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

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

If there is anything that Canon shooters don't 'have to hang their heads about, it is lenses. Canon's EF mount unquestionably has the richest stable of lenses in the history of photography...we just like to complain.

 

[Don Haines]

There are two lenses in the Canon fleet, that if an update were announced, I would immediately pre-order..

This is one of those lenses. 50mm is (at least for me) a very popular focal length and F1.4 allows great low light use and narrow depth of field, and all at a reasonable price.

IS on the lens? not that important to me.... if it has it, great.... if it doesn't, I can deal with it.

The big thing for me is AF. Once you go to fast lenses, AF gets harder to do. The odds are better for a Canon lens to AF fast and accurately than a third-party lens.

 

[Luds34]

I wish I was still that young. Those cameras just don't get any lighter as you grow older.

Well hopefully you're still young at heart! Cheers!

 

[AvTvM]

If there is anything that Canon shooters don't 'have to hang their heads about, it is lenses. Canon's EF mount unquestionably has the richest stable of lenses in the history of photography...we just like to complain.

pointing out facts and stating customer expecations for new or improved lenses does not qualify as "complaining" or "whining". even when some Canon Defense League members [not you Dustin!] consider it as such.

fact is, the Canon50/1.4 is the weakest (IQ) and "relatively worst" (AF drive construction) of all 50/1.4's currently on the market. nikon better, sigma art much better.

my opinion (no whining!) is: canon should have launched a greatly improved mark II already several years ago. and if they launch one tomorrow, it better be really good, since they got some catching up to do.

my canon customer wallet's opinion is: got 50/1.4, got 50/1.8 STM, prefer the 1.8, since it also plays well on EOS-M. will sell hardly used 50/1.4. will only consider 50/1.4 Mark II, if it is optically as good as Sigma art or Tamron (45) and has highest quality Canon AF USM drive and dors not cost more than sigma does.

my wallets expectation may be a bit high ... but hey, it's my wallet and my money talking. If Canon wants it, they'll have to convince me and my wallet first. ;D

 

[Maximilian]

...
fact is, the Canon50/1.4 is the weakest (IQ) and "relatively worst" (AF drive construction) of all 50/1.4's currently on the market. nikon better, sigma art much better.

my opinion (no whining!) is: canon should have launched a greatly improved mark II already several years ago.
...

+1
I do not have a 50 mm lens yet but I want one, and I want an affordable one with f1.4, best at the same size (and price) as the current one. And OEM is preferred.
But I am not willing to spend my money in that 30 years (lens design) to 20 years (mechanical construction) old tool Canon is not willing or able to replace soon. And I also don't want to get the 50/1.8 STM as a makeshift.
So if Canon wants to get my money, they should deliver soon. Otherwise the Tamron or Sigma options become more and more tempting, despite the aperture (T) or the size (S).
And if I have spent my money I will not spend it twice as I don't expect any good resale value from those two.

And even if this sounds to someone like whining, it is just a rational conclusion.

So if someone from Canon would listen (I don't expect that) I'd say (almost like ahsanford):
Make the build and optics comparable to the new WA primes, give me (personally) a decent f1.4 IQ, make it IS if possible, but f1.4 is preferred over that. But deliver SOON!

*UPDATE*

“Soon” is always a relative term and we’re now not expecting such a lens to be announced in 2016.</p>

And "SOON!" does not mean Canons definition of "soon". So 2016 would be more than just "really welcome". :

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

If there is anything that Canon shooters don't 'have to hang their heads about, it is lenses. Canon's EF mount unquestionably has the richest stable of lenses in the history of photography...we just like to complain.

pointing out facts and stating customer expecations for new or improved lenses does not qualify as "complaining" or "whining". even when some Canon Defense League members [not you Dustin!] consider it as such.

fact is, the Canon50/1.4 is the weakest (IQ) and "relatively worst" (AF drive construction) of all 50/1.4's currently on the market. nikon better, sigma art much better.

my opinion (no whining!) is: canon should have launched a greatly improved mark II already several years ago. and if they launch one tomorrow, it better be really good, since they got some catching up to do.

