Canon: We'll make any nutty lens you want -- unless its a 50 prime [CR9]

[ahsanford]

Tokyo [AP] -- Touting company plans to offer new diffractive optics lenses, Canon imaging exec Richard Trickle continues to put his money down on offering new glass.

"Lenses continue to drive business, and we'll design as many as can to help the photography community thrive, unless it's in a staple focal length prime lens like a 50mm f/1.4" he said in an interview Wednesday.

Trickle, continuing with excitement: "We'll refresh anything the field wants. Other than an exceptionally handy, small and fast prime lens in high demand like a new EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, of course."

"There really is no end to what we'll do to satisfy our customers. Illuminated crop macro lenses to shoot your restaurant order from short distances for Instagram? Done. Tilt-shift 1:2 macro lenses? You're welcome. Compact DO superteles? You betcha. Resurrect nutty old nonsense? I don't want to spoil anything, but can you imagine Softfocus II? I sure can."

"But I honestly can't think of a reason why we'd waste time and offer a staple professional tool like a workhorse 50 prime that has a flat plane of focus, is sharp somewhere other than dead center and has AF that can lock without hunting until next Tuesday. Who the hell needs one of those?"

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Certainly there are prototypes of a new 50mm F1.4 being exhaustively tested by Canon.

Maybe the person responsible for deciding which lenses to launch has a trauma of this focal length? ???

Maybe they want to wait for the sales of the 85mm IS, to know if it's worth going the same way with the 50mm?

Maybe they have a warehouse full of the old 50mm F1.4. Who knows if they made a mistake in the production, and manufactured one million units of the old 50mm, when the correct would have been a thousand units? : Maybe the same warehouse is full of 75-300mm too ... ;D

 

[Don Haines]

It's because they are working on a 50F1.0 DO BR IS lens....

or perhaps it's a 1200F5.6 DO lens.....

but a new 50F1.4? Other than Ahsanford and myself, there is no market....

 

[hne]

Certainly there are prototypes of a new 50mm F1.4 being exhaustively tested by Canon.

Maybe the person responsible for deciding which lenses to launch has a trauma of this focal length? ???

Maybe they want to wait for the sales of the 85mm IS, to know if it's worth going the same way with the 50mm?

Maybe they have a warehouse full of the old 50mm F1.4. Who knows if they made a mistake in the production, and manufactured one million units of the old 50mm, when the correct one would have been a thousand units? : Maybe the same warehouse is full of 75-300mm too ... ;D

Oh, I can so see this happen! An order was made for...
35mm f/2: 90000
35/1.4L USM: 12000
50/1.4 USM: 500000
85/1.8 USM: 200000
85/1.2L II USM: 2000
70-200/2.8L IS USM: 8000
70-200/2.8L USM: 800000
70-200/4L USM: 10000000

That'd explain why the 35/1.4L, 50/1.4 and 70-200/2.8L are all still around after all these years. And also why the 70-200/4 will NEVER be discontinued.

 

[Talys]

They've had it ready to go for a year, with a brand new 5-stop mode 3 IS for small lens, but marketing has been arguing about whether to put a purple or a pink ring around it, and whether or not to call the new rubberized MF grip charcoal or graphite.

 

[Duckman]

I'm shocked they haven't released one yet!! I'm patiently waiting for a new 50 myself.... hopefully sooner than later!
-J

 

[mistaspeedy]

Meanwhile, I've only recently upgraded from the 50mm F1.8 STM to the 50mm F1.4 USM.... I'll upgrade to the new IS version about 25 years after it is released

 

[[email protected]]

They did a backroom deal with Sigma. Canon agreed to not put out a decent 50, and Sigma agreed to ensure that any 24-70 or 70-200 zooms they put out would only have the image quality of their pre-Art technology. Where are the trust busters when you need 'em?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have heard that Canon did a survey of those who might want a new 50mm lens, and only one was interested.

