Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 Replacement Ready? [CR1]

[ahsanford]

As for why no IS might come to this lens, consider the attached.

The 24/28/35 primes were an even lower class of animal feature/price wise than the 20/28/50/85/100 non-L primes. The first group had the noisy old motor while the second looked like a fairly modern lens with USM.

So the lineage of those 24/28/35 lenses was different. That's about all I can think of to justify no IS with a new 50. Again, it's a CR1.

I'm still sticking to my guns on what's coming, and of course, it's easy to get butt hurt over my speculations if your lens is going away or isn't being refreshed. But that's my current guess right now.

If I forgot any lenses, let me know. This was a quick thing I put together from TDP and Northlight's info.

(And no. I didn't forget the 50 f/2.5. That lens is a duckbill platypus that has no place in a market segmentation exercise. )

- A

 

[wsmith96]

How can they justify putting IS in the wide primes but not in a 50mm lens? This makes no sense.

Agree. I realize that this is just a CR-1, but I would expect that the new 50 would include IS.

 

[ahsanford]

Canon's mid range 35mm has IS, but both the 50mm f/1.8 STM and the 50mm f/1.4 USM wouldn't?

IS will be in 50mm/2.0 Macro lens. 8)

No, I don't really know but doesn't it sound possible?

Side note: now that Canon can tuck 0.7x max mag macro into a 24-70 zoom, do you think Canon will ever update that compact 50mm f/2.5 Macro, which is a 0.5x max mag?

The the 50 macro and 24-70 f/4L IS are apples and oranges, don't get me wrong, but now that we can tuck impressive macro functionality into a walkaround lens -- effectively giving us a casual 'walkaround macro' that doesn't take up another slot in our bags -- why pack a compact macro instead?

- A

 

[YuengLinger]

Maybe they're saving the IS to wrap around the upcoming stellar 50mm 1.2 L II!

 

[ahsanford]

No IS? ashanford will be devastated... and I will enjoy my Sigma Art

If the Canon 1.4 rivals/beats the Tamron 45 1.8, your sigma art will lose a little of its lustre

It's not about luster, it's about needs. If this rumor is true:

• You go to Sigma for the end-all be-all best IQ (at least until Canon through BR into a new 50L)
  
  
• You go to Tamron if you need IS
  
  
• You go to Canon for something smaller and lighter or if you are obsessive about reliable AF. I say smaller and lighter as there is zero chance the 'premium' (middle) grade I showed in my chart before will get all 'Arted Up' to pickle jar size/weight like the Sigmas. If a big/heavy Canon 50mm prime is coming (and I'm not convinced that it is), it will be with the next 50L -- not this 50 f/1.4.

- A

 

[CanonGuy]

I know some will be disappointed in no IS. However, assuming modern optics and IQ seen in the likes of the new 24, 28, and 35 primes, combined with REAL focusing that will now be consistent and accurate. This should be a big hit. Hopefully it retains a similar size/weight as some of the ~50mm prime options are quite large.

And why do you think it will be a hit? The CR post doesn't mention any serious new feature that is going to be added to this 50. Then why did you assume it would be a hit? And why consumer will see it differently than the current version? Sure the optical performance might be better, but this post stated nothing about that which could be the base of your 'big hit' statement.

Being fanboy is ok, but please at least be rational.

 

[ahsanford]

I know some will be disappointed in no IS. However, assuming modern optics and IQ seen in the likes of the new 24, 28, and 35 primes, combined with REAL focusing that will now be consistent and accurate. This should be a big hit. Hopefully it retains a similar size/weight as some of the ~50mm prime options are quite large.

And why do you think it will be a hit? The CR post doesn't mention any serious new feature that is going to be added to this 50. Then why did you assume it would be a hit? And why consumer will see it differently than the current version? Sure the optical performance might be better, but this post stated nothing about that which could be the base of your 'big hit' statement.

Being fanboy is ok, but please at least be rational.

It's not fanboyism. You are missing the key assumption that I'm sure is behind Luds' enthusiasm: the 50mm in this story will get a new optical formula and see an IQ bump like the 24/28/35 lenses did. I agree with that assumption. If that happens, the lens will sell itself. A 9/10 sharpness lens (like the 35 f/2 IS USM) with internal focusing, better build quality, relatively small size and fast/modern/reliable/consistent AF will sell like hotcakes.

If, however, Canon pulls a nifty-fifty repackaging effort like the 50 f/1.8 STM -- in which the optical formula was unchanged from its predecessor -- then you are correct, CG, that enthusiasm should be not be as high.

