. this rumor really only makes me glad I have a 1.4...now come on canon, lets have at a new 50mm 1.2!!!!! (or will sigma beat ya to the punch?)

Lenses of f1.2 are fine for thin dof, but on *digital* they don't gain much speed over f1.4 because the iso has to be raised even more (without telling the user) to compensate for the light being lost .. and higher mp sensors will worsen this effect.

1+1 = Canon won't update the f1.2 lens, and Sigma won't produce one as they design for multiple systems and wide appeal and not a very special high-budget crowd like Canon the the 50/1.2

True, but, the difference's between 1.2 and 1.8 are a bit greater.

And, with sigma now and their ART line, they are stepping up their quality and their game. They have enough cheap lenses with mass appeal, the ART line seems to be trying to change that reputation.

 

[Marsu42]

True, but, the difference's between 1.2 and 1.8 are a bit greater.

Imho the f1.8 is really Canon protecting their f1.2 lens and/or trying to get more profit from a high-priced, but cheaper produced f1.8 IS version vs. f1.4 IS (the latter should be possible, shouldn't it?

And, with sigma now and their ART line, they are stepping up their quality and their game. They have enough cheap lenses with mass appeal, the ART line seems to be trying to change that reputation.

Fortunately - but still, I really don't see them producing f1.2 lenses, but it's not like I haven't been wrong before

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

And, with sigma now and their ART line, they are stepping up their quality and their game. They have enough cheap lenses with mass appeal, the ART line seems to be trying to change that reputation.

Fortunately - but still, I really don't see them producing f1.2 lenses, but it's not like I haven't been wrong before

we shall see and we shall see. Maybe sigma will just go with a real good 1.4.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

True, but, the difference's between 1.2 and 1.8 are a bit greater.

Imho the f1.8 is really Canon protecting their f1.2 lens and/or trying to get more profit from a high-priced, but cheaper produced f1.8 IS version vs. f1.4 IS (the latter should be possible, shouldn't it?

I would agree...specifically from the idea that the 1.4's replacement is a 1.8...If you wanted thin DOF and good IQ, the 1.4 was a great mid point - take that away and that will force many to bite the bullet and snag the 1.2 (I know in my case, if the only option was the 1.2 or a 1.8 with IS for $600...I'd just find myself a used 1.2)

 

[Sporgon]

I would agree...specifically from the idea that the 1.4's replacement is a 1.8...If you wanted thin DOF and good IQ, the 1.4 was a great mid point - take that away and that will force many to bite the bullet and snag the 1.2 (I know in my case, if the only option was the 1.2 or a 1.8 with IS for $600...I'd just find myself a used 1.2)

I don't think so because the current f1.4 is pretty lousy between 1.4 & 1.8 - so much so that it looses the benefit of the ultra thin DoF. Also the mechanics of the focus is pretty inaccurate for that DoF.

If a 1.8 was really good at f1.8 with accurate focus mechanics then I think it would bs justified as a replacement for the current and ancient 50mm f1.4.

Actually when you look at lens design it wouldn't surprise me ( or disappoint me ) if the new 50mm IS is actually f2 in order for Canon to make it stellar wide open.

 

[Marsu42]

Actually when you look at lens design it wouldn't surprise me ( or disappoint me ) if the new 50mm IS is actually f2 in order for Canon to make it stellar wide open.

Since nowadays it's not difficult to prevent the lens from going wide open in any mode (or sticky dof preview), I'd prefer the manufacturer not to limit the speed of a lens to get max. iq wide open and favorable review curves. The most popular issue with the 50/1.2 also doesn't seem to be that it's soft @f1.2, but that it has a focus shift.