A New 50 Coming Soon? [CR1]

[jcollett]

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.

I shoot with the EOS M and 5DmII and would love to know how to restrict the aperture range without fixing it to a particular value. Searched on the internet and did not see anything obvious on this topic. Could you link some info on this; would love to have a convenient way to have a lens shoot in its best range like f/4 to f/11 on the EF50 1.4.

 

[Marsu42]

I shoot with the EOS M and 5DmII and would love to know how to restrict the aperture range without fixing it to a particular value.

Magic Lantern -> ML Auto ISO feature

 

[e17paul]

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.

When I was unsatisfied with the manual focus on my 50/1.8 mk2, I was torn between the 50/1.4 and the 50/2.5 macro. I tried both in the shop, and bought the macro when I realised it's build and handling is so far ahead of the 1.8 mk2. Not only is the manual focus much better, but the ring declutches when switched to AF so there is no danger of damaging the motor like on the 1.8 mk2. I wish it had full time override, but the long travel manual focussing wins it space in my setup. It's not up to the quality of my old Olympus OM lenses, but nothing short of an L or a Zeiss will be.

There is more than enough selective focus at f/2.5, especially given the ability to focus much closer. The lens is more than fast enough for available light indoors, when used with a modern sensor. I use this as a standard 50, with the extra flexibility of being able to go closer than 45cm. For that reason, I wouldn't want to swap it even for a 50/1.2L

I hope that the new 50 follows this pattern, but with IS. I might be tempted to upgrade if I can have full time manual override, IS, and quieter AF, together with the good depth of field scale, 30cm minimum focus and the same lack of distortion as the 50/2.5 macro.

Paul

 

[sleepnever]

Give me a new middle of the road (less than the 50 1.2L) 50mm 1.4 to replace the build and optics of the current 50 1.4 and price it at ~$400 and I'm sold. I don't need IS on my 50mm.

 

[cayenne]

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

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

That was my first question too immediately after reading this...

Why in the world are they replaceing a f/1.4 with a f/1.8???

They already have the nifty 50 now...and the f/1.4 is ok...but why not improve and upgrade the aging, but still amazing 50L f/1.2??

I had a chance to rent one of these babies a couple weeks ago, mostly for video, and it was amazing...I took that thing into dark rooms, and when I opened it up, it literally appeared that I'd turn the lights on in the room.

Why are they bothering with f/1.8 for a new lens???

I don't get it...

cayenne

 

[Sporgon]

Why in the world are they replaceing a f/1.4 with a f/1.8??
They already have the nifty 50 now...and the f/1.4 is ok...but why not improve and upgrade the aging, but still amazing 50L f/1.2??

Why are they bothering with f/1.8 for a new lens???

I don't get it...

cayenne

Because in practical use there is virtually no difference between a 50mm 1.4 & 1.8 in terms of DoF, but in manufacturing they will be able to produce a lens which is very sharp wide open and then be stellar right across the frame when stopped down a little with smaller elements. Also easier to achieve IS and so more feasible ( at realistic price ) to produce.

 

[pj1974]

As I've written numerous times on CR before, I would be happy with a new Canon 50mm prime.

My main requirements are:
- at least f/2 (up to f/1.4 in an ideal world)
- good IQ wide open (eg sharpn, good contrast & pleasing bokeh, low CA)
- true FTM USM AF (fast & accurate), or STM if not USM

Added bonuses:
- 4 stop IS
- close MFD
- 58mm filter thread size
- lightweight / small-ish
- metal mount
- less than $800

I like Canon's latest 35mm f/2 USM IS - it meets pretty much all the criteria I have for a 50mm; except it's a 35mm (I've analysed my photos, and I would much prefer a 50mm prime than a 35mm prime). I find I can use one of my zoom lenses at 35mm (eg my Canon 15-85mm). If they could make a 50mm similar, I'd be very happy with that to round out my lens arsenal.

Paul

 

[GMCPhotographics]

As I've written numerous times on CR before, I would be happy with a new Canon 50mm prime.

