We May Be Waiting a Little While Longer for a New 50mm Lens [CR2]

[Ah-Keong]

How about:

(double gauss) 50mm f/1,2L mark II

or

(retrofocus) 50mm f/1,4L IS USM

I'm not certain the 50mm FL is going to 'pull an 85' with the f/1.2L and f/1.4L IS being sold side by side. But a retrofocus resolution champ in the 50mm space would seem inevitable for Canon, and I don't see such a lens being a non-L. So your theory is entirely plausible.

- A

I love the 50mm f/1,2L (double gauss) optics. It has the magical 3D signature pop that current modern optics lack.
I would believe an update to the AF mechanism would bring the AF speed, accuracy, etc to date with modern bodies (6D2, 5D4, 1DX2, etc)

The current state of the art (retrofocus) optics is kinda clinical and sharpness all over. As the market has demand for such optics, the 50mm f/1,4L IS USM like the upcoming 85mm f/1,4L IS USM would be meeting the demand in this market area...

Choose your Poison(s)!

 

[Maximilian]

"Meh!" to this information.

I already hear the keen cry of anguish from one CR member, in particular.

It's cool. I'm fine. I'm just going to print this post out and stare at it quietly while playing The Cure in my room.

- A

+1 to this decision and +1 to that taste of music 8)

 

[Fleetie]

I already hear the keen cry of anguish from one CR member, in particular.

It's cool. I'm fine. I'm just going to print this post out and stare at it quietly while playing The Cure in my room.

- A

Pornography because there's no 50 in sight or The Top because everything is spinning and confusing? (The Top is my favorite)

fwiw to the uninitiated, 'Pornography' is the name of an album.

"Pornography" is their best album, IMO. It's the only Cure album I still actually listen to.

 

[Antono Refa]

I think we must remember that Canon is a business and they aim to make money. I realise that a fast high quality 50 is exciting to those of us who read here but I suspect Canon's research probably finds little interest, or at least not enough for them to be making it a priority.

Interesting that...

1) Zeiss did their research, and found there's a market for a 55mm f/1.4 Otus, and an 85mm f/1.4 Otus.

2) Sigma did their research, and found there's a market for a 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art, and an 85mm f/1.4 Art.

3) Tamron did their research, and found there's a market for an SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD, and an SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD.

4) Nikon did their research, and found there's a market for a 58mm f/1.4G AF-S, and an 85mm f/1.4G AF-S.

5) Canon did their research, and found there's absolutely no market for a 50mm f/1.4[L] IS USM. The 85mm f/1.4L IS USM does have a market, but it's whole different story.

The market isn't just people who would buy the lens within the first year. It's for people who want to buy OEM now, or their first camera next year, or switch from Nikon the year after that.

Where did you find information about Canon's market research? Can you share it?

I was cynical, of course I don't have that info.

Canon is very good at market research and has figures for their sales, and likely for sales of others.

<snip>

Nikon is closing factories and pulling out of Brazil, do you really think their decisions based on their market research is that good?

<cynicism>Of course Canon's market research is impeccable, while Nikon makes mistakes. Closing factories and pulling out of markets has to do with making the wrong lenses, and couldn't possibly have to do with shrinking camera & lens sales.</cynicism>

My point was it's unlikely four different companies erred on their estimating a new 50mm f/1.4 would make a profit, while Canon nailed it wouldn't. Possible, but unlikely.

Your claims regarding an expensive 50mm f/1.4 could have been applied to the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM, up until it was announced.

 

[ahsanford]

I fully concede Canon is wiser at what products to offer and what products not to offer, but consider:

• I heard a comment about 'people prefer zooms' which is fine, but let's not forget why these lenses sing -- small DOF, subject isolation, bokeh, etc. and a 24-70 2.8 is dramatically less effective at this than at f/1.4.
  
  
• A 50 f/1.4 is a staple general purpose instrument like a 35 f/1.4 or 24-70 2.8 is. It's not some exotic prestige piece like 20 f/1.4 or 105 f/1.4, it is a bread and butter tool. Sure, a 50 f/1.8 is fine in a pinch but Canon's is stripped for features (no distance scale, FBW, slow focusing, not a common filter diameter, etc.). And sure, the 50 f/1.2 is awesome wide open for centered subjects, but it's a specialty / non-general-purpose lens, IMHO -- you have to wrestle with that non-planar field, it's only sharp in the center, the AF is finnicky, etc.
  
