Here is the Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
544
594
it's probably far less than the 300. while it probably has a more complex design than the EF 50mm F1.8, it's most likely not as complex as the RF 35mm

While people may have wanted a "better" lens, this lens has always been a go-to first prime lens for the EF mount, I don't think Canon wanted to put it out of the reach of all photographers.
I think Canon needs a middle 50mm. Too much price gap between this under $300 lens and the RF501.2 which is over $2000
 

adrian_bacon

EOS M50
Aug 12, 2020
32
25
Very nice! This looks nearly like a pancake!
If I use my 40 f2,8 Pancake with the EF R Adapter its probably the same size!
If image quality is halfwaht decent, that would be a great little lense for travel, street and general walk around =) =)
I do the same thing. I’m. Really hoping for a real pancake 40mm, though this doesn’t look much longer than their EF pancakes.
 

AccipiterQ

EOS 90D
Sep 11, 2014
141
182
I think this nifty fifty will be telling in terms of Canon's intended direction on price for the whole RF lineup. If it's $120-$150 initial retail, it will indicate that Canon probably intends on fleshing out the RF lineup with roughly equivalently-priced lenses to the old EF system. If it's > that, it means Canon is going to skew things upwards in price generally. Will be interesting to see as an indicator.
I'm curious as well....Canon is introducing some attachements for cellphones that act as lenses for the cameras on those. If this lens is priced higher it would indicate they're ceding the lower-price-tier completely to cellphones and focusing on more dedicated camera crowds. I'm hoping they don't do that though, it's going to be hard to break into photography if the initial cost is too high, especially if you don't even know if you're going to like it or not.
 

twoheadedboy

EOS R5
CR Pro
Jan 3, 2018
191
278
Kenosha, WI
I'm new to photography... if I pair this with the EOS r5, what are the best situations for this lens and why should I get one? What can I shoot, theoretically, what it can be used best for?
An R5 is a helluva lot of camera for someone new to photography. Personally I would suggest, if it's not too late, to go R6 and have a lot of money left over for more lenses. Don't let your camera body cost be the reason you go cheap on lenses, it should always be the reverse. It would be even better to get an RP and even more glass (and/or other gear, like filters, a camera bag, a tripod, an external flash, etc.) Then when you figure out what your needs and preferences are, get the right body in the system for that. Might be an R5 but might be whatever supplants it in 2 years, as well.
 
Last edited:

VICYASA

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 15, 2019
62
57
An R5 is a helluva lot of camera for someone new to photography. Personally I would suggest, if it's not too late, to go R6 and have a lot of money left over for more lenses. Don't let your camera body cost be the reason you go cheap on lenses, it should always be the reverse. It would be even better to get an RP and even more glass (and/or other gear, like filters, a camera bag, a tripod, an external flash, etc.) Then when you figure out what your needs and preferences are, get the right body in the system for that. Might be an R5 but might be whatever supplants it in 2 years, as well.
I have $. That's not an issue. Just talking about THIS LENS and what are the benefits if paired with a r5! That is all. I'm rich, beeyotch. So if If I pair it with my 70-200 RF and 15-35 F 2.8, just looking for the best uses of the item talked about in this thread.

Thanks! ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

Dantana

EOS RP
Jan 29, 2013
318
164
Los Angeles, CA
www.flickr.com
This looks like a cool little lens that will replace my 40mm/adapter combo. I'd also be tempted by a mid-level lens, but it seems that if we are to get one, it will be a little later, which is understandable in a system that has only existed for 2 years. I'm looking forward to seeing some images and test results out of this one.

On a side note, I was very tempted a few months ago when there were a couple discount codes for the Canon refurbished store that seemed to work together. They made the price on the 1.2 much closer to something I could afford.
 

Dantana

EOS RP
Jan 29, 2013
318
164
Los Angeles, CA
www.flickr.com
I have $. That's not an issue. Just talking about THIS LENS and what are the benefits if paired with a r5! That is all. I'm rich, beeyotch. So if If I pair it with my 70-200 RF and 15-35 F 2.8, just looking for the best uses of the item talked about in this thread.

Thanks! ;)
It's a very compact, fairly fast, normal length prime lens, that looks like it will be in the lower price range.
 