My main requirements are:
- at least f/2 (up to f/1.4 in an ideal world)
- good IQ wide open (eg sharpn, good contrast & pleasing bokeh, low CA)
- true FTM USM AF (fast & accurate), or STM if not USM

Added bonuses:
- 4 stop IS
- close MFD
- 58mm filter thread size
- lightweight / small-ish
- metal mount
- less than $800

I like Canon's latest 35mm f/2 USM IS - it meets pretty much all the criteria I have for a 50mm; except it's a 35mm (I've analysed my photos, and I would much prefer a 50mm prime than a 35mm prime). I find I can use one of my zoom lenses at 35mm (eg my Canon 15-85mm). If they could make a 50mm similar, I'd be very happy with that to round out my lens arsenal.

Paul

Compare your spec list to the new Zeiss 55mm...it's quite amusing really and puts us all into a very distinct bracket in the market place.

 

[pj1974]

As I've written numerous times on CR before, I would be happy with a new Canon 50mm prime.

My main requirements are:
- at least f/2 (up to f/1.4 in an ideal world)
- good IQ wide open (eg sharpn, good contrast & pleasing bokeh, low CA)
- true FTM USM AF (fast & accurate), or STM if not USM

Added bonuses:
- 4 stop IS
- close MFD
- 58mm filter thread size
- lightweight / small-ish
- metal mount
- less than $800

I like Canon's latest 35mm f/2 USM IS - it meets pretty much all the criteria I have for a 50mm; except it's a 35mm (I've analysed my photos, and I would much prefer a 50mm prime than a 35mm prime). I find I can use one of my zoom lenses at 35mm (eg my Canon 15-85mm). If they could make a 50mm similar, I'd be very happy with that to round out my lens arsenal.

Paul

Compare your spec list to the new Zeiss 55mm...it's quite amusing really and puts us all into a very distinct bracket in the market place.

Yes... I did look at the new Zeiss 55mm lens... and actually I believe while it will have 'outstanding IQ' (eg superior bokeh, sharper, more contrast) - I can't justify the price for such a lens. Plus I rely on AF in too many situations. :-\

I'd much rather spend big bucks on the Canon EF 200-400mm 1.4x L IS USM My most expensive lens to date is the Canon EF 70-300mm L IS USM, which I love (a great portable telezoom, with quality IQ).

So, I'm still looking for a new Canon 50mm prime that meets my needs...

Paul 8)

 

[GMCPhotographics]

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.

The amusing thing about the focus shift issue is that it only happens when it's stopped down. My copy is worse at f2.8, which is quite amusing because it's not that sharp at MFD and it's certainly not a macro lens. If I shoot wide open, then it's not an issue when shooting under half meter. The other thing whic i have noticed with my 50L, is the that if I use one of the outer AF points and then re-compose...then the AF accuracy at MFD / f2.8 is very good. Failing that, View view isn't effected by the focus shift at f2.8...which another workaround.

 

[Marsu42]

The amusing thing about the focus shift issue is that it only happens when it's stopped down.

Unfortunately, given the razor-thin dof wide open, this is bound to happen a lot :-o

The My copy is worse at f2.8, which is quite amusing because it's not that sharp at MFD and it's certainly not a macro lens.

Ok, in Canon's defense this really doesn't matter as it isn't a macro lens, it's not supposed to be optimized for mfd.

Failing that, View view isn't effected by the focus shift at f2.8...which another workaround.

Another workaround is just to skip this lens, esp for this price tag :-> ... but probably more buyers will turn up of the next Canon lens isn't f1.4 anymore but f1.8, as intended....

... if you know what you want the 50/1.2 for and how to do it, of course it's legit and a good idea, but this lens is also a prestige item: it's even available in bread-and-butter discount retailers in Germany (that's where I tested it a couple of times), and this means a lot of people are buying it because it looks cool (it does!) and *has* to be "the best" as it's f1.2.

 

[BRNexus6]

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

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

That was my first question too immediately after reading this...

