Where are the new Canon 50mm and 85mm lenses?

[zlatko]

Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...

But Sigma doesn't hear the voices asking for smaller & lighter gear.

 

[jd7]

As long as Canon keeps selling the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 like they have been, I think we'll be in for a long wait. Those lens productions must be almost pure profit at this point and while they aren't the world's best lenses, they are good enough for a great many people. The 24, 28, and 35 lenses were rather poor in comparison and not good sellers from what I understand, so the economics to replace them made sense. Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...

This is pretty much what I think as well. The 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are great as they are so the improvement will be harder to sell at a higher price point. Canon knows that the ROI for a prime lens factors heavily into pro shooters' decisions and many already own the existing 50 and 85. Canon must find or somehow create a demand for the replacement versions and that was a lot easier with lackluster 24, 28 and 35 version 1 lenses. And while they're at it, Canon doesn't want to create an EF lens that is so good that the L versions become less of an upgrade at their even higher price point!

I assume zooms probably sell much better at a higher price point so they get all the love first.

Surely there would be a large demand, at least for an updated 50 1.4? I'd really like a fast 50 but there just isn't one which appeals to me at the moment. The build quality of the Canon 50 1.4 seems to be ordinary at best (from what I've read), it's soft wide open, and I've seen a number of photos (on flickr, etc) which had harsh bokeh which didn't appeal to me. I'm hesitant about the Sigma 50 Art - I don't want to spend that much money on a lens which may have focus problems, plus it's bigger and heavier than I'd prefer. I'm actually thinking of picking up a Sigma 50 1.4 EX (ie Sigma's older 50 1.4), as a "best compromise" (for my purposes) of sharpness/bokeh/build quality/cost, despite the potential focus problems and the softness wide open, but have been holding off in the hope Canon might release something compelling.

 

[zlatko]

As long as Canon keeps selling the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 like they have been, I think we'll be in for a long wait. Those lens productions must be almost pure profit at this point and while they aren't the world's best lenses, they are good enough for a great many people. The 24, 28, and 35 lenses were rather poor in comparison and not good sellers from what I understand, so the economics to replace them made sense. Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...

This is pretty much what I think as well. The 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are great as they are so the improvement will be harder to sell at a higher price point. Canon knows that the ROI for a prime lens factors heavily into pro shooters' decisions and many already own the existing 50 and 85. Canon must find or somehow create a demand for the replacement versions and that was a lot easier with lackluster 24, 28 and 35 version 1 lenses. And while they're at it, Canon doesn't want to create an EF lens that is so good that the L versions become less of an upgrade at their even higher price point!

I assume zooms probably sell much better at a higher price point so they get all the love first.

Surely there would be a large demand, at least for an updated 50 1.4?

Absolutely. Demand would be huge -- it *will* be huge. My guess is that Canon will get around to it. They've been putting out new lenses and updates of old lenses pretty steadily, so they just haven't gotten around to this one. I think it's far too easy to theorize (wrongly) about what "Canon wants" as if we can read their minds just based on what lenses exist and what lenses don't exist.

Canon could certainly make an awesome and GIGANTIC 50/1.4 that's as big as 24-70/2.8 zoom, but that's not what everyone wants. I'm hoping for an update along the lines of the 35/2 IS which is fabulous and small.

 

[zlatko]

As long as Canon keeps selling the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 like they have been, I think we'll be in for a long wait. Those lens productions must be almost pure profit at this point and while they aren't the world's best lenses, they are good enough for a great many people. The 24, 28, and 35 lenses were rather poor in comparison and not good sellers from what I understand, so the economics to replace them made sense. Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...

This is pretty much what I think as well. The 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are great as they are so the improvement will be harder to sell at a higher price point. Canon knows that the ROI for a prime lens factors heavily into pro shooters' decisions and many already own the existing 50 and 85. Canon must find or somehow create a demand for the replacement versions and that was a lot easier with lackluster 24, 28 and 35 version 1 lenses. And while they're at it, Canon doesn't want to create an EF lens that is so good that the L versions become less of an upgrade at their even higher price point!

I assume zooms probably sell much better at a higher price point so they get all the love first.

Surely there would be a large demand, at least for an updated 50 1.4?

Absolutely. Demand would be huge -- it *will* be huge. My guess is that Canon will get around to it. They've been putting out new lenses and updates of old lenses pretty steadily, so they just haven't gotten around to this one. I think it's far too easy to theorize (wrongly) about what "Canon wants" as if we can read their minds just based on what lenses exist and what lenses don't exist.

Canon could certainly make an awesome and GIGANTIC 50/1.4 that's as big as 24-70/2.8 zoom, but that's not what everyone wants. I'm hoping for an update along the lines of the 35/2 IS which is fabulous and small. I love the size and the bokeh of the current 50/1.4 but just wish it were better in the 1.4 to 2.0 aperture range, and wish the AF motor were better.

