Canon Introduces New EF 50MM F/1.8 STM Lens

[meywd]

No optical improvement?

http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-lens-sample-images/

Look at those samples.

On 8000D/760D, at 1.8, 1/250.
Nice sharpness on the eye.
Impossible to get a such quality-shoot at 1.8 with the MKII version.

So I'm 100% sold on this. I will take one day 1.

Edit: I wonder if these pic are fake?
Only seen on this website
I hope not...

Those samples do look nice. I hope you're right about it being better than the MKII version.

I don't think these are fake, looking at my pictures with the MKII, i find it has the same IQ.

 

[NancyP]

I would be first in line for the Plastic Fantastic STM if I hadn't gotten the 40 pancake a year ago. If the new P.F. STM is pretty good at f/2, I may get it anyway. Light weight is really good.

 

[slclick]

I would be first in line for the Plastic Fantastic STM if I hadn't gotten the 40 pancake a year ago. If the new P.F. STM is pretty good at f/2, I may get it anyway. Light weight is really good.

I have shot over 7k images with the 40 and I am still getting the 50. When it comes to longer FL's, spreads of 35-50 mm don't matter much at all to me but the perspective from 40 to 50 on FF is a big jump for me, YMMV. 40 is still wide and 50 is neither wide nor tele. I don't personally like 50 that much but for $125 it may just be the low light street lens I'd want to have on hand and not 'fuss' over.

 

[e_honda]

It looks like the same lens with a new motor and a slightly better iris. With that said, at $125 I'm not going to complain.

Also looks to have much improved build quality, which is a huge welcome. Plenty of instances with the MK II of the front element just randomly separating from the rest of the lens. I'm very pleasantly surprised with the new metal mount.

MK II had the optical performance of a $300 lens (comparatively) and the build quality of a $50 lens.

 

[sdsr]

Pssst! ... Hey ... buddy ... let me clue you in to the real deal. See, Leica makes some lenses with up to 12 aperture blades. Yeh, that's right, you heard me ... twelve! Don't let Canon cheat you with their lousy seven rounded when you can have 10 or even 12.

12 is for amateurs. The old Russian Jupiter 9 has 15, the Tair 11 has 20!

 

[Luds34]

What are the chances of Canon releasing one 30mm stm prime. DPP doesn't show active focus point for my sigma 30mm 1.4. It only works with center point.

30mm lens is not a common focal lenght, and Sigma was pioneered in luminous prime lenses for APS-C.

When Canon launched the EF-S 24mm F2.8 I was sad because it means you will never see a EF-S 22mm F2 or a EF-S 30mm F1.4.

Maybe someday, Canon decides to update the EF 28mm F1.8

I know it's popular to get bashed online, whether in forums or by reviewers. And I don't know if it's a product of purchasing the lens in recent years (better quality control, more consistent these days?) but as an owner of the 28mm f/1.8 I can say it is a solid lens. Sure it suffers from CA likes it's similar era 85mm f/1.8. And the corners can be a little soft. But in real world shooting you just don't see these things (or can compensate for them). In any case I really enjoy this lens. I shoot at f/2 plenty of times with it, it's small, compact, nice little lens hood, and it just takes great photos. To me the proof is in the photos and over the years I've come away with some nice shots. I want to say I thought it was commonly known, but this is a better bet then the crop only Sigma 30mm lens. USM, internally focusing to boot.

I do echo the thoughts on the EF-S dedicated primes though. However I have given up waiting. I'm hopeful that Canon will maybe get it together with the EF-M line. Hitting it out of the gate with the 22mm prime gave hope!

 

[Finn M]

Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.

This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.

 

[Loswr]

Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.

This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.

Great advice – a beginner or amateur looking for a cheap, compact lens should buy one that costs about the same as an entry-level Canon dSLR plus the new 50/1.8 STM...and then spend double that for a camera on which to mount it. Can we get a reality check, please? :

And how about another reality check for all those people you and a couple of your friends switching to MILCs. You think that would mean an increase in MILC sales...but we're not seeing that.

 

[SUNDOG04]

Please....can we please not call this new 50 a "nifty fifty"? Fifty mm is a bit of an odd size for me and I would prefer the 40mm. I do use the 50 Compact Macro from time to time, but not really for landscape. It is an old piece of junk that does its job well and I would still use it over the new 50. If I had one of those old nifty-fifties I would probably throw it at he neighbors cat when it is in my yard after the birds. But, I think Canon did a nice job with it and I would not hesitate to buy it if I used 50mm more.

 

[zlatko]

Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.

This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.

Good luck with that Fuji XF 35/1.4 lens. I did not have good luck with it. First, it is noisy. It makes a noise when it focuses and it makes a noise when the aperture stops down (unless you're shooting wide open). For lens at that price (about $500), it should not be noisy. It is noisier than all Canon lenses in that price range. Second, the ergonomics are poor. There is no place to get a good grip on it when removing the lens from the camera. And the aperture ring slips easily, so if you're not careful you may accidentally be shooting at f/16 when you thought the aperture ring was on A (Shutter priority mode).