Why in the world are they replaceing a f/1.4 with a f/1.8???

They already have the nifty 50 now...and the f/1.4 is ok...but why not improve and upgrade the aging, but still amazing 50L f/1.2??

I had a chance to rent one of these babies a couple weeks ago, mostly for video, and it was amazing...I took that thing into dark rooms, and when I opened it up, it literally appeared that I'd turn the lights on in the room.

Why are they bothering with f/1.8 for a new lens???

I don't get it...

cayenne

The Nifty-Fifty just doesn't hold up anymore. Nikon replaced their old 50mm 1.8 with a much better lens, while still keeping the price pretty low. It was about time Canon decided to replace their old outdated primes. A 50mm 1.8 IS USM will be welcomed by many. IS is more important to me than 1.4 aperture. I think most would agree that a 50mm 1.8 with IS beats a 50mm 1.4 without IS in most settings.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

<div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14461\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14461\">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>EF 50 f/1.8 IS USM


</strong>We’re told that a new EF 50mm f/1.8 IS USM is ready for release, but may not happen until Q1 of 2014.</p>
<p>The lens would be in line with the new 24,28 & 35mm IS lenses. Pricing would be more than the current EF 50 f/1.4 USM it would be replacing. However, Canon has noticed that the pricing on the 3 mentioned lenses at launch was too high and lead to poor initial sales numbers. Since the lenses have been price dropped, they are selling better.</p>
<p><strong><a href=\"http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5574981434&toolid=10001&campid=5337404931&customid=&icep_item=310762527587&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg\" target=\"_blank\">Canon EF 50 f/1.4 USM $299</a> </strong>(free shipping)</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>

That's good ... hope the price remains reasonable.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The amusing thing about the focus shift issue is that it only happens when it's stopped down.

Unfortunately, given the razor-thin dof wide open, this is bound to happen a lot :-o

The My copy is worse at f2.8, which is quite amusing because it's not that sharp at MFD and it's certainly not a macro lens.

Ok, in Canon's defense this really doesn't matter as it isn't a macro lens, it's not supposed to be optimized for mfd.

Failing that, View view isn't effected by the focus shift at f2.8...which another workaround.

Another workaround is just to skip this lens, esp for this price tag :-> ... but probably more buyers will turn up of the next Canon lens isn't f1.4 anymore but f1.8, as intended....

... if you know what you want the 50/1.2 for and how to do it, of course it's legit and a good idea, but this lens is also a prestige item: it's even available in bread-and-butter discount retailers in Germany (that's where I tested it a couple of times), and this means a lot of people are buying it because it looks cool (it does!) and *has* to be "the best" as it's f1.2.

My reasons for buying a 50mm f1.2 L was three fold. Firstly, I didn't care much for the 50mm f1.4 USM, it was cheap and plasticy, poor AF and build, very low contrast wide open and it's out of focus rendering was quite harsh. Secondly, I need the bright f1.2 aperture...faster the better and that's how I use them mostly. Thirdly, I needed the L build and reliability. If I buy a lens, I want it to last a long time. If I get 10 years out of it, it'll cost me roughly £100 / year for reliable no worry usage. If I sell it for 80% of what I bought it for....then that's even better.

 

[Marsu42]

If I get 10 years out of it, it'll cost me roughly £100 / year for reliable no worry usage. If I sell it for 80% of what I bought it for....then that's even better.

Same reason here for upgrading from the 100mm non-L macro to the L version ... and my primary concern with the new non-L IS lenses, it's seldom mentioned in tech geek threads. I don't buy red ring because it looks cool (actually I taped it), but because it's much more reliable, and even after less than 10years I'm pretty confident with my 100L/70-300L/17-40L.

 

[Sporgon]

If I get 10 years out of it, it'll cost me roughly £100 / year for reliable no worry usage. If I sell it for 80% of what I bought it for....then that's even better.