  
• As others have pointed out, everyone else prioritizes this sort of product as being important. This isn't Canon being shrewd, this is Canon being stubborn. We just got 3 new T/S lenses very few people were asking for and we can't get an all-purpose 50 prime?!

Honestly: find me a bigger sucking belly wound in Canon's EF portfolio where photographers are SOL with a staple need like this. I don't think it exists.

- A

 

[Ryananthony]

I think the 50/1.4 still sells. Probably to a similar market as the 50/1.8 but for those with a little more money to spend or the desire for a little bit better then the cheapo 50/1.8 probably with some help from the sales staff at a camera shop. Why replace a lens if the current is still selling with out issue?

Canon replace the damn 50/1.4. The enthusiast want it.

 

[Loswr]

I think we must remember that Canon is a business and they aim to make money. I realise that a fast high quality 50 is exciting to those of us who read here but I suspect Canon's research probably finds little interest, or at least not enough for them to be making it a priority.

Interesting that...

1) Zeiss did their research, and found there's a market for a 55mm f/1.4 Otus, and an 85mm f/1.4 Otus.

2) Sigma did their research, and found there's a market for a 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art, and an 85mm f/1.4 Art.

3) Tamron did their research, and found there's a market for an SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD, and an SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD.

4) Nikon did their research, and found there's a market for a 58mm f/1.4G AF-S, and an 85mm f/1.4G AF-S.

5) Canon did their research, and found there's absolutely no market for a 50mm f/1.4[L] IS USM. The 85mm f/1.4L IS USM does have a market, but it's whole different story.

The market isn't just people who would buy the lens within the first year. It's for people who want to buy OEM now, or their first camera next year, or switch from Nikon the year after that.

Where did you find information about Canon's market research? Can you share it?

I was cynical, of course I don't have that info.

Let's just say, hypothetically, that you did have that info. Say that info indicated that Canon's current 50/1.4 and 50/1.2L were substantially outselling those lenses you list above. If you were Canon, would you that compel you to release updated version of your lenses?

Honestly: find me a bigger sucking belly wound in Canon's EF portfolio where photographers are SOL with a staple need like this. I don't think it exists.

If photographers are buying the current versions of Canon's 50/1.4 and 50/1.2, why do you think updated versions are necessary? Yes, I know you want one. We all know you want one. I suspect a few other people want one, too.

Since Antono Refa helpfully listed out some of those companies which offer 50mm-ish f/1.8 and faster lenses, let's see how their competing lenses stack up on Amazon's best-selling digital camera lenses list:

Canon 50mm f/1.8 – #1
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 - #7
Canon 50mm f/1.4 – #8
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G – #11
Sony 50mm f/1.8 – #22
Canon 50mm f/1.2L – #90
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art (for Canon) – #134
Pentax 50mm f/1.8 – #315
Sony 50mm f/1.4ZA – #565
Nikon 58mm f/1.4G – #666
Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC –#1104
Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus – #2212

So, on Amazon in the US, Canon is selling more 50/1.8's than any other lens out there of any focal length, more 50/1.4's than anyone else, and even the 50/1.2L is outselling almost all of the faster-than-f/1.8 50mm lenses (the only one doing better is the Fuji 56mm f/1.2R at #51 on Amazon's list, but since that's an APS-C format lens I didn't include it on the list).

So, if you consider what people are actually buying, the Canon 50mm lenses are doing very (very!) well. It certainly seems that, rather than being a 'sucking belly wound in Canon's EF portfolio where photographers are SOL,' according to the people who really matter — those actually buying lenses — their need for a 'staple' 50mm prime is being quite well met.

Sorry, I know it sucks when reality slaps you in the face.

 

[ahsanford]

Sorry, I know it sucks when reality slaps you in the face.

Great perspective as always, Neuro. Appreciate the legwork on the Amazon list.

That said, a sale is not a need met. People are getting by with what is offered, but that belies an enormous opportunity for improvement.

