infared said:I am thinking that maybe Canon will release a superb 50mm with giant roller bearings and blue glass to go along its 35mm f/1.4...(I can gaze at it askance with my Sigma 50mm ...like I do now with the new 35mm II...with drool running out of the side of my mouth...). It would make sense if Canon followed through a re-issue of the most common primes to keep pace with the incredible new sensors that will be in the new cameras being released in 2016. Mirrored and Mirrorless (a Full Frame WONDER!...the Sony Slayer...LOL!). It's Christmas time....I can dream. <
Maiaibing said:New 50mm 1.2 L with floating element to avoid the focus shift is way overdue. For me they can make it 1.4 L if only this gets fixed.
As DPReview shows mirror slap is a real problem as MPIX goes up, and since Canon's IS can help here it should also be standard on any new L-lens until Canon gets in-body IS.
Based on the 35L non-IS I'm not holding my breath on the IS coming true.
AshtonNekolah said:don't let me spoil the fun but ill bet it will not be a 50mm 1.2 IS, sound better doing a all new 50mm 2.8mm IS 4 stops. They will keep the original 50 1.2 as is for now. I never had any problems with it. maybe gear lovers need to pack it up and start looking at what people really use and need than there fantasy's being fulfilled. a 50mm 1.2 IS heh that would be the day, its not going to make your subject look any prettier, IS on a tripod should be turned off to not cause shake it's more of a problem at wider apertures, @ 1.2 its enough to shoot in just about any situation.
mrzero said:Good24 said:There will be a lot of unhappy campers here if the next 50 is not a replacement for the current 1.4, with IS. Replacing that lens with IS and 1.8 sounds great to me and perfectly reasonable. Keep it around same cost as the 35 f/2 IS.
The old 28mm went from 1.8 to 2.8 with the addition of IS. Taking the 50 to 1.8 seems about right if not downright generous. Maybe it will be f/2.
No, the 28/1.8 USM remains in the lineup. All 3 of the EF IS primes were refreshes of non-USM lenses and kept the original apertures.
Good24 said:mrzero said:Good24 said:There will be a lot of unhappy campers here if the next 50 is not a replacement for the current 1.4, with IS. Replacing that lens with IS and 1.8 sounds great to me and perfectly reasonable. Keep it around same cost as the 35 f/2 IS.
The old 28mm went from 1.8 to 2.8 with the addition of IS. Taking the 50 to 1.8 seems about right if not downright generous. Maybe it will be f/2.
No, the 28/1.8 USM remains in the lineup. All 3 of the EF IS primes were refreshes of non-USM lenses and kept the original apertures.
Ah I see, my bad. Though it still has me wondering why the conventional wisdom seems to be that a refresh of the 1.4, with IS added, will be something slower than 1.4. I guess this is ahsanford's point/question about whether the 24/28/35 grew bigger or heavier with addition of IS. If it can still be 1.4 with IS and not turn into a monster, all the better.
jedy said:I'd love to see an updated version of the 50mm 1.4, much like the 1.8 update. I personally hope Canon don't add IS as this will increase the size and will make it much more expensive. The appeal of non-L 50mm lenses is size and reasonable cost making them a bargain. The 35mm f2 IS, for example, is a disappointment for me as it's still only f2 (I'd rather have seen a non-IS f1.8 35mm) and the IS is just an expensive and pointless feature for photographers at this focal length. Now that I have almost given up finding a small-ish 35mm lens with at least f1.8, I hope Canon can at least give us a reasonable update to the 50mm without expensive (and imo pointless) IS.
jedy said:...I personally hope Canon don't add IS as this will increase the size and will make it much more expensive.
photon said:jedy said:...I personally hope Canon don't add IS as this will increase the size and will make it much more expensive.
The cheapest zoom Canon makes has IS. The cost of those motors isn't significant compared to the cost of the elements inside.
Bear in mind IS on an f2 lens may help keep your shots steady but you do loose out on having the option of that shallower depth of field asthetic - shallow dof is surely one big advantage of primes. Also bear in mind the workhorse 24-70 f2.8 L II doesn't have IS and many professionals say it's their favourite lens. People chose it over the 24-70 f4 IS due to the max f2.8 (and increased sharpness) for lowlight shooting. Not saying I don't find IS useful though. It's very handy on my 24-105 f4.Or, I can accept a higher ISO value and actually stop down the lens for more working DOF. People rave about what an f/1.4 lens will do for you, but when the only way to get the exposure you need is to shoot it wide open, your hands may be tied compositionally.