Random Orbits

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 14, 2012
2,411
292
I don't think it has to be a 1.4 to be more featured. But we do have the tide turned on the f/1.8 lenses by Nikon as they have put out excellent pro level f/1.8 lenses and now on Canon we have huge f/1.2s or decidedly non L f/1.8s & f/2.0s. It'll depend what each companies road map is going to be, I am wondering what Nikon's non S primes will be or if they are only covering that with zooms.

Personally I would like f/1.8 L lenses from Canon to complement the f/1.2's. No compromises, you just pick the light one or the black hole depending on task.
It doesn't have to be f/1.4 to be more featured, but it's hard to sell a lens that is f/1.8 at a price higher than f/1.4s from other companies. The max aperture is a top line spec that sells lenses. Plus, EF has the legacy of having f/1.8, f/1.4 and f/1.2 options. A RF f/1.4 will have a lot of leeway to given how small the RF f/1.8 and how large the RF f/1.2L are... in price, IS, size, weight, etc., and it can be priced accordingly.

For now, I like Canon's strategy of lower priced f/1.8-f/2 options rather than Nikon's higher priced S prime options. Given the shrinking market, it's nice to have a lower priced line. The pros and enthusiasts are going to buy what they want, but the camera companies need to sell to those with more limited budgets. Canon came out with 2-lens kits to sell a few years ago. The 50 f/1.8 and EF-S 10-18 kit sells for under $400, and that is something that is "sellable" in big box stores.
 

Aaron D

Hey!
Jul 21, 2016
231
209
Kansas City
www.aarondougherty.com
What can I shoot, theoretically, what it can be used best for?
A 50mm is arguably the most useful lens available. It closely matches the eye's natural perspective, it's small, lighweieght, inexpensive. You could leave it on your camera full-time and never need another lens. You'll likely WANT more, but if you're just beginning it's wise not to go spending money before you know WHY you want another lens. This is the ideal 'starter' lens. You won't regret getting one.

I did all these at 50mm: https://aarondougherty.com/West-Bottoms Though it was with a 24-105 zoom lens, I chose to stick to 50mm to keep that view across all the images.
 

canonnews

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2017
801
1,250
Canada
www.canonnews.com
Very nice! This looks nearly like a pancake!
If I use my 40 f2,8 Pancake with the EF R Adapter its probably the same size!
If image quality is halfwaht decent, that would be a great little lense for travel, street and general walk around =) =)
not quite, it's probably pretty close to the same size as the original EF 50mm 1.8
 

Dantana

EOS RP
Jan 29, 2013
318
164
Los Angeles, CA
www.flickr.com
A 50mm is arguably the most useful lens available. It closely matches the eye's natural perspective, it's small, lighweieght, inexpensive. You could leave it on your camera full-time and never need another lens. You'll likely WANT more, but if you're just beginning it's wise not to go spending money before you know WHY you want another lens. This is the ideal 'starter' lens. You won't regret getting one.

I did all these at 50mm: https://aarondougherty.com/West-Bottoms Though it was with a 24-105 zoom lens, I chose to stick to 50mm to keep that view across all the images.
Well put. A lens like this used to be the "kit" lens that people would start off with on their SLR. My dad's AE-1, and a 50 1.8 got me a long way until I added a couple other used lenses.

For quite some time the mid range zoom has been used as the kit lens. It gives you more flexibility on focal length with the cost of a smaller aperture and a larger lens. To me, neither approach is wrong or right. Given the option, I may have picked this up with my R instead of the zoom (24-105L), though it is my most used lens and I am happier with it than the EF v1 that it replaced.
 

canonnews

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2017
801
1,250
Canada
www.canonnews.com
I don't think it has to be a 1.4 to be more featured. But we do have the tide turned on the f/1.8 lenses by Nikon as they have put out excellent pro level f/1.8 lenses and now on Canon we have huge f/1.2s or decidedly non L f/1.8s & f/2.0s. It'll depend what each companies road map is going to be, I am wondering what Nikon's non S primes will be or if they are only covering that with zooms.

Personally I would like f/1.8 L lenses from Canon to complement the f/1.2's. No compromises, you just pick the light one or the black hole depending on task.
the cool thing about lens ecosystems, is that they can do multiple versions. ie: they can do the 50mm F1.8 STM, and a 50mm F1.8 Macro IS STM.

Nothing what we're seeing here prevents a better F1.8, but having a cheaper RF version of the 50mm F1.8 is an instant win for most photographers.