And on other FLs, zooms, etc. where I can only presume Canon is sitting in a similar position in the marketplace, being at/near the top of the heap didn't stop Canon from periodically upping it's game and offering newer/better products.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Canon 50mm f/1.8 – #1
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 - #7
Canon 50mm f/1.4 – #8
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G – #11
Sony 50mm f/1.8 – #22
Canon 50mm f/1.2L – #90
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art (for Canon) – #134
Pentax 50mm f/1.8 – #315
Sony 50mm f/1.4ZA – #565
Nikon 58mm f/1.4G – #666
Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC –#1104
Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus – #2212

^^ Also, the market prefers zooms? ^^ (I happen to generally believe that, btw.)

Just rechecking the list (as it changes seemingly quite often), I'm only seeing:

• 3 zooms in the top 10 lenses
• 6 zooms in the top 20 lenses

So perhaps the number of zooms out in circulation is quite high, but it's because they're principally 18-55s that were kitted with a body? Or is this data just a noisy slice of realtime data with a different overall trend? Or is Amazon not reflective of the market at large for some reason?

- A

 

[jolyonralph]

I think the 50/1.4 still sells.

Which is why this won't happen...

Canon replace the damn 50/1.4.

Once people stop buying it, or they can make more profit on a newer model, they'll consider replacing it.

 

[Antono Refa]

Let's just say, hypothetically, that you did have that info. Say that info indicated that Canon's current 50/1.4 and 50/1.2L were substantially outselling those lenses you list above. If you were Canon, would you that compel you to release updated version of your lenses?

If I was the decision maker, that would not be the question I would ask myself.

The question I would is which would make me more profits

1) Making a new 50mm f/1.4 [L or not] IS [USM / STM / nano / whichever]

2) Not making a new 50mm f/1.4 [L or not] IS [USM / STM / nano / whichever]

That means I would be interested in looking at how much the four 50mm lenses I listed add to (or subtract from) the respective manufacturers' bottom line, not in how well they sell in comparison to my existing lenses.

 

[Loswr]

Let's just say, hypothetically, that you did have that info. Say that info indicated that Canon's current 50/1.4 and 50/1.2L were substantially outselling those lenses you list above. If you were Canon, would you that compel you to release updated version of your lenses?

If I was the decision maker, that would not be the question I would ask myself.

The question I would is which would make me more profits

1) Making a new 50mm f/1.4 [L or not] IS [USM / STM / nano / whichever]

2) Not making a new 50mm f/1.4 [L or not] IS [USM / STM / nano / whichever]

That means I would be interested in looking at how much the four 50mm lenses I listed add to (or subtract from) the respective manufacturers' bottom line, not in how well they sell in comparison to my existing lenses.

Fair enough. As you say, we don't have the data. Canon probably does. They haven't updated the 50/1.4 or 50/1.2L. I know what that leads me to conclude. YMMV.

 

[stevelee]

The 50mm f/1.4 was the first prime lens I bought to use with my T3i. I never observed any problems with it, and found it a useful lens to have in my arsenal. Of course I mainly got it to use as a portrait lens, since at 80mm rough equivalence it put me at a good distance from the subject, and the kit lens is limited to f/5.6 in that focal range.

Now that I have a 6D2, I don't know what I might use the lens for, and so far it has never been on that camera. Sometime I will check the photos I've made with the kit zoom to see what focal lengths I regularly use, and maybe start using the prime some for circumstances where I regularly shoot in the 50-ish range. With the quality of higher ISO in the 6D2, I haven't felt the need for the wider aperture so far.

Obviously if Canon comes out with an updated 50mm lens, I would not be in the target audience.

 

[BillB]

Let's just say, hypothetically, that you did have that info. Say that info indicated that Canon's current 50/1.4 and 50/1.2L were substantially outselling those lenses you list above. If you were Canon, would you that compel you to release updated version of your lenses?

If I was the decision maker, that would not be the question I would ask myself.

The question I would is which would make me more profits

1) Making a new 50mm f/1.4 [L or not] IS [USM / STM / nano / whichever]

2) Not making a new 50mm f/1.4 [L or not] IS [USM / STM / nano / whichever]

That means I would be interested in looking at how much the four 50mm lenses I listed add to (or subtract from) the respective manufacturers' bottom line, not in how well they sell in comparison to my existing lenses.