 

[AvTvM]

lol. hehe!

i have a 1 yr young ED 50/1.4 in my closet. dont think i have taken more than 50 shots with it yet. will not buy any other 50 prime any time soon. f/1.4 or 1.0 or whatever and IS or not. "art" or not. south or north of 1k ... no, thanks.

waiting for delivery of my personal copy of canon EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM.

 

[mjg79]

I am torn between admiration for Canon making the TS-E 50mm lens (and a 2.8 and Macro at that) and bewilderment that that has been given a high priority than a modern 50/1.4. That TS lens will have been very involved to design and build, inevitably will not sell that many units but speaks to canon's determination to maintain an ecosystem that nobody else can match with the highest quality glass. All great. But still, yes, the OP makes a fair and funny point - a modern 50mm 1.4 , L or non-L would seem a no brainer.

I suspect some of this is because of Sigma's success in that focal length perhaps having now saturated the market for those wanting a fast sharp modern 50 - if Canon is doing serious market research I think they might find that there just isn't a huge demand. Those who really want a 50mm L lens in many cases already have the 1.2. Those who just want a simple 1.4 can buy the lens sold today which is good if not great. Those obsessed with sharpness can buy the Sigma 50 Art. So while many here - myself included - love the idea of an updated 50/1.4 with L build quality and maybe IS, how many of us would actually be willing to pay the high price Canon would likely charge to recover the development costs?

If the number who really would buy it is low then Canon simply will not be pushing resources that way. I am sure it will come eventually, Canon clearly is determined to maintain a high quality range of glass, but I sort of understand why it would be a lower priority.

For me the strangest thing really though is why they don't make the 50mm 1.0 again. The old lens, impossible to service, soft at wide apertures, terrible bokeh, clumsy auto-focus sells for thousands second hand. If people could buy a brand new one from Canon, hopefully improved especially with modern coatings, and full warranty and ability to service it, I am sure these days there would be more demand than before. I think more and more people today are willing to pay thousands to buy what they consider to be "the best" - see how Zeiss has made a success of the Otus line. If Canon wished to avoid development costs they could simply restart production of the flawed original I think they would still sell plenty - they could price them at $3000 and undercut the second hand price which is rather strange!

 

[ahsanford]

waiting for delivery of my personal copy of canon EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM.

Phew. That means I'll only be waiting the second longest.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

But still, yes, the OP makes a fair and funny point - a modern 50mm 1.4 , L or non-L would seem a no brainer.

Autofocus is the key. Canon will always win the argument on that front in my book.

But the critical call in the 50 space is eitehr staying with the older/simpler double gauss designs or going huge like the recent offerings. Compact size vs. uncompromising sharpness.

I think the non-L replacement is an easy one -- just make a 50 prime like the 24/28/35 IS refresh lenses from 5 years ago. Done. Easy. Take my money.

The L very well could go the big pickle jar route like the 50 Art, 55 Otus, etc. and throw the house at resolution. We'll see.

- A

 

[mistaspeedy]

I guess they could just refresh it like the 50mm F1.8 STM. They can add new coatings, maybe optimize the placement of a lens element a tiny bit like the STM (if needed), make the autofocus more consistent and reliable and that's it.

 

[ahsanford]

I guess they could just refresh it like the 50mm F1.8 STM. They can add new coatings, maybe optimize the placement of a lens element a tiny bit like the STM (if needed), make the autofocus more consistent and reliable and that's it.

Take the exact same optical formula as 1993 and just put it in a modern ring USM / internal focusing setup and $600 would leave my coffers faster than a speeding bullet.

Don't get me wrong, I want the lens to be modernized, get sharper wide open, get IS, etc. but I want the AF solved and I want the extruding telescoping barrel eliminated so much more.

- A

 

[snoke]

Take the exact same optical formula as 1993 and just put it in a modern ring USM / internal focusing setup and $600 would leave my coffers faster than a speeding bullet.

Don't get me wrong, I want the lens to be modernized, get sharper wide open, get IS, etc. but I want the AF solved and I want the extruding telescoping barrel eliminated so much more.

Maybe what you want not achievable for price. Big price adjustment for other IS prime lens. Down. Maybe Canon learn not profitable. Who know.

