How many years before we see a 50L II

[Viggo]

many years.
there is nothing wrong with the 50L.

it's a people lens. it's plenty sharp.
it's f/1.2 - so if you're not nailing focus, you need to work on your technique.

+1 and you might want to visit the many "where is the 35L II" threads for some perspective on long waits...

Thank you..

 

[Menace]

The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring.

GUILTY as charged ;D

Yeah, sure, but when it hits, it's so worth it.

Love mine - very happy with it.

 

[Ruined]

It's a tough world out there for lovers of the 50mm focal length. There is a new Sigma 50 Art, but it has outer-edge focus problems, is somehow too contrasty for some, and for videographers, there are focus breathing issues. On top of that, it's supposedly a bit heavy for a prime.

On the other hand, the well known Canon 50L isn't as sharp as some would hope wide open and also has focus breathing problems. On top if that, it's slow to focus, despite having USM.

So the question is... When will Canon respond to the Sigma 50 Art with an update to the 50L?

I would be thrilled if the updated lens was quick to focus, tack sharp wide open, and rendered colors the same way it does on the current 50L.

Of course it's all speculation at this point, but it doesn't hurt to pose the question.

Thoughts?

The Canon is also f/1.2 allowing 50% more light and greater DOF isolation than the sigma. The sharpness difference is neglible in practice and the Canon has more realistic colors.

So to answer your question probably not for a long, long time: most pros who use the 50L (not just blog jockeys) adore it. Next 50mm will be the 50mm f/1.8 IS.

 

[GammyKnee]

The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring.

Beautifully put.

But this is why the 50L is such a divisive lens; some people by nature have an optimistic outlook and concentrate on the times that the AF hits, others dwell on the failures. Glass half full / half empty.

Next 50mm will be the 50mm f/1.8 IS.

I agree, I think that will be the next 50mm we see from Canon.

 

[RLPhoto]

The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring.

Beautifully put.

But this is why the 50L is such a divisive lens; some people by nature have an optimistic outlook and concentrate on the times that the AF hits, others dwell on the failures. Glass half full / half empty.

Next 50mm will be the 50mm f/1.8 IS.

I agree, I think that will be the next 50mm we see from Canon.

I dearly hope the First Sub-F/2 IS lens is not a 50mm. More specifically a Longer short tele in mind...

 

[drjlo]

It's actually the field of curvature and is especially prominent at close distances from about f/2.8 to f/4.5. The lens will back-focus and there is pretty much nothing you can do about it.

What, people use the 50L at narrower than f/1.8 or so ??

 

[dgatwood]

So the question is... When will Canon respond to the Sigma 50 Art with an update to the 50L?
...
Thoughts?

Canon's lenses have historically had a life of somewhere between 15 and 20 years as a current product.

Expect the 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 to be updated well before the 50/1.2L.

Maybe, but probably not, unless they decide to add IS to one of them as part of an "IS everywhere" campaign. Both are over two decades old, which tells me Canon probably doesn't care much about updating them. They're more than good enough for low-end lenses.

Look at the lenses that Canon has updated in the past ten years and the age of the predecessor:

24–70 L II: 10 years
16–35 L II: 6 years
70–200 L II: 9 years
70–300 (L as an alternative to non-L): 5 years
300mm IS II: 11 years
400mm IS II: 12 years
500mm IS II: 12 years
600mm IS I: 12 years
24mm IS: 24 years
35mm IS: 22 years


Only those last two replaced lenses that were more than a decade old, and both of those were IS upgrades to previously non-IS lenses.

 

[candc]

I have only had mine for a few days but so far I think its great. I love the look it gives wide open. Its plenty sharp and the AF accuracy has been dead nuts on. In short: its a lot better than I was expecting with all the interweb negativity out there.

 

[Menace]

I have only had mine for a few days but so far I think its great. I love the look it gives wide open. Its plenty sharp and the AF accuracy has been dead nuts on. In short: its a lot better than I was expecting with all the interweb negativity out there.

Glad to hear it - do share some photos

 

[candc]

I have only had mine for a few days but so far I think its great. I love the look it gives wide open. Its plenty sharp and the AF accuracy has been dead nuts on. In short: its a lot better than I was expecting with all the interweb negativity out there.

Glad to hear it - do share some photos

I posted a few in the lens gallery yesterday.

 

[candyman]

.................
Look at the lenses that Canon has updated in the past ten years and the age of the predecessor:

24–70 L II: 10 years
16–35 L II: 6 years
70–200 L II: 9 years
70–300 (L as an alternative to non-L): 5 years
300mm IS II: 11 years
400mm IS II: 12 years
500mm IS II: 12 years
600mm IS I: 12 years
24mm IS: 24 years
35mm IS: 22 years


Only those last two replaced lenses that were more than a decade old, and both of those were IS upgrades to previously non-IS lenses.

I am not sure the 16-35 II has been updated .....Is the 16-35 f/4 IS really the update?....

 

[Menace]

I have only had mine for a few days but so far I think its great. I love the look it gives wide open. Its plenty sharp and the AF accuracy has been dead nuts on. In short: its a lot better than I was expecting with all the interweb negativity out there.

Glad to hear it - do share some photos

I posted a few in the lens gallery yesterday.

Cool - looks like you had a nice day out

 

[wockawocka]

There are issues with the 50L. I've had two.

In each case unless shooting wide open there is focus drift which is noticeable between 1.4 and 2.0.

When I got the Sigma there was a higher number of in focus shots than not, the images are sharper and I see none of the 'ugly bokeh' that I've been told about. The lens performs better in the outer points in AI servo mode than the 1.2L does as well.

It's worth the upgrade and I'm someone that likes to stay brand loyal. But the new 50 from Sigma is stunning.

It handles flare better than the L, it has almost zero CA and fringing wide open. For people to say the 1.2 is better either hasn't used the Sigma, had a bad copy or well, whatever.

When Canon releases a new version of the 50L I'll be jumping back to that, because when it does appear it should be better still (revised coatings, lessons learned from the old design and closed loop AF).

Until then, the Sigma 50 Art is the lens to get.

 

[Alrik89]

.................
Look at the lenses that Canon has updated in the past ten years and the age of the predecessor:

24–70 L II: 10 years
16–35 L II: 6 years
70–200 L II: 9 years
70–300 (L as an alternative to non-L): 5 years
300mm IS II: 11 years
400mm IS II: 12 years
500mm IS II: 12 years
600mm IS I: 12 years
24mm IS: 24 years
35mm IS: 22 years


Only those last two replaced lenses that were more than a decade old, and both of those were IS upgrades to previously non-IS lenses.

I am not sure the 16-35 II has been updated .....Is the 16-35 f/4 IS really the update?....

The 16-35mm II is the update of version I.
Whats wrong with you?

 

[candyman]

.................
Look at the lenses that Canon has updated in the past ten years and the age of the predecessor:

24–70 L II: 10 years
16–35 L II: 6 years
70–200 L II: 9 years
70–300 (L as an alternative to non-L): 5 years
300mm IS II: 11 years
400mm IS II: 12 years
500mm IS II: 12 years
600mm IS I: 12 years
24mm IS: 24 years
35mm IS: 22 years


Only those last two replaced lenses that were more than a decade old, and both of those were IS upgrades to previously non-IS lenses.

I am not sure the 16-35 II has been updated .....Is the 16-35 f/4 IS really the update?....

The 16-35mm II is the update of version I.
Whats wrong with you?

O yeah, mondaymorning dip
you're right