A New EF 50 f/1.8 IS? [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10594"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10594" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10594"></a></div>
<strong>A new 50?


</strong>A purported replacement to the EF 50 f/1.4 was mentioned today in the form of an EF 50 f/1.8 IS. The lens would be smaller than the current 50 f/1.4. There is no imminent announcement of such a lens, but Canon is working to replace the 50 f/1.4 sometime in the next year. The current 50 f/1.8 would remain in the lineup.</p>
<p><strong>CR’s Take</strong>


There’s no doubt in my mind Canon is working on a couple of new 50mm lenses. With IS added to the new 24 & 28mm primes, IS in a 50 shouldn’t surprise anyone. It would be a welcomed lens if they can make it small enough to work well on a mirrorless platform.</p>
<p>Take this one with a grain of salt….</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[trulandphoto]

STM maybe?

 

[Marsu42]

STM maybe?

More likely it'll be real usm instead of the micro "usm" on the current 50/1.4. And if they sacrifice a little light for IS, the lens is sharp even wide open at double the price, this would sound like Canon.

 

[RLPhoto]

Lame, don't need IS on a 50mm prime. Rather have the extra speed.

Canons going to want 700$ for it too, I just know it.

 

[jabbott]

Since when does replacing a fast aperture prime with a slower aperture prime count as a replacement? An f/1.4 aperture gathers nearly 40% more light than an f/1.8 aperture, and produces noticeably stronger bokeh. One doesn't need IS with such a large aperture. Definitely going to take a grain of salt with this rumor!

 

[Ricku]

Lame, don't need IS on a 50mm prime.

Your comment is even lamer.

There is no such thing as "no need for IS". ALL lenses and all FL's can benefit from IS.

 

[RLPhoto]

Lame, don't need IS on a 50mm prime.

Your comment is even lamer.

There is no such thing as "no need for IS". ALL lenses and all FL's can benefit from IS.

Your must have more dollars than sense because IS makes things more expensive. Especially wide aperture lenses.

 

[japhoto]

There’s no doubt in my mind Canon is working on a couple of new 50mm lenses.

This is good news since none of the present lenses are worthy of my money.

-50 1.8 = a toy lens, too few aperture blades
-50 1.4 = more expensive toy lens, prone to breaking (also had one and didn't like it)
-50 1.2 = expensive and with problems like focus shift
-Sigma 50 1.4 = could be good if by some miracle one could find a decent specimen

If I'm not missing anything, these are the autofocusing lenses for Canon at the moment. So after that short listing I welcome new additions to the lineup (and IS of course, it's a life-saver for me).

 

[briansquibb]

Lame, don't need IS on a 50mm prime.

Your comment is even lamer.

There is no such thing as "no need for IS". ALL lenses and all FL's can benefit from IS.

Your must have more dollars than sense because IS makes things more expensive. Especially wide aperture lenses.

Agreed - shooting handheld under 1/60 is going to attract motion blur. If the subject it stationary then use something to support it.

 

[japhoto]

Lame, don't need IS on a 50mm prime.

Your comment is even lamer.

There is no such thing as "no need for IS". ALL lenses and all FL's can benefit from IS.

Your must have more dollars than sense because IS makes things more expensive. Especially wide aperture lenses.

I'll gladly pay more for IS and what does the wide aperture have to do with it? Do you think a wide-aperture lens is only for wide aperture shooting? I for one shoot pretty much always static subjects, so IS gives me the ability to stop down for DOF or shoot in low light, so yeah, I think IS is great.

 

[briansquibb]

Lame, don't need IS on a 50mm prime.

Your comment is even lamer.

There is no such thing as "no need for IS". ALL lenses and all FL's can benefit from IS.

Your must have more dollars than sense because IS makes things more expensive. Especially wide aperture lenses.

I'll gladly pay more for IS and what does the wide aperture have to do with it? Do you think a wide-aperture lens is only for wide aperture shooting? I for one shoot pretty much always static subjects, so IS gives me the ability to stop down for DOF or shoot in low light, so yeah, I think IS is great.

Static = iso100 + tripod

 

[japhoto]

Lame, don't need IS on a 50mm prime.

Your comment is even lamer.

There is no such thing as "no need for IS". ALL lenses and all FL's can benefit from IS.

Your must have more dollars than sense because IS makes things more expensive. Especially wide aperture lenses.

