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

[NancyP]

When I want "lightweight, very good IQ wide open, stellar IQ f/4 - f/8", I go for the pancake 40. PITA to focus manually. Absolutely fabulous for landscape. I have to say that my interest in a 50mm lens for distance hiking and landscape has gone to zero. Shorty Forty is darn good.

F/1.2 to f/1.8 subject isolation? There I get into "50 vs 85" territory. I don't do portraiture and have less need for 50 and 85mm f/1.2 to 1.8 than many people. My 125mm f/2.5 macro lens gives me nice enough isolation for many subjects, but is manual focus.

 

[Good24]

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.

Maybe the part of the rumor that is true is that a 50 1.4 is in the works. But it's not a replacement for the current 1.4. Rather it's a 1.4 L with blue glass and replaces the current 1.2 L. And then separately we will see a 50 f/1.8 or f/2 with IS that replaces the current 1.4.

 

[CanoKnight]

Ok Canon.. it better have IS or you will push me toward the artful sigma. You don't want that now, do you .

 

[sdsr]

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

Not sure what you mean by "bullet proof," but while it may still be the best AF 135mm lens, the recent (and much cheaper) Rokinon 135mm f2 is clearly sharper, has far better control of chromatic aberrations (there's really no need to stop it down at all except to get greater depth of focus) and bokeh that's at least as good.

As for any Canon 50mm 1.4 successor (I agree with what you would like such a lens to be), and tying this in with your other comments re any forthcoming Canon FF mirrorless body, it would be nice if the latter had IBIS and thereby made IS concerns irrelevant (at least to those who buy such a body). It's nice using Canon's non-IS lenses on a Sony a7rII....

 

[infared]

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.
- A

Not according to Dustin Abbott...um that would be the Canon 135mm f/2 on the left.
Hint: the 100% image on the right is "absurdly" sharp. No?

http://dustinabbott.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/25-Head-to-Head.jpg

 

[StudentOfLight]

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.
- A

Not according to Dustin Abbott...um that would be the Canon 135mm f/2 on the left.
Hint: the guy on the right is "absurdly" sharp. No?

http://dustinabbott.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/25-Head-to-Head.jpg

I learnt this fact when I was conflicted about whether I should take (to a low light copncert) my 6D + Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC or my 60D with the 135L. I ended up taking my 60D with the 70-200 VC.

 

[vscd]

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

Sometimes i have the feeling, people think that adding IS is just an option or decision to make. It's more difficult than that. You change the optical path and formula, and because you insert a new group into the path you even change the focallenght, or at least you need most probably larger elements to compensate it. That's like on leaf shutter lenses, where you loose light because of the space the shutter uses between the elements...

It's not impossible to make an 50mm f1.4 IS and I hope Canon does the favour to us, but this will rise the price at least for 400-500$. I honestly even doubt that the 50mm focallenght is that important anymore.

Edit: weathersealing is REALLY important for me.

 

[martti]

Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
The market is wrong...or maybe there is something else to taking photographs than the sharpness of the lens?

I nearly bought one at 850 euros but then I came to my senses. What should I do with it, I am not an artist?

 

[ntt2007]

Early this year, a rumor said canon will update their 50 1.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 135L. Look like things are going on right track. Please release the new 50 1.4 quickly and make new 85 1.8.

 

[Antono Refa]

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.

That's what people said before Canon released the 35mm f/2 IS, when the fastest lenses with IS were f/2.8

 

[mb66energy]

A compact EF 1.4 50 IS would be interesting for me. Without IS? no ...
I would like to gain low light capability with 1.4 AND IS!

Maybe waiting for Tamrons 1.8 65mm IS (just my guess that they would do that) with
a max 1:3 reproduction ratio and stellar quality ...

 

[mrsfotografie]

Too late...Canon had 50 years to give us a decent 50mm. I have my Sigma! 8)

They had a decent 50mm, and they produced it for only three years before they introduced the EF50mm f/1.8 II... :

Of course the little EF50mm f/1.8 Mk I no longer competes for image quality with most of the modern third party 50's but if you throw in the size, weight, reasonable build quality and more than adequate optics, it remains my favorite Canon 50mm.

 

[crashpc]

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.

That's what people said before Canon released the 35mm f/2 IS, when the fastest lenses with IS were f/2.8

Also, this should not be f number related.
There is 200mm f/2 lens, which is stabilized. Yes, it costs a lot, but it is not really a manufacturing problem. If they made it f/1.6 IS instead of f/1.4, I wouldn´t complain at all.

 

[privatebydesign]

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.

That's what people said before Canon released the 35mm f/2 IS, when the fastest lenses with IS were f/2.8

Agreed, and the Tamron f1.4's with VC clearly demonstrate there is no technical reason.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

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.

That's what people said before Canon released the 35mm f/2 IS, when the fastest lenses with IS were f/2.8

Agreed, and the Tamron F1.4's with VC clearly demonstrate there is no technical reason.

Tamron F1.8 VC.

 

[vscd]

Agreed, and the Tamron F1.4's with VC clearly demonstrate there is no technical reason.

Tamron F1.8 VC.

No facts please! ;D

 

[JMZawodny]

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

The current 135L could be improved dramatically and I expect a new/modern/higher IQ version is in the works.

 

[brad-man]

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.

That's what people said before Canon released the 35mm f/2 IS, when the fastest lenses with IS were f/2.8

I don't know what people said, but all I said was that I don't expect a 50mm with IS to be faster than f/2, and if there were, it would be pricey. I still think that.

 

[infared]

Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
The market is wrong...or maybe there is something else to taking photographs than the sharpness of the lens?

I nearly bought one at 850 euros but then I came to my senses. What should I do with it, I am not an artist?

That lens definitely has an incredible LOOK...and is great for portraiture....but ...
..after all of these years Canon has truly neglected the "normal perspective" for FF. They are not the only manufacturer guilty of this. Here again...I think Sigma will push the R&D team on a decent 50mm, just like I believe they did for the 35mm.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
The market is wrong...or maybe there is something else to taking photographs than the sharpness of the lens?
I nearly bought one at 850 euros but then I came to my senses. What should I do with it, I am not an artist?

I think Sigma will push the R&D team on a decent 50mm, just like I believe they did for the 35mm.

Sigma will? Sigma 50 Art already exists, and has the best image quality among all 50mm autofocus this planet.
Meanwhile, Canon 50L has the best image quality "from another world". The world of somhos and ghosts.

EDIT:
Excuse the irony. I re-read, and understood that you referred to Sigma push Canon to produce a 50mm high image quality.