Good optics (better than EF nifty fifty), reasonable price: will buy.
The build quality looks OK to me -- it does still have a metal mount, after all.
The build quality looks OK to me -- it does still have a metal mount, after all.
Upvote
0
I didnt understand 50mm f1.8 use {personally}... it was just something everyone should have so i got it too lolWell, size. Putting an RF-EF adapter on to a lens that is intended to be small negates some of the smallness benefits that small seekers were hoping to achieve in purchasing a small lens.
Control ring.
A feeling of smugness that you have an RF lens versus the peasants that refuse to let go of their EF arsenal.
That's about it.
Oh, and by the way, what does "beeyotch" mean? - just curious!
I really hope you're right!I was thinking the opposite. If this comes in small and cheap, there is a lot of room in between it and the large, expensive f/1.2L to be able to offer a high quality 50/1.4 at a different price point. I hope they do, but could take a couple years.
Thanks! What situations would you use this lens?
hmm...
It seems Canon continues the road that no midrange 50 mm (e.g. 50/1.4 IS or /1.8 IS) is needed.
Now let's see the price.
Nice, if this is 300 or under I'll pick one up for the hell of it.
Seeing this though, I am 100% convinced this means Canon will release an RF 50mm F/1.4 IS. This is a cheap nifty fifty without IS and doesn't even have a dedicated focus or control ring. They have the low end and the high end, I have no doubt there will be a midrange option between 600-1200 versus the very expensive F/1.2. In my opinion it sets the stage for a line up exactly like the EF 85mm line up.
Nice, if this is 300 or under I'll pick one up for the hell of it.
Seeing this though, I am 100% convinced this means Canon will release an RF 50mm F/1.4 IS. This is a cheap nifty fifty without IS and doesn't even have a dedicated focus or control ring. They have the low end and the high end, I have no doubt there will be a midrange option between 600-1200 versus the very expensive F/1.2. In my opinion it sets the stage for a line up exactly like the EF 85mm line up.
Why? They never brought out an EF 50 f1.4 IS and they could have very easily. It seems unlikely to me given the RF 50 f1.2L has dealt with all the usability issues the EF 50 f1.2L had, like focus accuracy, softness off center, focus creep, etc.Strong agree. I think it's the only reasonable conclusion. Ahsanford will be happy!
I think the main question to ask yourself is do I need a prime lens or will zoom lenses better suit my needs. 40 years ago when I got my first 35mm SLR, a 50mm was the popular kit lens, but by the time I got my next camera around 1995, zooms had come a long way and I had no need for a prime lens and have never even considered one since. I shoot mostly landscapes, so I never have the need of very shallow Depth of Field - that is one of the benefits of a prime lens. And over the years, zooms have gotten even better, so any increase in sharpness that a prime might provide is not necessary for me. You may feel differently. For myself, the overall composition is one the most important characteristic of a photo, so I will always be choosing the versatillity of a zoom lens. But if I needed a very shallow DOF, then, in many cases, I would be better off with primes, as zooms rarely are faster than f/2.8 (and those are big and expensive) and are more likely f/4 or higher.
Why? They never brought out an EF 50 f1.4 IS and they could have very easily. It seems unlikely to me given the RF 50 f1.2L has dealt with all the usability issues the EF 50 f1.2L had, like focus accuracy, softness off center, focus creep, etc.
Once they've sold as many 1.2's and 1.8's as possible would be the time to announce the 1.4 I supposeI really hope you're right!
But it is interesting they start with the cheapo first - again. And in EF they lost interest in a better 50 mm...
Yeh... I'm still not convinced. Don't get me wrong I am practically the only member of the 'CR EF 50 f1.4 Appreciation Club' and have extolled it's virtues here many times, but the logic for a three or four tiered 50mm range isn't supported by the current market.I mean that a 50/1.4 is coming, not that a 50/1.4 IS is coming.
What are the advantages from EF 50mm f1.8
They could charge between 35 and 85 in my opinion and include macro and IS. That would be an amazing budget trinity prime lens for the enthusiast user!They always have to chose what the selling point is. The RF 35mm is a universal lens (IS, half macro, reasonable quality). The 50mm’s selling point is small and hopefully cheap.
IS or macro would make it more expensive and bigger.
I think it’s a good choice. If you need macro or IS you can chose the 85 or 35 and there’s this tiny 50mm
Yeh... I'm still not convinced. Don't get me wrong I am practically the only member of the 'CR EF 50 f1.4 Appreciation Club' and have extolled it's virtues here many times, but the logic for a three or four tiered 50mm range isn't supported by the current market.
Back in the day it was common to get a 50mm lens in a kit with a body, that kind of flowed over into the digital market but not really very well because most entry level cameras were crop cameras so the focal lengths went out the window. Then as iso performance got better the 'need' and desire for faster lenses waned in the mass market as along with the iso 'correction' for slower apertures the zoom lens image quality got better. Which meant a lens range with a 50 f1.8, 50 f1.4, 50 f1.2 L and 50 2.5 Macro made no sense, 50's might be called the "nifty fifty" but with relatively good general purpose zooms available for not much more money they make little sense and the truth is vastly fewer people buy them nowadays than in years gone by.
This leads me to believe the market for prime lenses will get a lot of market research before being thought about as a production item and we will see far fewer of them as the market is smaller and the perceived need for them has diminished.
However, me personally, and I understand I am a data point of one so am irrelevant, will happily get the RF 35 1.8 and the RF 85 f1.8 when I end up getting an R5.
Not just you... and from an aesthetic (and maybe also functional) point as well, I also hope there’s a real and nice looking lens hood just like the older ones for the EF 50’s. Not some atrophied pseudo lens hood like for the RF 35 1.8...Nice! I bet it will still be twice the price of the EF version though - $199/£199 ?
Just from an aesthetic point of view, I don't like the way the lens barrel protrudes from the front of the lens as with the RF35. Just me I guess ...