A New 50mm Lens Mentioned Again [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Dear Canon,
Please release the new 50L f1.2 real soon (like in a couple months when you anniunce the 1DX2). I would very much love to give you my money for it. My Sigma ART is wonderful, but nothing bokehs like Canon with those lovely colors. My wallet is waiting. Much love.
-Stew-
Please release the new 50L f1.2 real soon (like in a couple months when you anniunce the 1DX2). I would very much love to give you my money for it. My Sigma ART is wonderful, but nothing bokehs like Canon with those lovely colors. My wallet is waiting. Much love.
-Stew-
Upvote
0
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. <
There's no "maybe" about it. A new 50 f1.2 L is a done deal. It's probably already built and 95% ready for announcement.
Upvote
0
Now, if the f/whatever IS should have 1:2 close focus, that would get my money. If it comes in the seemingly forthcoming full frame EF-M mount, then it would prompt my upgrade to the new system.
Upvote
0
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.
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.
Upvote
0
Canon could solve the IS-large aperture problem by introducing a mirrorless FF with 5-axis stabilisation at the same time as the new lightweight f/1.2. Or, have a choice of in-lens or in-camera stabilisation for the next generation of SLRs, in-lens for telephotos or in-camera for short focal length.
Upvote
0
AshtonNekolah
Time doesn't wait, Shoot Like It's Your Last.
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.
Upvote
0
AshtonNekolah
Time doesn't wait, Shoot Like It's Your Last.
Maiaibing said:
IS on any L lens will drastically send the prices up in all new L lens that comes out if that is the case.
Upvote
0
AshtonNekolah said:
IMHO a 50f2.8IS will only happen if it's a macro.
Canon must have something to compete with the Sigma F1.4 non-ART otherwise they'll leave the door wide open in that part of the market.
If they improve the build and optics of the current 1.4 then they can ask a little more for it. I'd happily pay £300 (~$400) for a decent build non-L ringUSM 50mmf1.4... something akin to the 85f1.8, but 50f1.4.
Yes a new 50f1.2L akin to the build of the 35LII would be a good move.
Upvote
0
mrzero said:
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.
Upvote
0
Good24 said:
The current 50mm 1.4 is nominally a USM, although it is a different type of USM motor than other lenses. Since the prior 3 EF IS primes all replaced non-USM lenses, some of us think that a 50mm IS will replace the 1.8. The new 50mm 1.8 STM, however, threw a wrench into that thought process. There is also the 50mm macro that is non-USM that could be a contender, but who knows. Also, there was a rumor that they are working on an 85mm IS, and there is no current 85mm non-USM lens to replace, so where Canon is going from here with the IS primes remains to be seen. I personally would like to see the 50mm and 80mm IS primes remain at 2.0 like the 35mm before they get to a 135mm returning down to 2.8 and replacing the old soft focus.
The 24/28/35 IS primes are all larger than the non-USM lenses they replaced, although that probably has more to do with the increased image quality and better construction.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
jedy said:
You could move to Nikon, then -- they chose a line of f/1.8 lenses without IS instead of what Canon did.
Keep in mind the bold bit above is only the opinion of about half this forum. The rest of us love IS. Since I do I lot of shooting handheld in poor light, provided my subject isn't moving, a 3 stop IS setup lets me net the same shot as a non-IS lens at three stops better ISO.
In your 35mm f/2 example, if the old non-IS version required ISO 6400, the new IS version could net that same shot with ISO 800. That is massive.
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.
For what I shoot, IS gives my stills a little latitude when lighting is abysmal. I'll take it on every lens I can.
- A
Upvote
0
jedy said:
The cheapest zoom Canon makes has IS. The cost of those motors isn't significant compared to the cost of the elements inside.
Upvote
0
photon said:
The inclusion of IS generally doesn't make the lens bigger so much as slightly heavier, but nowhere near as heavy as widening the max aperture does.
Consider the cleanest possible IS vs. aperture comparison, Canon's 70-200 lenses:
70-200 f/2.8 IS I = 51.9 oz
70-200 f/2.8 = 43.9 oz
70-200 f/4 IS = 26.8 oz
70-200 f/4 = 25.2 oz
So one stop quicker nearly doubles your weight, while IS only adds a few ounces. And neither of them got any longer with an IS change, btw.
- A
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
Well done IS is useful on any lens. I recently took some bulb 4 or 5 sec exposures of light painting with my 35F2 IS and didn't have a tripod or anything to lean on. They came out great. I wouldn't have gotten the same results with a lens without IS.
While I would probably not want to buy a new 85 F2 IS, it is only because I don't get that much use from my 85. I generally use it outside, but infrequently.
I would go for a new 50 F 2 IS, especially if it had real USM. The current 50 F 1.4 is not quite where I want it to be in terms of AF, contrast at wide apertures, but is fine stopped down.
IS has great utility. I may not replace F1.4, but I find it useful. I really don't want a gigantic and heavy 50, so I hope that whatever Canon comes out with, it is not as large as my zooms.
While I would probably not want to buy a new 85 F2 IS, it is only because I don't get that much use from my 85. I generally use it outside, but infrequently.
I would go for a new 50 F 2 IS, especially if it had real USM. The current 50 F 1.4 is not quite where I want it to be in terms of AF, contrast at wide apertures, but is fine stopped down.
IS has great utility. I may not replace F1.4, but I find it useful. I really don't want a gigantic and heavy 50, so I hope that whatever Canon comes out with, it is not as large as my zooms.
Upvote
0
I'd welcome a fast 50mm lens with IS, even if it were heavier. I have an uncontrollable shake in my hands that IS corrects well. I currently can't use the existing f/1.8 lens even wide open without blur. IS would be a great add for me.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
