When the hell will I get my EF 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM?!

[rfdesigner]

Can you "short" the 50STM?

Once the new 1.4 comes out a lot of STMs are going to appear on the second hand market.

Anway one spec I'd really like to see from it is vignetting of under 2 stops, and no coma in the corners.

cue wooshing and oinking sound.

 

[slclick]

Get the Tammy, 45 is more like the human eye anyhow.

 

[rfdesigner]

Get the Tammy, 45 is more like the human eye anyhow.

cheers..

It does look fairly good (low coma) in the corners.. though 2 stops of vignetting on a 1.8 is not the same as a 1.4.

My No.1 though is accurate ringUSM. what's the point if F1.4 if you can't hit focus reliably.

 

[ahsanford]

Get the Tammy, 45 is more like the human eye anyhow.

cheers..

It does look fairly good (low coma) in the corners.. though 2 stops of vignetting on a 1.8 is not the same as a 1.4.

My No.1 though is accurate ringUSM. what's the point if F1.4 if you can't hit focus reliably.

+1. Same reason I won't get that Tamron or the Sigma Art. Sharp is lovely, IS is nice. But fire and forget AF you can bet your life on is paramount to me, esp. with larger aperture lenses.

Why don't the various review sites do hit-rate studies? That's an easy test to run, even if it's on a tripod on static targets. I'd love to see head to head with Art vs. L shot wide open.

- A

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have no use for a 50mm lens with IS. Perhaps for video, and then I would want STM. Starting at about 135-200mm, IS becomes useful. I have too much subject movement to use slow shutter speeds.

Perhaps on a 1 inch sensor, 50mm with IS might fall into the range where it would benefit me.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

I have no use for IS at all - well at least for the last 2 years. So I would be happy to see a new 50mm 1.4 (?) with just upgraded optics. I would also love to see a new 16-35 F4 L, 300 F2.8 L and 800 F5.6 L with no IS as well!
Not going to happen - but I can hope.................

 

[JonAustin]

I have no use for a 50mm lens with IS. Perhaps for video, and then I would want STM. Starting at about 135-200mm, IS becomes useful. I have too much subject movement to use slow shutter speeds.

Perhaps on a 1 inch sensor, 50mm with IS might fall into the range where it would benefit me.

I have no use for IS at all - well at least for the last 2 years. So I would be happy to see a new 50mm 1.4 (?) with just upgraded optics. I would also love to see a new 16-35 F4 L, 300 F2.8 L and 800 F5.6 L with no IS as well!

Not going to happen - but I can hope.................

Certainly respect your opinions, which are shared by many. However, with the 16-35/4L IS and 35/2 IS (among others), Canon certainly sees a market opportunity for normal- to wide-angle IS, and I am part of that market (I own both these lenses).

When using a lens equipped with IS, you can always switch it off if you don't need it. But if you need it and don't have it, well ...

Canon would provide the most choice if they were to release every lens in both IS and non-IS variants, but that's not going to happen, either. And I do appreciate that those wanting non-IS versions of lenses only available with IS are paying (in $$, size, weight and image quality, however negligibly) for a feature they don't want.

 

[In-The-Dark]

I too am hopeful for an EF 50mm IS USM. Wouldn't matter if it's f/1.8 . . . as long as it remains light, compact, is sharp wide-open, and with accurate AF.

 

[bholliman]

I voted next year, but hope its sooner. Who knows?

Can you "short" the 50STM?

Once the new 1.4 comes out a lot of STMs are going to appear on the second hand market.

I'm one of those "getting by" with the STM until when/if the mythical 50/1.8 IS appears. The STM is a nice little lens, but not very sturdy and mine has started having AF problems. I probably won't bother to sell mine even when I buy a better 50mm prime since the money I'd get for the STM is hardly worth the effort to sell it. I'll keep it as a lens to keep in my pocket for emergency use, maybe hand it down to the kids.

 

[rfdesigner]

I voted next year, but hope its sooner. Who knows?

Can you "short" the 50STM?

Once the new 1.4 comes out a lot of STMs are going to appear on the second hand market.

I'm one of those "getting by" with the STM until when/if the mythical 50/1.8 IS appears. The STM is a nice little lens, but not very sturdy and mine has started having AF problems. I probably won't bother to sell mine even when I buy a better 50mm prime since the money I'd get for the STM is hardly worth the effort to sell it. I'll keep it as a lens to keep in my pocket for emergency use, maybe hand it down to the kids.

If it's only 1.8 then I'll pass until my STM dies.

IS does nothing for depth of field

 

[slclick]

Oh, I sold my STM, and I got what I paid for but then the buyer (after a month) sent me this.....

