Canon to Finally Announce a 50mm f/1.4 Replacement Soon? [CR1]

[Sabaki]

hmmm ... slightly improved version of the current 50/1.4 ... what pricepoint do you think they are targetting? 500 ? or rather 999 ?

Seeing the MRSPs Canon did with the New IS WA primes and then how they needed to correct them because of the market, I'd expect the two possibilities:
1. slightly improved d. gauss design, better coatings, better mechanics, etc. for about 500 to 600 $/€
2. different, new optical formula, e.g. like the Sigma Art, etc. for about 800 to 1.000 $/€

I suppose the 50/1.4 sucessor at 1.
And the 50/1.2L sucessor at 2. with all the L treatment, BR and then about 1.500 to 1.800 $/€

Speaking of price; if the new 50mm non L comes in at $1000, I would rather save the extra cash and buy the 85mm L f1.2 instead.
No mistake that the 50mm is a desired focal length but if the pricing isn't decent, the 85mm would be my boken monster of choice

 

[PepeSilvia]

This would make me sad. I imagine it will go like the 24-70. Holding out on a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS...

As a stills photographer, I have zero issues with the 24-70ii not having IS. I guess that aside from videographers, those who want an IS version of the 24-70, lives too much in theory and do not spend enough time out there taking photos.

Just my two cents but my opinion nonetheless.

My camera doesn't even have a video mode, but I shoot in low light a lot and it's incredibly useful. Just today, I took a bunch of handheld portraits in low light between 1/15 and 1/40 shutter speed on my 100mm IS lens, without IS there's no way I would have been able to get anything useable in that situation. When I rented the 35mm IS I took a portrait in almost nothing but moonlight that was around 1/4 second that came out great. Sure you could use a tripod or a flash, but that's just more stuff to always have to carry around just in case, while IS is always there.

And I'm not saying the 24-70 II is not a worthy replacement, but that there were rumors of it having IS before it was announced and people were asking for it, and I suspect Canon decided to hold out on a f/2.8 IS as a business decision. I'm not the target market for such a lens so my opinion on it doesn't really matter, just an observation.

At this point after seeing what they did with the 35mm f/2 IS and how compact and inexpensive it is, it's difficult to see any legitimate reason Canon couldn't include IS in the new 50mm. I think they know people want a replacement to the f/1.4 so bad that they will take what they can get, IS or not it will sell just fine.

 

[AvTvM]

I agree - the best part of the Sony system is the lenses made by other manufacturers. ;D

well, thread topic is Canon 50/1.4 Mk. II ... Canon is long overdue with an improved version competitive in terms of IQ [Sigma!] and AF drive/performance. Same with the 50/1.2 L.

Meanwhile ... an optically excellent, native 55/1.8 lens is availble from Sony (with "Zeiss" badge). It dances circles around all current Canon 50 lenses.

 

[bdunbar79]

I agree - the best part of the Sony system is the lenses made by other manufacturers. ;D

well, thread topic is Canon 50/1.4 Mk. II ... Canon is long overdue with an improved version competitive in terms of IQ [Sigma!] and AF drive/performance. Same with the 50/1.2 L.

Meanwhile ... an optically excellent, native 55/1.8 lens is availble from Sony (with "Zeiss" badge). It dances circles around all current Canon 50 lenses.

How is the AF performance on the Zeiss lens?

 

[zim]

I agree - the best part of the Sony system is the lenses made by other manufacturers. ;D

well, thread topic is Canon 50/1.4 Mk. II ... Canon is long overdue with an improved version competitive in terms of IQ [Sigma!] and AF drive/performance. Same with the 50/1.2 L.

Meanwhile ... an optically excellent, native 55/1.8 lens is availble from Sony (with "Zeiss" badge). It dances circles around all current Canon 50 lenses.

How is the AF performance on the Zeiss lens?

It's very responsive in the five knuckle hand jive test

 

[bdunbar79]

LOL!

 

[Loswr]

What surprises me of late is not Canon's choice of release, but the complete lack of enthusiasm shown here once something is released.

The stunning recent example is the ef 35mm 1.4 L II. Months (if not years) of whining, pleading, demanding a version II of the 35mm L, and now it has been out for, what, almost 8 months, and we have one thread to showcase it here on CR, and that thread has one person's posts?

Forum members here seem to think that Canon pays attention to demands, yet there is no evidence that CR members, of late, buy or use new stuff, or appreciate it if they do.

Another example of a lens, a zoom, that generated pages and pages of speculative anxiety was the ef 100-400mm II, yet the most recent post in that lens images forum is...December.

Start a new thread about either lens saying how it's total garbage, attach a couple of blurry images to 'prove' your point, mention Canon's lack of innovation along the way. Then sit back and watch the post count rise....

 

[Maximilian]

[snip]
Meanwhile ... an optically excellent, native 55/1.8 lens is availble from Sony (with "Zeiss" badge). It dances circles around all current Canon 50 lenses.

How is the AF performance on the Zeiss lens?

It's very responsive in the five knuckle hand jive test

LOL!

Am I missing something? Is my sens of humor not working on this?

AFAIK is the Sony ZEISS AF 1,8/55 ZA FE-Mount equipped with the Sony linear AF system.
And the Sony AF system is not known for being crappy, isn't it?

Do you know something different?

 

[d]

Meanwhile ... an optically excellent, native 55/1.8 lens is availble from Sony (with "Zeiss" badge). It dances circles around all current Canon 50 lenses.

...and so it should for that price! But yes, a decent Canon 50mm is long overdue. It's not a focal length I use much myself, so I'm quite happy to just have the 50mm STM in my kit.

d.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Those concerned about STM as an option: after spending a week with the new 18-135 IS USM on the 80D I'd be surprised if Canon puts STM in anything but the most budget of options after this. Nano USM seems better in every metric: quieter, faster, and focus pulls seem just as smooth. Manual override is still focus by wire but is much better executed with less lag. I'm now considering STM more of a gateway technology that has allowed the development of Nano USM.