The Fuji X-T1 is a perfect-sized camera and I really wanted to work with it. But I did not really get along with it. I posted about it previously:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=25917.msg510988#msg510988

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I have a mk1 50mm f1.8 from way back when I bought it new with an EOS 650. Yep...that's right, the original EOS slr...on film. So mine is from the first year of EOS cameras and lenses. All the other lenses from that period I have sold on, except this one. It's got an original metal mount and still produces great images.

Will I sell mine for this new one? no not really...there's no point. The new one is the same optically. The only improvement is the quieter AF motor, but I'd loose the focus window.

 

[sdsr]

This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.

Are you saying that someone who isn't a beginner/amateur would be better off with much more expensive Fuji gear or that a beginner/amateur would be? If the latter, it's not clear, as Neuro points out, why a beginner would want to spend far more for Fuji lens/body combination, and I suspect there aren't many beginners who are interested in manual focus rings, big or otherwise, and that stopped down a bit the new Canon is at least as good anyway. If the former, all bets are off, I guess (my preference would be for a compact mirrorless camera with a FF sensor, at least one of which costs less than the XT-1...).

 

[SalAlexander]

Really looking forward to replacing my 50 1.8 II !
The focusing on that thing was just getting worse and worse :-\

 

[ahsanford]

Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.

This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.

I fail to see how discussion of a $125 f/1.8 full frame lens -- i.e. comically the best bargain in all of photography -- can be hijacked to discuss a mirrorless product in a completely different price class. Apples and oranges.

Enjoy your mirrorless rig. I hear they are great. When you buy that 35mm f/1.4, just remember to buy six extra batteries and avoid any moving subjects and you will have a peach of a day shooting.

- A

 

[Sporgon]

Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.

This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.

That's a pretty strange conclusion. I'm quite a fan of Fuji, I like the ethetics of the X-T1, but that 35mm lens you mention is poor across the frame for a crop, never mind if it was full frame.

The Canon 50mm STM is going to spank that Fuji lens in resolution across the frame, and the Canon lens is FF ! As is usual when you start comparing crop to FF in terms of shallow dof and subject isolation the crop system starts to become more expensive than FF, unlike in the usual 'reach limited' situations when it is significantly cheaper.

You could take the same three quarter length portrait with the 35/1.4 on the Fuji and the 50/1.8 on the 1200D and I reckon you could get both an etheticslly and technically better picture on the Canon - for less than one third of the price.

 

[Loswr]

You could take the same three quarter length portrait with the 35/1.4 on the Fuji and the 50/1.8 on the 1200D and I reckon you could get both an etheticslly and technically better picture on the Canon - for less than one third of the price.

Yeah, but with the Fuji you'd look good doing it, you know, in that retro hipster I'd look even better if this was a Nikon Df sort of way.

 

[Marsu42]

This will be a major hit to the sales of the Yongnuo clone.

True, Canon is really sending a message with this price. But Yn doesn't have lens hoods that cost 1/4th of the lens' price

 

[ahsanford]

The only downside I see, is that you have to set the focus to infinity before you lay it in your bag, so that you do not damage the tube or focus mechanism by a slight pressure. The front element does extend as it seems. Edit: hope it's not the same S___ as the canon 50 1.4, which is very prone to focus motor damage. I hate that.

+1. I am very deliberate in 'shortening the barrel' of my old 50 1.4 to not damage it in my tiny walkaround bag. However, I'm not sure a focus by wire STM lens has similar concerns.

Internal focusing is probably #3 on my list of reasons why I want want that 50 f/nooneknows IS USM (#1 being proper/modern/fast/reliable USM AF and #2 being better wide open performance). Internal focusing would eliminate the barrel extension and mechanical force on the AF gears/components and it would eliminate a sliding surface for dust/dirt/water/junk to get into (i.e. the front filter would better seal the lens than in a non-internally-focusing design).

Also, if you goof around with bokeh shape stencils, telescoping in-and-out front elements kind of ruin it. It's best when the lens' physical length doesn't change when you use those.

- A

 

[bdunbar79]

Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.

This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.

Good luck with that Fuji XF 35/1.4 lens. I did not have good luck with it. First, it is noisy. It makes a noise when it focuses and it makes a noise when the aperture stops down (unless you're shooting wide open). For lens at that price (about $500), it should not be noisy. It is noisier than all Canon lenses in that price range. Second, the ergonomics are poor. There is no place to get a good grip on it when removing the lens from the camera. And the aperture ring slips easily, so if you're not careful you may accidentally be shooting at f/16 when you thought the aperture ring was on A (Shutter priority mode).

The Fuji X-T1 is a perfect-sized camera and I really wanted to work with it. But I did not really get along with it. I posted about it previously:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=25917.msg510988#msg510988

Oh you don't know what you're talking about! Everyone knows that amateurs cannot expose correctly and underexpose by 5 stops. Not to worry with the Fuji. You can just boost in post 5 EV with no problem and you end up with much better IQ than any Canon camera exposed properly.

 

[ahsanford]

Oh you don't know what you're talking about! Everyone knows that amateurs cannot expose correctly and underexpose by 5 stops. Not to worry with the Fuji. You can just boost in post 5 EV with no problem and you end up with much better IQ than any Canon camera exposed properly.

Someone's been reading DPReview's sensor testing of the 5DS. :

- A