If nobody buy 50/1.4 then Canon need new lens. Why Canon stop make lens if sell well?

Your #1 task: stop everyone buy old 50/1.4.

 

[mjg79]

But still, yes, the OP makes a fair and funny point - a modern 50mm 1.4 , L or non-L would seem a no brainer.

Autofocus is the key. Canon will always win the argument on that front in my book.

But the critical call in the 50 space is eitehr staying with the older/simpler double gauss designs or going huge like the recent offerings. Compact size vs. uncompromising sharpness.

I think the non-L replacement is an easy one -- just make a 50 prime like the 24/28/35 IS refresh lenses from 5 years ago. Done. Easy. Take my money.

The L very well could go the big pickle jar route like the 50 Art, 55 Otus, etc. and throw the house at resolution. We'll see.

- A

Yeah I agree the non-L update shouldn't be a huge issue and should fit nicely with the 35 IS etc. If they do the same to the 85 that would make a nice selection of lighter smaller primes.

As for the L, who can say really? In so many focal lengths the L lens tends to be all about sharpness and perfection. I rather like that the current 50L is a character lens even though personally I don't get on with it well for some reason - I've seen beautiful photos taken with it. Nikon seemed to take a similar approach with their 58/1.4, not putting the priority on sharpness but rather the rendering.

The size comparison you show is rather sobering - if Canon does go head to head with the Sigma Art then it's likely we end up with a huge lens. Interestingly I have seen a good few Sigma users who claim they prefer the older non-Art 50/1.4 Sigma made; it isn't as sharp but the bokeh and general rendering apparently are more pleasant.

A (sort of) 50mm lens I've always admired and wanted but the prices are crazy is the Nikon Noct 58/1.2. Am I right in thinking it was a Gaussian lens design but they did something special with the elements? I was astonished a while back to read a fairly detailed test that found it out-resolved the 58/1.4G Nikon. Apparently Nikon can't make a modern Noct because of the narrow F-mount not allowing room for the Autofocus contacts - I would love to see Canon give us another characterful 50L but maybe a bit sharper and less nervous bokeh than the current 1.2, the Noct gives a really special mixture of sharpness wide open, gentle rendering of details, very soft bokeh - really it's the only Nikon lens I've ever felt jealous of and if Canon could give us an autofocus L version of it I would be reaching for the credit card! It proves it's possible to make a 58mm lens that is in many respects similar to the 85L without it being enormous.

 

[Orangutan]

I guess they could just refresh it like the 50mm F1.8 STM. They can add new coatings, maybe optimize the placement of a lens element a tiny bit like the STM (if needed), make the autofocus more consistent and reliable and that's it.

Take the exact same optical formula as 1993 and just put it in a modern ring USM / internal focusing setup and $600 would leave my coffers faster than a speeding bullet.

Don't get me wrong, I want the lens to be modernized, get sharper wide open, get IS, etc. but I want the AF solved and I want the extruding telescoping barrel eliminated so much more.

- A

Canon has been remarkably good at predicting the commercial success of its products; it seems a safe bet that if Canon hasn't released it, there isn't really enough demand to warrant the R&D and production.

I really don't mean this to be snarky, but maybe there just aren't a lot of folks like you who want this. What is so special about this focal length?

 

[NancyP]

Actually, I would rather like to see a 65 mm f/1.4 (traditional size) or f/2.8 (compact). I have been pleasantly surprised by how much use I get out of the Shorty Forty. It would be nice to have a prime smack in the middle between 40 and 85.

 

[AvTvM]

@lens size: Sigma and Zeiss Otus are made in variants for different mounts - this may well contribute to their huge size.

i would expect a new Canon 50/1.4 IS lens even as retrofocus design to be not as huge, since it would be only matched to Canon EF mount, which offers optimal parameters for a compact design. FFD and generously wide opening (throat width) are a huge advantage. Canon got that one really right in 1987. Nikon F-mount of 1957 is a dog for modern high performance, fast lens designs.