Looking at it from an R&D investment viewpoint, the question becomes which lens development projects are going to maximize profit. Only so many lenses can be developed at the same time, so there is a backlog, and 50mm lenses may well be somewhere in that backlog. Overall, it seems clear to me that Canon decided to emphasize the development of zooms during the last several years. As far as primes are concerned, 50 mm lenses seem to have been down the lens development list, for whatever reason. Maybe it is because Canon doesn't see a lot of money to be made by rolling out new 50mm primes. There are rumors about Canon doing some development work on 50mm primes so maybe there is some hope something will eventually show up.

 

[AJ]

I think we must remember that Canon is a business and they aim to make money. I realise that a fast high quality 50 is exciting to those of us who read here but I suspect Canon's research probably finds little interest, or at least not enough for them to be making it a priority.

Interesting that...

1) Zeiss did their research, and found there's a market for a 55mm f/1.4 Otus, and an 85mm f/1.4 Otus.

2) Sigma did their research, and found there's a market for a 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art, and an 85mm f/1.4 Art.

3) Tamron did their research, and found there's a market for an SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD, and an SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD.

4) Nikon did their research, and found there's a market for a 58mm f/1.4G AF-S, and an 85mm f/1.4G AF-S.

5) Canon did their research, and found there's absolutely no market for a 50mm f/1.4[L] IS USM. The 85mm f/1.4L IS USM does have a market, but it's whole different story.

The market isn't just people who would buy the lens within the first year. It's for people who want to buy OEM now, or their first camera next year, or switch from Nikon the year after that.

Where did you find information about Canon's market research? Can you share it?

I was cynical, of course I don't have that info.

Let's just say, hypothetically, that you did have that info. Say that info indicated that Canon's current 50/1.4 and 50/1.2L were substantially outselling those lenses you list above. If you were Canon, would you that compel you to release updated version of your lenses?

Honestly: find me a bigger sucking belly wound in Canon's EF portfolio where photographers are SOL with a staple need like this. I don't think it exists.

If photographers are buying the current versions of Canon's 50/1.4 and 50/1.2, why do you think updated versions are necessary? Yes, I know you want one. We all know you want one. I suspect a few other people want one, too.

Since Antono Refa helpfully listed out some of those companies which offer 50mm-ish f/1.8 and faster lenses, let's see how their competing lenses stack up on Amazon's best-selling digital camera lenses list:

Canon 50mm f/1.8 – #1
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 - #7
Canon 50mm f/1.4 – #8
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G – #11
Sony 50mm f/1.8 – #22
Canon 50mm f/1.2L – #90
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art (for Canon) – #134
Pentax 50mm f/1.8 – #315
Sony 50mm f/1.4ZA – #565
Nikon 58mm f/1.4G – #666
Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC –#1104
Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus – #2212

So, on Amazon in the US, Canon is selling more 50/1.8's than any other lens out there of any focal length, more 50/1.4's than anyone else, and even the 50/1.2L is outselling almost all of the faster-than-f/1.8 50mm lenses (the only one doing better is the Fuji 56mm f/1.2R at #51 on Amazon's list, but since that's an APS-C format lens I didn't include it on the list).

So, if you consider what people are actually buying, the Canon 50mm lenses are doing very (very!) well. It certainly seems that, rather than being a 'sucking belly wound in Canon's EF portfolio where photographers are SOL,' according to the people who really matter — those actually buying lenses — their need for a 'staple' 50mm prime is being quite well met.

Sorry, I know it sucks when reality slaps you in the face.

But ...
Canon EF-S 18-55 mk1 was selling quite well, and yet it was updated with the mk2.
Canon EF-S 18-55 mk2 was selling quite well, and yet it was updated with the STM.
ditto for EF-S 55-250 and 50/1.8

50/1.4 isn't some exotic lens like 65 macro or 90 TS which don't get updated for decades.

Plenty of 50/1.4 owners would upgrade given a 50/1.8 STM-like makeover. And such a lens would be pretty much guaranteed to sell well to new owners.

I think Canon's saving grace is that Sigma and Tamron have not made an inexpensive double-Gauss competitor.
The Sigma 50/1.4A is in a different category. The older Sigma 50/1.4 has focus issues.

