New 50mm On Coming Soon? [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I have had all canon 50's and only remains the new 50mm STM because is cheap. Waiting for a new 40/1.4 IS ;D
Upvote
0
The 50mm 1.2 is still way to new so it has to be the 50mm 1.4 I would think. 
Some dates and discussion here (85mm but scroll down) : http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=29066.0
Some dates and discussion here (85mm but scroll down) : http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=29066.0
Upvote
0
Of course you are right here. And I am hoping also for a mid range 50mm.Mac Duderson said:
But you also have to consider that Sigma has put some pressure on the high end 50 mm lenses and that possibly that Canon NEEDS to react here first. And having the new BR elements now, I suppose Canon wants them to be introduced into other L lenses as well, if they get an IQ advantage from it.
Also keep in mind that Sigma was so self-confident at the introduction of the 50 mm Art that they said the real competence was the Otus.
Upvote
0
Seems more likely the 50mm 1.4 is the next lens, the 1.2 L has its flaws, but that's what makes its special character, it's a speciality lens, to make soft images, if you improve it, the risk is to make another über sharp 50mm ART. Not sure the base users would like it.
On the other hand, to substantially improve on the 1.4 (except for the obvious AF and construction), they'll have to give up the planar formula, and the lens will be like a Sigma Art. So there is a trade off in weight, size and price.
This is the Canon "standard" lens offer I'd like to see :
- 50mm f1.8 STM
- 50mm f1.4 USM IS (same series as the 24/28/35 IS) - Old one is 1993
- 50mm f1.2 L USM
- 55/60mm f2 Macro IS USM (L) 1:2 or 55/60mm f2.8 Macro IS USM (L) 1:1 - Old one is 1987
- 45mm f2.8 TS L (with the recent independent movements and better optics) - Old one is 1991
Plus maybe a small 40-42mm f2 USM (1 stop brighter the the 2.8, no IS, no focus by wire, as compact as possible, but not a pancake).
On the other hand, to substantially improve on the 1.4 (except for the obvious AF and construction), they'll have to give up the planar formula, and the lens will be like a Sigma Art. So there is a trade off in weight, size and price.
This is the Canon "standard" lens offer I'd like to see :
- 50mm f1.8 STM
- 50mm f1.4 USM IS (same series as the 24/28/35 IS) - Old one is 1993
- 50mm f1.2 L USM
- 55/60mm f2 Macro IS USM (L) 1:2 or 55/60mm f2.8 Macro IS USM (L) 1:1 - Old one is 1987
- 45mm f2.8 TS L (with the recent independent movements and better optics) - Old one is 1991
Plus maybe a small 40-42mm f2 USM (1 stop brighter the the 2.8, no IS, no focus by wire, as compact as possible, but not a pancake).
Upvote
0
One person's needs/preferences are not necessarily universal needs held by everyone.JS5 said:
Here are a few types of professional photography where 50mm f/1.x is not the most important lens that any professional should have:
Architecture, Real estate, Macro, Sports, Wildlife... etc.
Upvote
0
JS5 said:
You might want to take up comedy.
For one, hyperbole can get you into trouble, especially when you say - "But the most important lens that any professional should have"
Lets see. My last paying gig (2 days ago, was shooting sports. My go to lens is a 70-200 F/2.8 IS II, followed by 300 F/2.8 IS II, then may use either a 24 - 70, 24 - 105, or Fisheye, but 90% of my shots are with the 70 - 200.
Hmmm... There was that big game a little over a month ago... TON of Photographers. I think those guys were pros... That Super something or rather. Hmmmmm.... I saw some 200 - 400s, 300s, 400s, 500s, and even some 70-200s, even some 24-70s during the end of game. 50s? I am not sure I saw many of those.
When I do fashion, I am still more 24-70 or 70-200 with 85 F/1.2 in there. Again, the 70-200 tends to get the most usage because the tele side of things is generally more flattering than wide, for me at least.
Maybe it is just me, but the Two Most Important Lens, if I was to have just 1 or 2 lenses would be the 70-200 and then the 24 - 70. If I was doing architecture, something of the wide primes or even the T/S would rank up there. For Fashion / Portrait, when I look at mine, and my peers, I see the 85 F/1.2 being the more go to lens than the 50.
