Canon's problem is that they really low-balled the 'economy' lenses; so while you're right that a light 50 f1.8 might be the right ballpark for a lot of folk; that particular 50 f1.8 might not be. It's definitely built down to a price, it's not weather sealed, and the close focus IQ is poor.I think the people clamouring for 50/1.4 are ACTUALLY asking for one of the two lenses we ALREADY have. Either they want something like the EF50/1.4, a double Gaussian design, cheap, compact, good not great IQ, and so basically what the RF50/1.8 is, once you factor in the lower need for raw F-stop these days. People are hung up on the 1.8 vs. 1.4 but I think that is a mistake (and one I made for 3-4 years before finding peace!). In other words, the RF50/1.8 **IS** the double-Gaussian RF50/1.4 you've been waiting for.
Canon is doing pretty well rounding out the RF lenses and bodies for the pro crowd, for the sports/wildlife crowd and for the low to mid enthusiast crowd.
I think they still have a wide-open hole in provisions for the light weight/street shooter/travel well heeled enthusiast crowd. The sort of folks who buy Leica Qs, Fuji x100vis, Nikon Zfs etc. A nice compact setup with high quality primes, high build quality, weather sealed. The sort of bracket Sony is hitting quite regularly now, that Sigma hits with it's 'i' series glass (all beautifully made from metal, all weather sealed). Really it's a shame the 28 f2.8 isn't better made; because it's an interesting proposition for someone building a light street/travel kit, but it's not going to tempt people away from the Q/Zf etc.
Upvote
0