Personally, I actually would buy a faster STM version of the current EF 50 f/1.4 USM -- nothing else changed -- for $300-400 sight unseen. It's still the sharpest 50 canon sells, but its #1 problem is AF and a modern STM setup would solve that. (That said, I'd be pissed as I love USM, so such a lens would be an opportunity lost.)

But give me the 50mm lens I really want -- the 24/28/35 refresh IS refresh treatment -- and I'd pay twice that, I'd pay Sigma 50 Art money, no hesitation. I have zero shame in stating I value rock solid first party AF very, very highly.

- A

 

[rowlandw]

No IS? Well, I already have the new nifty-fifty for that.

 

[Haydn1971]

No great surprise, IS hasn't been deployed in a Canon lens faster than f2.0, Tamron has pushed this to f1.8... I've always expected the f1.4 to be IS free, just unclear if if would be a £300 mid-range or £600-800 L product. There is still room for a £400-500 f1.8/2.0 IS 50mm lens

 

[ahsanford]

No great surprise, IS hasn't been deployed in a Canon lens faster than f2.0, Tamron has pushed this to f1.8... I've always expected the f1.4 to be IS free, just unclear if if would be a £300 mid-range or £600-800 L product. There is still room for a £400-500 f1.8/2.0 IS 50mm lens

That's why I still -- despite this rumor -- see a three price point present and future 50mm market:

• 50 f/1.2L --> 50 f/1.2L II: A lens built around draw/bokeh, meant to be used almost exclusively for small DOF work, portraiture, etc.
  
• 50 f/1.4 USM --> 50 f/nooneknows IS USM: A fully featured lens (internal focusing, distance scale, IS, etc.) that is meant for general use.
  
  
• 50 f/1.8 II --> 50 f/1.8 STM: The gateway prime that gets you hooked on primes' two major selling points over zooms: sharpness and small DOF. Spartan feature set: focus by wire, no distance scale, telescoping external focusing, etc.
  
  

The fair question is this: can that middle price point (broadly the $500-$750 neighborhood) still sell well without IS, i.e. as a 50 f/1.4 USM II?

• The shortsighted person would beat this up at a 30,000 ft first glance and walk away: "Why pay 3-4 times as much as the 50mm f/1.8 STM for a fraction of a stop?"
  
  
• People who actually read past the top-level spec line will see value: Besides the lens simply being sharper, it will have FTM (not by wire) focusing, proper USM autofocus, internal focusing to minimize dust ingress and prevent that awkward concern of pressing on the protruding barrel of cheaper lenses, better build quality, a real focus ring, etc.
  
  

So, yes, in my mind, a non-IS 50mm f/1.4 USM II would still get the sale and justify a middle price point to me. That middle price point just won't be as high without IS.

- A

 

[douglaurent]

Take your time Canon. It's still soon enough to get IS in the next replacement around the year 2030-2035.

 

[slclick]

I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced

The 135L doesn't NEED replacing, some just want it updated. Me, it's my favorite glass.

 

[Pixel]

I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced

The 135L doesn't NEED replacing, some just want it updated. Me, it's my favorite glass.

I have always thought that as well....until....I put it side by side with the 70-200 2.8L II recently and there's no comparison. The 135mm 2.0L is showing it's age.

 

[ahsanford]

I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced

The 135L doesn't NEED replacing, some just want it updated. Me, it's my favorite glass.

The 100L and 135L are all but bullet proof optically. Absurdly sharp.

Everyone pines for the next version to be a hair faster, but consider what that might look like.

I think the opportunity for the 135L is to be modernized. Weathersealing and IS come to mind.

- A

 

[brad-man]

It would be absurd for Canon to not release a 50mm lens with IS. That is the direction the wind is blowing. So, assuming they will produce an EF 50mm f/x IS, the question becomes will they replace the 50 f/1.4 as this rumor suggests? Many (most?) will value IS over speed, but many would rather have an f/1.4 lens.

EF 50mm f/x IS at around $875 release price
EF 50mm f/1.4 update at around $525 release price

Would there be a good enough market to support both of these lenses? Personally, I'd take the IS (after the price has settled down), but I also dig a 1.4 lens...

 

[TeT]

I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced

The 135L doesn't NEED replacing, some just want it updated. Me, it's my favorite glass.

I have always thought that as well....until....I put it side by side with the 70-200 2.8L II recently and there's no comparison. The 135mm 2.0L is showing it's age.

A properly updated 135 L should slam be noticeably better than the 70 200 L II at 135mm ...

 

[rfdesigner]

I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced

The 135L doesn't NEED replacing, some just want it updated. Me, it's my favorite glass.

The 100L and 135L are all but bullet proof optically. Absurdly sharp.

Everyone pines for the next version to be a hair faster, but consider what that might look like.