my canon customer wallet's opinion is: got 50/1.4, got 50/1.8 STM, prefer the 1.8, since it also plays well on EOS-M. will sell hardly used 50/1.4. will only consider 50/1.4 Mark II, if it is optically as good as Sigma art or Tamron (45) and has highest quality Canon AF USM drive and dors not cost more than sigma does.

my wallets expectation may be a bit high ... but hey, it's my wallet and my money talking. If Canon wants it, they'll have to convince me and my wallet first. ;D

I don't disagree with you on this lens. I've owned and sold several copies of the 50mm f/1.4. I just never loved the lens. I went without an AF 50mm for some time, and (for now) I have purchased the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC instead. I like the Tamron a lot, but if Canon produces a better lens I would happily swap to the Canon.

P.S. I do have the 50mm STM now, too, but I use that more for video work (70D/80D) and on the M3. The Tamron beats the pants of the 50 STM in overall IQ.

 

[Haydn1971]

I'm still sticking with my four 50mm lens strategy

50mm f1.8 STM nifty fifty
50mm f1.8/2.0 IS like a 35 f2.0 IS
50mm f1.4L jam jar with blue gunk Otus chaser
50mm f1.2L stays as it is arty option

 

[d]

P.S. I do have the 50mm STM now, too, but I use that more for video work (70D/80D) and on the M3. The Tamron beats the pants of the 50 STM in overall IQ.

And so it should - it's over 5x the price where I live!

I'm still sticking with my four 50mm lens strategy

50mm f1.8 STM nifty fifty
50mm f1.8/2.0 IS like a 35 f2.0 IS
50mm f1.4L jam jar with blue gunk Otus chaser
50mm f1.2L stays as it is arty option

Yeah I'm with you on this, it seems like a "sensible" line-up for Canon.

d.

 

[YuengLinger]

...
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.

I wish I was still that young. Those cameras just don't get any lighter as you grow older.

Ahh. The pain of arthritis. My mother, rest her soul, use to get very cranky when it hit hard. Explains a lot about some of the posts here.. :

 

[ahsanford]

I'm still sticking with my four 50mm lens strategy

50mm f1.8 STM nifty fifty
50mm f1.8/2.0 IS like a 35 f2.0 IS
50mm f1.4L jam jar with blue gunk Otus chaser
50mm f1.2L stays as it is arty option

Yeah I'm with you on this, it seems like a "sensible" line-up for Canon.

d.

I'm torn on this. I think three lenses is all they need (just one L in your list), and the L is the one everyone will bicker over.

If we use the 35L as a crystal ball as to what will come, I could imagine the next 50L addressing the screaming needs of the resolution camp very well. The 35L II is a formidably sharp lens, so it takes the 35 Art and adds weather sealing, reliable first party AF and the magic BR gunk to form a compelling value proposition. A 50mm f/1.4L in the same vein as the 35L II would sell very well, even at a similar price.

But some folks are truly hung up on f/1.2 being a Canon exclusive, having a 'magical' draw/feel, etc. and they will insist on that lens sticking around. Were they to redesign it, I'm not sure such a unique lens can simultaneously satisfy the draw/bokeh/magic camp and the resolution camp without being enormous and having a greater than $2k price.

We shall see what comes.

- A

 

[j-nord]

Do we think this 1.4 replacement will compete with the sigma art for sharpness? What price point? 500? 600?

 

[d]

I'm torn on this. I think three lenses is all they need (just one L in your list), and the L is the one everyone will bicker over.

If we use the 35L as a crystal ball as to what will come, I could imagine the next 50L addressing the screaming needs of the resolution camp very well. The 35L II is a formidably sharp lens, so it takes the 35 Art and adds weather sealing, reliable first party AF and the magic BR gunk to form a compelling value proposition. A 50mm f/1.4L in the same vein as the 35L II would sell very well, even at a similar price.