 

[ahsanford]

If it's only 1.8 then I'll pass until my STM dies.

IS does nothing for depth of field

Agree, buuuuut...

1) Internal focusing is nice.
2) Far better build quality is nice.
3) For stills, USM obliterates STM.
4) Distance scales are useful for rough range bracketing in super low light or street shooting.
5) I'd prefer a solid lens hood attachment, and I presume a new mid-level 50 would have one (the 24/28/35 hoods are terrific).
6) Three stops IS = three stops latitude with either ISO or DOF when shooting static subjects in low light handheld. (I am in this situation constantly.)
7) FTM mechanical focusing is worlds better than focus by wire.

...so, IMHO, there's far more to the EF 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM value proposition than what 'nooneknows' turns out to be. In my mind, this lens is much more about being a comprehensively better, full-featured lens much more than it is 'possibly slightly faster than the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM'.

So if 'f/nooneknows' turns out to be f/1.8, they'll get my money on day one without hesitation.

- A

 

[rfdesigner]

Oh, I sold my STM, and I got what I paid for but then the buyer (after a month) sent me this.....

Brilliant!!!... you made my day!

 

[Loswr]

Oh, I sold my STM, and I got what I paid for but then the buyer (after a month) sent me this.....

 

[slclick]

I was a bit more tactful in my response.

 

[rfdesigner]

If it's only 1.8 then I'll pass until my STM dies.

IS does nothing for depth of field

Agree, buuuuut...

1) Internal focusing is nice.

yes but it doesn't make my photos better.

2) Far better build quality is nice.

yes but it doesn't make my photos better. (actually I'd like better build but bang for buck I can't complain about the STM)

3) For stills, USM obliterates STM.

This one I really want and is one reason for rejecting the current 1.4 and the ART.. what's the point in f1.4 if the AF is flakey?

4) Distance scales are useful for rough range bracketing in super low light or street shooting.

I have an EG-S focus screen, I can see my DOF, for super low light there's live view, I haven't looked at distance scales since I gave up on my praktica gear.

5) I'd prefer a solid lens hood attachment, and I presume a new mid-level 50 would have one (the 24/28/35 hoods are terrific).

but it doesn't make the photos better... but yes I'd still like it.

6) Three stops IS = three stops latitude with either ISO or DOF when shooting static subjects in low light handheld. (I am in this situation constantly.)

My subjects move, at least a little bit, I generally use AUTOISO with a minimum speed of 1/125... so yes nice if it's free and doesn't affect aperture but it doesn't make my photos any better.

7) FTM mechanical focusing is worlds better than focus by wire.

yes but it doesn't make my photos better (though it does save battery which is much appreciated)

 

[Kwwund]

I'd love a 50mm/f/1.4 IS but it will never happen. All the thought leaders say "you don't need IS because the lens is so fast, or else you should be using a tripod." By the same logic, no one would have more than one pair of shoes.

 

[Loswr]

By the same logic, no one would have more than one pair of shoes.

See above - we were talking about bare feet. Or not.

 

[ahsanford]

I'd love a 50mm/f/1.4 IS but it will never happen. All the thought leaders say "you don't need IS because the lens is so fast, or else you should be using a tripod." By the same logic, no one would have more than one pair of shoes.

Yeah, everyone who says 'you don't need IS for stills' with an f/1.4 lens must love capturing nighttime available light shots at ISO 12800.

I'd rather shoot the same shot at ISO 1600 or have the latitude to stop down for more working DOF. If your subject isn't moving (a good deal of what I shoot), IS gets you that. It's clearly, obviously, undeniably useful.

Not all of us have a tripod on us, own a studio, prefer to add light to scenes, etc. Some of us would prefer our gear could do a little more in difficult/realtime/unorthodox photography situations. IS is a means to do that.

- A

 

[rfdesigner]

I'd love a 50mm/f/1.4 IS but it will never happen. All the thought leaders say "you don't need IS because the lens is so fast, or else you should be using a tripod." By the same logic, no one would have more than one pair of shoes.

Yeah, everyone who says 'you don't need IS for stills' with an f/1.4 lens must love capturing nighttime available light shots at ISO 12800.

I'd rather shoot the same shot at ISO 1600 or have the latitude to stop down for more working DOF. If your subject isn't moving (a good deal of what I shoot), IS gets you that. It's clearly, obviously, undeniably useful.

Not all of us have a tripod on us, own a studio, prefer to add light to scenes, etc. Some of us would prefer our gear could do a little more in difficult/realtime/unorthodox photography situations. IS is a means to do that.

- A

Don't disagree. I just see an IS lens as a 50Macro replacement... say 50 f2_and_a_bit IS USM.