Same reason here for upgrading from the 100mm non-L macro to the L version ... and my primary concern with the new non-L IS lenses, it's seldom mentioned in tech geek threads. I don't buy red ring because it looks cool (actually I taped it), but because it's much more reliable, and even after less than 10years I'm pretty confident with my 100L/70-300L/17-40L.

You both make fair points; however the build of the new series of IS primes is a big improvement over the old 'consumer grade' lenses of the past. Time will tell how robust they really are.

Personally I use less L glass now because of the AF accuracy and adjustability of the new cameras, so I basically don't use manual focus anymore, something that the L s are much better made for.

I think I'm in the minority of people on CR who don't have Elle's Disease. Good job really 'cos I have a disease involving long faces, tails and four hoofs

 

[e17paul]

Even if the quality is equivalent the new 24/28/35mm a price 5 times higher than the current 50 F1.8 would scare potential buyers and push them to Sigma.

Regardless of price, an IS lens can't push someone to buy a non IS lens.

These lenses are specifically made with IS for hybrid shooters/videographers. Non IS lenses are not an alternative.

I love IS for a 50mm lens. I want to be able to shoot to at least 1/30 and lower shutterspeed with this focal length handheld.

+1

My 50/2.5 lives on my 6D. If it could freeze water hand held, it would be more versatile. I can usually manage 1/30 handheld, but IS would comfortably allow 1/15 or 1/8. With full time MF override, quiet AF and weatherproofing, it would be perfect. I'm hoping for the new lens to have closer focus than the 50/1.8, 50/1.4 & 50/1.2L. It may well do, because Canon seem to be phasing out lenses with the old noisy focus motor, in favour of USM on full frame and STM on EF-S. Fortunately, the roll out of STM lenses is solving this.

I'm guessing that the new 50 IS will come in at a higher price, and the 50/1.4 will become the bargain model. Then, there is also the 40/2.8 STM to prop up the range, as currently the 2nd cheapest and 2nd lightest prime in the lineup. Canon have to improve the perceived quality at the low end, the focus rings on some of the kit zooms feel loose and ready to fall off when tried in the shop. That might help encourage sales of L-series lenses, but it must also help the sales of mirrorless cameras by Sony, Fuji, Olympus & Panasonic

 

[dadgummit]

If I get 10 years out of it, it'll cost me roughly £100 / year for reliable no worry usage. If I sell it for 80% of what I bought it for....then that's even better.

Same reason here for upgrading from the 100mm non-L macro to the L version ... and my primary concern with the new non-L IS lenses, it's seldom mentioned in tech geek threads. I don't buy red ring because it looks cool (actually I taped it), but because it's much more reliable, and even after less than 10years I'm pretty confident with my 100L/70-300L/17-40L.

I have had the 100mm Macro for about 6 years and it works as good as the day I first opened the box. What reliability concerns do you have? I would think that since the L has IS, and IS is almost always the weak link in any lens' reliability I would assume the older lens would last longer than the L.

 

[Marsu42]

What reliability concerns do you have?

It broke down twice due to water/mist/dew/... getting in, when I saw the second repair estimate I decided that buying the L version is cheaper for outdoor shooting near ground level. Of course the non-L is fine if you use it indoors or very, very carefully outdoors, the iq is nearly the same and the IS doesn't make a difference near 1:1

 

[GMCPhotographics]

What reliability concerns do you have?

It broke down twice due to water/mist/dew/... getting in, when I saw the second repair estimate I decided that buying the L version is cheaper for outdoor shooting near ground level. Of course the non-L is fine if you use it indoors or very, very carefully outdoors, the iq is nearly the same and the IS doesn't make a difference near 1:1

My 100LIS macro is a little sharper than my non L was. The zoom ring on the L is a lot smoother and better geared. For macro work, this is essential. The body shell on the L is mostly magnesium / aluminium alloy, which is why it feels like plastic. It's not cool to the touch. The IS unit is great for some types of photos. When I shoot ring shots, wide open at f2.8 it's amazing. But for 1:1 stuff, a tripod is needed. The colours and contrast I'm seeing from the L lens are a lot better too.