I'd buy a quality Canon prime with Nano USM. I'm not a big fan of STM, but I think I could easily become a fan of Nano USM.

 

[grainier]

I just realized that I am so tired of waiting I don't even care anymore.

 

[Luds34]

Is an f/1.4 IS just too difficult to make? ???

That was kind of my thinking, difficult or expensive. I always figured f/1.4 AND IS was a longshot.

Either way, proper USM, and assuming internally focusing that is a big step up. Also if it can nail focus consistently then that is worth the upgrade alone.

 

[jeffa4444]

50m is not the focal length I want. They should make it 58mm ;D

No, no,no!
I want a 55mm!

45mm would be closer to human vision!

 

[JonAustin]

As a stills photographer, I have zero issues with the 24-70ii not having IS. I guess that aside from videographers, those who want an IS version of the 24-70, lives too much in theory and do not spend enough time out there taking photos.

My camera doesn't even have a video mode, but I shoot in low light a lot and it's incredibly useful. Just today, I took a bunch of handheld portraits in low light between 1/15 and 1/40 shutter speed on my 100mm IS lens, without IS there's no way I would have been able to get anything useable in that situation. When I rented the 35mm IS I took a portrait in almost nothing but moonlight that was around 1/4 second that came out great. Sure you could use a tripod or a flash, but that's just more stuff to always have to carry around just in case, while IS is always there.

And I'm not saying the 24-70 II is not a worthy replacement, but that there were rumors of it having IS before it was announced and people were asking for it, and I suspect Canon decided to hold out on a f/2.8 IS as a business decision. I'm not the target market for such a lens so my opinion on it doesn't really matter, just an observation.

At this point after seeing what they did with the 35mm f/2 IS and how compact and inexpensive it is, it's difficult to see any legitimate reason Canon couldn't include IS in the new 50mm. I think they know people want a replacement to the f/1.4 so bad that they will take what they can get, IS or not it will sell just fine.

+1

I have to roll my eyes every time I read a post in which such self-evident observations as "you know, IS doesn't freeze subject motion" are stated. We get it already. But just because IS may only be useful in, say, 25% of all photographic situations (and I'm just "spitballing" that percentage), it doesn't mean there aren't a lot of photographers that do much, if not all, of their work in those situations where IS is useful, or even vital.

So I wish all the reminders of the obvious would just give it a rest, already, or at least quit casting perjoratives. Some of us want IS in every lens we own, if for no other reason than we want to have the ability to switch it on and use it when we need it, and we are willing to pay for it. Some of us haven't purchased the 24-70/2.8 II because it lacks IS, and some of us bought it anyway, all the while still wishing it had IS. The same will apply the 50/1.4's replacement, should it be released without IS.

<\endrant>

P.S. I concur with ahsanford's "conversation starter." But in response to other focal length requests, I wouldn't mind a ~ 65mm ...

 

[grainier]

45mm would be closer to human vision!

That could get you labeled a humanist.

 

[Don Haines]

+1

I have to roll my eyes every time I read a post in which such self-evident observations as "you know, IS doesn't freeze subject motion" are stated. We get it already. But just because IS may only be useful in, say, 25% of all photographic situations (and I'm just "spitballing" that percentage), it doesn't mean there aren't a lot of photographers that do much, if not all, of their work in those situations where IS is useful, or even vital.

+2

Even with IS on a lens, I am always taking advantage of things to rest myself or the camera against to improve stability... If I have no IS, then I will make do. If I have IS, I will use it when appropriate and make do. For me, it's not a deal breaker, but it is certainly high up on the "nice to have" list.

 

[Luds34]

...
I have to roll my eyes every time I read a post in which such self-evident observations as "you know, IS doesn't freeze subject motion" are stated. We get it already. But just because IS may only be useful in, say, 25% of all photographic situations (and I'm just "spitballing" that percentage), it doesn't mean there aren't a lot of photographers that do much, if not all, of their work in those situations where IS is useful, or even vital.
...

A fast lens doesn't help keep the view in the camera steady when you've got to shoot hand held and for one reason or another, you can't hold the camera+lens very still.

But of course those of you that don't want/need IS are likely all in your 20s rather than in your 60s and similarly don't appreciate the weight difference of an A7RII vs 5D3.

Dilbert, please don't tell me that you're in your 60s. I pictured you young, maybe even in your teens. This would drastically destroy my own vision/world of canonrumors.

 

[zim]

It's very responsive in the five knuckle hand jive test

LOL!

Am I missing something? Is my sens of humor not working on this?

AFAIK is the Sony ZEISS AF 1,8/55 ZA FE-Mount equipped with the Sony linear AF system.
And the Sony AF system is not known for being crappy, isn't it?

Do you know something different?

Sorry Maximilian that was probably rather regional, nothing to do with lens performance couldn't resist the dancing references

 

[AvTvM]

hehe.

Still üpretty funny - or patrhetic - that Canon Defense League eagerly is waiting for a modestly improved EF 50/1.4 without even IS ... while Sony has 5-axis IBIS and a brilliant 55/1.8 ... for 2 years by now. ;D

 

[d]

hehe.

Still üpretty funny - or patrhetic - that Canon Defense League eagerly is waiting for a modestly improved EF 50/1.4 without even IS ... while Sony has 5-axis IBIS and a brilliant 55/1.8 ... for 2 years by now. ;D

And we of the CDL are very much grateful for the robust discussion and valuable insights shared with us here on Canon Rumors by all members of the Sony Optics Debating Squad...