 

[Loswr]

But ...
Canon EF-S 18-55 mk1 was selling quite well, and yet it was updated with the mk2.
Canon EF-S 18-55 mk2 was selling quite well, and yet it was updated with the STM.
ditto for EF-S 55-250 and 50/1.8

But ...
Those updates were mainly to reduce production costs (small savings x big unit sales = meaningful profit). Most were the exact same optical formula as their predecessor. The 55-250 STM is really the only one that saw improvements.

 

[FramerMCB]

My question is this: for all those of you that know what I'd ideally want -- a compact (and not necessarily face-meltingly sharp) 50 f/1.4 IS USM like the 35 f/2 IS -- what happens if the next new 50 is an L like the 85 f/1.4L IS?

Such a lens will likely be too big for me. I want a compact double gauss lens.

Seeing as it might be last new 50 we get for 5-10 years after that f/1.4L IS is announced, do I cave and get the f/1.2L because it's still relatively compact? Do I except all of it's flaws (finnicky AF, non-flat field, really a specialty tool for wide open shooting) or wait even longer for a non-L replacement?

- A

Rent the Tamron 45mm 1.8 VC and see how it works for you and whether you can live with the chromatic aberration issues (can be cleaned up in post) - which will depend on your shooting style/uses of the lens. It seems like a relatively compact lens for being a 1.8.

 

[slclick]

My question is this: for all those of you that know what I'd ideally want -- a compact (and not necessarily face-meltingly sharp) 50 f/1.4 IS USM like the 35 f/2 IS -- what happens if the next new 50 is an L like the 85 f/1.4L IS?

Such a lens will likely be too big for me. I want a compact double gauss lens.

Seeing as it might be last new 50 we get for 5-10 years after that f/1.4L IS is announced, do I cave and get the f/1.2L because it's still relatively compact? Do I except all of it's flaws (finnicky AF, non-flat field, really a specialty tool for wide open shooting) or wait even longer for a non-L replacement?

- A

Rent the Tamron 45mm 1.8 VC and see how it works for you and whether you can live with the chromatic aberration issues (can be cleaned up in post) - which will depend on your shooting style/uses of the lens. It seems like a relatively compact lens for being a 1.8.

I tried one after reading Dustin's review and knew of it's shortcomings but to tell the truth I prefer the 40 Pancake by far. The Micro contrast, color rendition, lack of distortion or corner sharpness issues. No CA either. 45 and fifty, as I'd said before are focal lengths that do nothing for me and the 24-70 Mk 2 does them very well if I need them.

 

[Antono Refa]

Let's just say, hypothetically, that you did have that info. Say that info indicated that Canon's current 50/1.4 and 50/1.2L were substantially outselling those lenses you list above. If you were Canon, would you that compel you to release updated version of your lenses?

If I was the decision maker, that would not be the question I would ask myself.

The question I would is which would make me more profits

1) Making a new 50mm f/1.4 [L or not] IS [USM / STM / nano / whichever]

2) Not making a new 50mm f/1.4 [L or not] IS [USM / STM / nano / whichever]

That means I would be interested in looking at how much the four 50mm lenses I listed add to (or subtract from) the respective manufacturers' bottom line, not in how well they sell in comparison to my existing lenses.

Fair enough. As you say, we don't have the data. Canon probably does. They haven't updated the 50/1.4 or 50/1.2L. I know what that leads me to conclude. YMMV.

You could have written the same about the TS-E 90mm from the time Canon upgraded the TS-E 24mm lens for eight years straight, till Canon decided to announce your estimate of their odometer was off.

 

[AJ]

But ...
Canon EF-S 18-55 mk1 was selling quite well, and yet it was updated with the mk2.
Canon EF-S 18-55 mk2 was selling quite well, and yet it was updated with the STM.
ditto for EF-S 55-250 and 50/1.8

But ...
Those updates were mainly to reduce production costs (small savings x big unit sales = meaningful profit). Most were the exact same optical formula as their predecessor. The 55-250 STM is really the only one that saw improvements.

So...

Why can't the same cost-saving measures be applied to 50/1.4? New motor, new lens coatings. Seems like a win-win to me