Upvote
0
Maui5150 said:
All of the above is very relevant however it might be skewed by the fact there is not a fantastic Canon fast AF lens out there. There are great IQ 50's but none with Canon AF qualities. If they make a new midrange to L series 50 with actual and not micro USM that has good draw, round specular highlights and great color rendition than you might see them in the field a bit more.
Upvote
0
slclick said:
Not necessarily disagreeing with you. The Canon 50mm F/1.2 is not the best AF lens, and the F/1.4 is adequate, but a cheap lens
My point was more to the focal length. 50 is a great all around low-light walk around lens, but for fashion / portrait, the 85 is more flattering (my first prime lens was the 50mm F/1.4) and I tend to rent an 85mm F/1.2 before using the 50.
For a wedding photographer, I can see 24-70, 70-200, 16-35 for wide and a 100 Macro as the 4 key lenses before dropping in to say an 85 for portrait / low light.
Even if the 50mm F/1.2 was as sharp as the 85, for me and the amount of fashion I have shot, the 85 makes women look better, especially if the bride is a little heavier.
Pure portrait, I would still take 70-200, 85, and them maybe 135 F/2
Architecture? T/S tends to be king.
I am not talking just the merits of one lens over another, but even just focal length / type of lens, I see better focal lengths or zooms that produce more results or more overall usage in general.
The 50 is a nice focal length for some nice tight bokeh DOF shots, but hands down if I am doing a portrait, I want an 85 over a 50 for the qualities it gives to a face / body, especially anyone who could not pass as anorexic.
Maybe the 50 is the king of New Born photography... But when I think of Portrait, Fashion, Sports, Architecture which I think covers a fair amount of the Pros. Photojournalists I see out there tend to be two bodies and the 24-70 / 70-200 combo.
Just trying to think where my Number 1, Must have lens is the 50... Can't think of it
Upvote
0
I was just going to recommend JS5 pop the cap off of a good brew, kick the ol' feet up and relax for a moment. I don't think it's too healthy to get so emotionally upset over camera gear, but maybe that's just me. 
Seriously though, I get people want an updated 50mm from Canon. But it isn't like their are zero options today, especially if you consider third party. The 50mm from Canon today are not awful options.
And for Ahsanford, I still think he just needs to put the 35mm f/2 IS on a 7D/70D/80D and call it good for a while. BAM! Modern 50mm problem solved!
Seriously though, I get people want an updated 50mm from Canon. But it isn't like their are zero options today, especially if you consider third party. The 50mm from Canon today are not awful options.
And for Ahsanford, I still think he just needs to put the 35mm f/2 IS on a 7D/70D/80D and call it good for a while. BAM! Modern 50mm problem solved!
Upvote
0
Maui5150 said:
I completely get the gist of your meaning and your styles of shooting examples, I'm right there with you (see my gear list below) I just meant in the overall world of professional photography, especially those using a Canon system outside the studio, we might see more 50's if there was one that had those qualities. It's the whole 'Your focal lengths aren't necessarily my focal lengths, but I respect your choices' thing.
Upvote
0
scyrene said:
Read again what I wrote -- I never said 'premium' or 'best'. I just said that group was for specialty lenses without much competition.
Consider the MP-E's comically unheard of price history the last eight years: it's price has actually gone up over time, and not just for a one or two time currency course-correction. The lens has no same-sensored rival, so this phenomenon shouldn't surprise us.
- A
Attachments
Upvote
0
Luds34 said:And for Ahsanford, I still think he just needs to put the 35mm f/2 IS on a 7D/70D/80D and call it good for a while. BAM! Modern 50mm problem solved!
So let me get this straight: I should disregard the $3k investment in my 5D3, move to crop and kiss my bokeh goodbye.
Yup, that's the ticket.
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
Um, I read what you wrote. Perhaps you meant it in a different way but I interpreted this:
ahsanford said:
as saying the first group is expensive and premium. The MP-E's price may not have gone down (at least where you are), but it is significantly below its RRP here - ~£700-800 instead of £1250 - and not expensive compared to other macro lenses (e.g. the 100L, which is a little less, and the 180L, Sigma's 180 2.8 macro both of which cost more). I just don't think it fits into the same category as the 11-24, which is priced more like a supertele lens.
Actually I'm not sure I go along with your tripartite system anyhow, but that's by the by.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