I'll gladly pay more for IS and what does the wide aperture have to do with it? Do you think a wide-aperture lens is only for wide aperture shooting? I for one shoot pretty much always static subjects, so IS gives me the ability to stop down for DOF or shoot in low light, so yeah, I think IS is great.

Static = iso100 + tripod

Yeah, ideally it is, but depending on the situation I don't necessarily even have my tripod with me, so IS gives me a way to deal with those situations. And also when I'm hiking and not primarily photographing it's a great advantage.

 

[Etienne]

Not another "IS" vs "I don't need no freakin IS" war, puhlease.

 

[japhoto]

Not another "IS" vs "I don't need no freakin IS" war, puhlease.

I agree and this isn't the first time briansquibb and I have bumped heads over this matter, so I'll leave and going to get some shuteye.

But regarding the matter I think it's great that there are even rumors of Canon re-working the 50mm lineup, with IS or not.

 

[briansquibb]

Not another "IS" vs "I don't need no freakin IS" war, puhlease.

I agree and this isn't the first time briansquibb and I have bumped heads over this matter, so I'll leave and going to get some shuteye.

But regarding the matter I think it's great that there are even rumors of Canon re-working the 50mm lineup, with IS or not.

We aren't bumping heads - we just have different opinions on the matter 8) 8) 8)

 

[Etienne]

Not another "IS" vs "I don't need no freakin IS" war, puhlease.

I agree and this isn't the first time briansquibb and I have bumped heads over this matter, so I'll leave and going to get some shuteye.

But regarding the matter I think it's great that there are even rumors of Canon re-working the 50mm lineup, with IS or not.

Agreed. I'd like a lightweight AF 50mm that's sharp wide open!

 

[unfocused]

Remember the vast majority of cameras Canon now sells are APS-C, so 50mm is the new 80mm and IS is definitely helpful under some situations at that focal length.

 

[Dylan777]

1.4 or faster, don't need IS....smaller + sharper wide open is a PLUS.

Can't wait...

 

[infared]

"This is good news since none of the present lenses are worthy of my money.
-50 1.8 = a toy lens, too few aperture blades
-50 1.4 = more expensive toy lens, prone to breaking (also had one and didn't like it)
-50 1.2 = expensive and with problems like focus shift
-Sigma 50 1.4 = could be good if by some miracle one could find a decent specimen
If I'm not missing anything, these are the autofocusing lenses for Canon at the moment. So after that short listing I welcome new additions to the lineup (and IS of course, it's a life-saver for me).
[/quote]"


I have the Sigma..(and TRUST me..I am not a Sigma Corp. fan...I have all L glass and a Zeiss for my 5DMarkIII)...but based on the LAME Canon 50mm offering...I went for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (and yeah....all those other letters they had to attach to the name?). I have to say...my Sigma lens is quite excellent ...I have never had a complaint using it unless it was photographer error (Me. LOL!). And I agree with the other posts..an f/1.8 DOES NOT replace an f/1.4? DUH. Even if a Canon 50mm f/1.8 IS gets made, I am keeping my Sigma and skipping that one along with all of Canon's 50mm offerings. Shameful situation...Canon.
...but hey whatever...Would not be surprised to see a lens like that coming down the pike for the new Canon Mirrorless (a camera I will never own...I will stick with my kick-ass MFT system for a micro system when I am not using a FF camera. The WHOLE point of having a mirrorless camera is to make it SMALLER. Did you hear that Canon?).
Hold the mirrorless manufacturing line and send us a couple of 24-70mm f/2.8 II's. That would suit my needs just fine!!! LOL!!!!

 

[preppyak]

The reason this intrigues me is because it could show a major divergence for future lenses for Canon, which would be different than the Nikon path. Nikon has basically no primes with IS (only their 85 macro and >200mm lenses), and I think only one zoom with VR in the f/2.8 range. Their most recent lenses are f/1.8.

Canon on the other hand just released two lenses that are a whole stop slower than their predecessors but add IS. This too would be nearly a stop slower and add IS. The pancake 40mm doesn't have IS, but that seems to be a size thing. If Canon is gonna keep targeting the video market, that might show the path for their future lens updates, making them slower but adding IS. F/1.8 is plenty shallow for most video work, and the IS can be indispensable. But for photo-first people, it'd probably be frustrating to see IS in everything...especially if Nikon is taking the other path