 

[ScottyP]

It is a good question, particularly the 50.

I will say the 85 f/1.8 is surprisingly good. I was thinking of selling mine recently because I wasn't using it. Then I found myself inside an indoor water park in Sandusky Ohio and my 70-200 2.8 was sucking wind. Too dim and I didn't want to shoot at ISO 6400. I also didn't want to fog my nice white up too badly.
I shot all afternoon with the 85 f/1.8 wide open, and it was very sharp, and it focused very quickly and very accurately on the screaming mad kiddos running around. About the only thing you hear bad about it is CA, but none was noticeable in that water park. No tree branches against a bright grey sky anywhere in there I guess.

 

[Luds34]

I'm actually thinking of picking up a Sigma 50 1.4 EX (ie Sigma's older 50 1.4), as a "best compromise" (for my purposes) of sharpness/bokeh/build quality/cost, despite the potential focus problems and the softness wide open, but have been holding off in the hope Canon might release something compelling.

That's what I did last summer. At one time I had the nifty fifty and my buddy had the Canon 50 f/1.4. Neither one seemed to focus very accurately/consistently so we both abandoned the lenses. So when I saw the old Sigma for $350 brand new on Amazon and thought for the price, why not. Since I'm on crop and I bought it for my "portrait" lens I can accept it's limitations. Namely it does focus a little slower (there is a good chunk of glass there) and the focus can just plain miss from time to time, and a bit soft wide open (fine for portrait uses). But for the most part, and after AFMA the lens, it does really well on static subjects. Trying to use it in AI Servo is a lot more hit and miss. I will say though, when the lens hits, it does produce some great shots, has lovely bokeh!

 

[mackguyver]

Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...

But Sigma doesn't hear the voices asking for smaller & lighter gear.

Not as loudly, but they are listening:
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/view-all-lenses?technologies=139

Also, I have owned and/or used various Canon 50s and both 85s. The only two issues I have with them is price and their almost total focus on portrait use. They are both FAR more expensive than their f/1.4 and f/1.8 cousins, and they aren't great at much other than portraits. The 50L is somewhat soft compared to the L zooms and f/1.4 but takes beautiful full body and 3/4 length portraits. The 85L focuses so slowly it's very poor choice for anything but portraits, but the results are remarkable.

For me, the 50L & 85L are my first choices for portraits and last choices for anytime I need those focal lengths for anything else.

 

[Sabaki]

Im on the other side of the fence. Waaaaaay on the other side

I want both a 50L and 85L that has comparable IQ to the Otus lenses and I don't mind a weighty lens at all.

 

[zlatko]

I'm actually thinking of picking up a Sigma 50 1.4 EX (ie Sigma's older 50 1.4), as a "best compromise" (for my purposes) of sharpness/bokeh/build quality/cost, despite the potential focus problems and the softness wide open, but have been holding off in the hope Canon might release something compelling.

That's what I did last summer. At one time I had the nifty fifty and my buddy had the Canon 50 f/1.4. Neither one seemed to focus very accurately/consistently so we both abandoned the lenses. So when I saw the old Sigma for $350 brand new on Amazon and thought for the price, why not. Since I'm on crop and I bought it for my "portrait" lens I can accept it's limitations. Namely it does focus a little slower (there is a good chunk of glass there) and the focus can just plain miss from time to time, and a bit soft wide open (fine for portrait uses). But for the most part, and after AFMA the lens, it does really well on static subjects. Trying to use it in AI Servo is a lot more hit and miss. I will say though, when the lens hits, it does produce some great shots, has lovely bokeh!

Sounds like you abandoned one lens with inconsistent/inaccurate AF for another lens with inconsistent/inaccurate AF. What's the advantage?

 

[davidcl0nel]

I think Canon will bring a 50 1.8 IS (for 400$, so the old one isn't deprecated) and a 50 1.4L or 50 1.2LII which can measure with the Sigma Art.
85 1.8 is an other line (these with the golden ring, as 50 1.4 and 28 1.8), they have to replace a lower version, which is missed for 85mm - so maybe there is an 85 2.0 IS as the 3rd way.
All current IS lenses have a small silver ring. Silver, Gold, Red... But there aren't every type of lens for every focal range. A gold 35 between 35 IS and 35 L won't never exist...

 

[Luds34]

I'm actually thinking of picking up a Sigma 50 1.4 EX (ie Sigma's older 50 1.4), as a "best compromise" (for my purposes) of sharpness/bokeh/build quality/cost, despite the potential focus problems and the softness wide open, but have been holding off in the hope Canon might release something compelling.