I think the opportunity for the 135L is to be modernized. Weathersealing and IS come to mind.

- A

I'd vote for elminiating the longitudinal chromatic abberation (with magic blue gel stuff), and working on getting the out of focus "disks" more disk like in the corners to minimise the slight swirl look of things like leafy backgrounds

 

[ahsanford]

It would be absurd for Canon to not release a 50mm lens with IS. That is the direction the wind is blowing. So, assuming they will produce an EF 50mm f/x IS, the question becomes will they replace the 50 f/1.4 as this rumor suggests? Many (most?) will value IS over speed, but many would rather have an f/1.4 lens.

EF 50mm f/x IS at around $875 release price
EF 50mm f/1.4 update at around $525 release price

Would there be a good enough market to support both of these lenses? Personally, I'd take the IS (after the price has settled down), but I also dig a 1.4 lens...

Great question and good estimates.

Throwing the rumor out and simply juggling IS and the max aperture (assuming it's a new optical design with USM, not a clone of the prior optical formula), if the 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM actually turns out to be...

...IS + f/1.4 --> You're honestly in the $1,000 territory. Consider: that lens will be 90% as sharp as the Art for half the size and weight with reliable first party autofocus and image stabilization. That's a killer value proposition.

...IS + f/1.8 --> Provided it's clearly optical superior and has all the 24/28/35 lens features we want (i.e it's not the recent nifty fifty with USM and IS and everything else is the same), I'd say you're in the $600-800 range. It's worth $500 but Canon will charge us more.

...No IS + f/1.4 --> Same proviso as before, and though aperture is sexier than IS to most people, $600-800 stills seems about right.

...No IS + f/1.8 --> you could argue 'why make this lens', but for the features I mentioned before, perhaps $300-400. I just don't see them making this lens, though.

But the key key key variables that drive this are (a) is it a new optical design and (b) how sharp it is. The numbers above presume 'Yes!' and 'Very - as sharp as the 35 f/2 IS USM'. If those two aren't so, the price may not be that high.

- A

 

[brad-man]

It would be absurd for Canon to not release a 50mm lens with IS. That is the direction the wind is blowing. So, assuming they will produce an EF 50mm f/x IS, the question becomes will they replace the 50 f/1.4 as this rumor suggests? Many (most?) will value IS over speed, but many would rather have an f/1.4 lens.

EF 50mm f/x IS at around $875 release price
EF 50mm f/1.4 update at around $525 release price

Would there be a good enough market to support both of these lenses? Personally, I'd take the IS (after the price has settled down), but I also dig a 1.4 lens...

Great question and good estimates.

Throwing the rumor out and simply juggling IS and the max aperture (assuming it's a new optical design with USM, not a clone of the prior optical formula), if the 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM actually turns out to be...

...IS + f/1.4 --> You're honestly in the $1,000 territory. Consider: that lens will be 90% as sharp as the Art for half the size and weight with reliable first party autofocus and image stabilization. That's a killer value proposition.

...IS + f/1.8 --> Provided it's clearly optical superior and has all the 24/28/35 lens features we want (i.e it's not the recent nifty fifty with USM and IS and everything else is the same), I'd say you're in the $600-800 range. It's worth $500 but Canon will charge us more.

...No IS + f/1.4 --> Same proviso as before, and though aperture is sexier than IS to most people, $600-800 stills seems about right.

...No IS + f/1.8 --> you could argue 'why make this lens', but for the features I mentioned before, perhaps $300-400. I just don't see them making this lens, though.

But the key key key variables that drive this are (a) is it a new optical design and (b) how sharp it is. The numbers above presume 'Yes!' and 'Very - as sharp as the 35 f/2 IS USM'. If those two aren't so, the price may not be that high.

- A

As was mentioned earlier, the fastest lens with IS that Canon has produced thus far is f/2, so I would not expect the new lens to be any faster. Perhaps the correcting IS lens element has size/mass limitations due to the speed it must travel that limits the max width of the aperture. If f/1.4 were possible, I have no doubt that the price would be $1000+ territory.

 

[YuengLinger]

It would be absurd for Canon to not release a 50mm lens with IS. That is the direction the wind is blowing. So, assuming they will produce an EF 50mm f/x IS, the question becomes will they replace the 50 f/1.4 as this rumor suggests? Many (most?) will value IS over speed, but many would rather have an f/1.4 lens.

EF 50mm f/x IS at around $875 release price
EF 50mm f/1.4 update at around $525 release price

Would there be a good enough market to support both of these lenses? Personally, I'd take the IS (after the price has settled down), but I also dig a 1.4 lens...

''Absurd''? Hyperbole.

Any way the wind blows? Not Canon.