But some folks are truly hung up on f/1.2 being a Canon exclusive, having a 'magical' draw/feel, etc. and they will insist on that lens sticking around. Were they to redesign it, I'm not sure such a unique lens can simultaneously satisfy the draw/bokeh/magic camp and the resolution camp without being enormous and having a greater than $2k price.

We shall see what comes.

- A

I agree that three is all they need, but I think four could make more money for the big C.

I can imagine people being torn between the classic, magical, 50mm 1.2L, and a new 50mm 1.4L BR with the latest build and optical developments. There'd be many who couldn't decide and would end up with both, then there'd be the back-n-forths who buy one, sell it for the other, then regret the switch etc etc.

Just imagine the extra dimension it would add to forum discussions about 50mm lenses if it outperformed the Sigma, cost half again more than the 50L, and -for added audaciousness - was actually 55mm, just to show the Sony Optics Debating Squad what a *real* 55mm lens should be like! Heck, they could jack the price another $1000, remove autofocus, and market it as an Otus alternative!

So many possibilities...

d.

 

[JonAustin]

... Heck, they could jack the price another $1000, remove autofocus, and market it as an Otus alternative! ...

Canon would never release an EF lens without AF.

(Would they?)

 

[d]

... Heck, they could jack the price another $1000, remove autofocus, and market it as an Otus alternative! ...

Canon would never release an EF lens without AF.

(Would they?)

All the tilt-shifts are manual focus...

 

[andrei1989]

... Heck, they could jack the price another $1000, remove autofocus, and market it as an Otus alternative! ...

Canon would never release an EF lens without AF.

(Would they?)

All the tilt-shifts are manual focus...

doesn't EF stand for Electronic Focusing?
tilt shift are TS, without EF

 

[d]

Ha, so they are! I need to take my 24mm TS-E II out more!

The comment about the Otus was in jest - I don't expect any manual focus 50/55mm lenses from Canon.

Cheers,
d.

 

[AvTvM]

Canon would never release an EF lens without AF.
(Would they?)

been there. Done that. Never again! ;D

 

[rfdesigner]

I just wish this were a CR3

As my poll I put up recently concluded CR readers preferred the 50f1.4ringUSM... the question of IS is basically down to cost. If it comes for free then I think everyone would take it, if it pushes the lens over $1000 then sales take a serious dent. If the lens was only f2.0 a lot of sales probably also go out the window.

I've recently returned to using 50mm as my preferred FL after getting a 6D, but with somewhat mobile subjects I want the AF to be reasonably fast & very accurate for DoF.. I do have a little time to focus, just not for ever (my auto ISO is set to minimum speed of 1/125 as I really do need it that fast, IS won't help me a whole lot at that speed @ 50mm)

I also spend rather a lot of time with the camera to my eye just in manual focus for framing (the 50STM is a real pain for this).. so focus by wire is out the window.

 

[Antono Refa]

I still think there are two overlapping lens spots here:

1. 50mm f/1.4 with IS at ~$600, in the same group as the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC and Canon 35mm f/2 IS

2. 50mm f/1.4 with uber-sharpness at ~$1,600, in the same group as the Nikon 58mm f/1.4G, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art, and Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus.

With a possible small variance in the max aperture and/or focal length. Those are separated not only by price, but by target audience as well. Which is why I think the 50mm f/1.2 is out of this game - it has similar focal length, max aperture, and price as the lenses in the 2nd group. The f/1.2 is for portraiture, where bokeh, colors, etc, are favored over corner to corner sharpness.

if this rumor is true, my guess is Canon is finally joining the competition in the 2nd spot (uber fifties).

 

[Ed V]

I am a new member. I am a street photography. My preferred lens for street work remains the 50mm. For the record, I have the 50 1.2 and an older version 50 1.8. I also have the 40 pancake.

I have been intrigued by the 50 1.4 as a lens better than the 50 1.8 and smaller/lighter than the 50 1.2. I see places like B&H now have it selling at $329 which seems a good deal.

Here's my question. Is the rumored upgrade worth the wait or should I just jump on a 50 1.4 for $329? Part of me says wait while the other part says jump on it now.

Ed