That's what I did last summer. At one time I had the nifty fifty and my buddy had the Canon 50 f/1.4. Neither one seemed to focus very accurately/consistently so we both abandoned the lenses. So when I saw the old Sigma for $350 brand new on Amazon and thought for the price, why not. Since I'm on crop and I bought it for my "portrait" lens I can accept it's limitations. Namely it does focus a little slower (there is a good chunk of glass there) and the focus can just plain miss from time to time, and a bit soft wide open (fine for portrait uses). But for the most part, and after AFMA the lens, it does really well on static subjects. Trying to use it in AI Servo is a lot more hit and miss. I will say though, when the lens hits, it does produce some great shots, has lovely bokeh!

Sounds like you abandoned one lens with inconsistent/inaccurate AF for another lens with inconsistent/inaccurate AF. What's the advantage?

The Sigma misses sometimes. It is inconsistent compared to say using my 85 f/1.8 (which seems to hit every single time). Overall it is very usable. Some of the challenges are just shooting with a narrow DOF as well. The Canon 50 f/1.8 II I had was junk. It was good to nail focus about 50% of the time it seemed.

From non-pentagon bokeh and shallower depth of field to better build quality and faster focus... the Sigma is pretty much better in every way vs the nifty fifty (I won't comment on IQ, color, contrast since it's been so long since I've had the Canon). The only advantage (IMHO) for the Canon lens is that it is smaller/lighter.

 

[zlatko]

OK, makes sense. Thanks

 

[burb72]

50mm is the standard lens, it has been forever. And all the canon 50s stink, except the 50 1.2 and it cost too much. I am surprised they didnt pick a wide, middle and long to update. the 85/100 are pretty good, but the 85/100/135 would benefit the most from an upgrade to is. The most complained about canons are the 50s and it seems they would put their energy towards those, then maybe pick a wide angle. anyway i have a mark 1 50 1.8 and a 100 f2, and am just waiting for the upgrades. The mark 1 is actually alright, i dont notice the focus issues that everyone complains about and the 100 f2 is a very good lens. i go back and forth daily on the 135 f2 if i should upgrade or not, waiting for that 135is/os or 100/85 is/os art and that 50 1.8 is. I dont think it would be 1.4 50mm but if it is they will be flying off the shelves. build it and please take my money.

 

[The Bad Duck]

Please let them come soon! At least the 50.

I love my 85 /1.8 and hate my 50 /1.4, and yet the 50mm focal length seems to fit my shooting style really good. I use it a lot even though I don´t like it... Hate that the AF misses so often.

Of course I am thinking of a sigma 50 ART, but it is heavy and reports of so-so AF makes me hesitate - accurate AF is my biggest issue with the canon 50 /1.4 since I can live with shooting at f/2. So bring me an equivalent of the 35/2 IS, preferably 50 /1.4 - 1.8 IS USM, and I will be very happy!

If instead canon gives us a 50 /2.8 IS as in the 24 and 28 lenses, I will go for the Art.

 

[bholliman]

I would buy a new Canon 50 f/1.8 IS in a heartbeat! I've owned a 50/1.4 and sold it. I've rented a Sigma 50/1.4 Art that was terrific. I loved the IQ and AF was decent on the copy I rented. I probably will not buy a Sigma Art due to size and weight and concerns I would get a copy with AF problems.. I really want primes that are small and light.

 

[Maximilian]

That makes two of us (of tens of thousands I suppose)

+1.000 or at least one more, that's me

I've been eagerly waiting for a new 50mm in the same range as recent 24/28/35 primes. Add in a nice 85mm and there it goes the midrange prime lineup again. Canon is sorely missing a new 50mm. I don't care if it's only 50/1.8 as long as it has proper ring USM, maybe IS would not hurt and it's decently sharp on that 1.8. I'd love to see 1.4 there of course, but I'm not getting my hopes too high

100% my thought.
Small, midrange primes with an aperture below 2.0 best in its class IQ wide open, and Canon will have me buying 3 to 4 new lenses. As long as the lineup is not completed, I'll keep waiting (although beeing tempted).

 

[Northstar]

I'd pay $1000 for an updated 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 from canon if the lens had excellent IQ wide open and fast accurate AF.

And I think a lot of other photographers would too.

 

[Antono Refa]

I'd pay $1000 for an updated 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 from canon if the lens had excellent IQ wide open and fast accurate AF.

And I think a lot of other photographers would too.

Zeiss, Nikon, and Sigma realized photographers would be willing to pay U.S.$1,000 for a fast 50mm lens, and released products with appropriate IQ and price tag.

The 50mm f/1.8 is a film era kit lens, the digital era's crop camera's equivalent of the 85mm f/1.8 + cheap entry into the world of fast primes, and as such it wouldn't be upgraded into that price bracket.

If I had to guess what Canon would do, then

1) The 50mm f/1.8 will only be upgraded as cheap as they can get to compete with the Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8, which could be no upgrade at well.

2) The 50mm f/1.4 might get the 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm treatment, e.g. IS & USM. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit slower, say f/1.8-2.0, in order not to compete to hard with...

2) A new 50mm f/1.4L USM in the U.S.$1,000 bracket to compete with the new lenses. None of the competitors have IS, so I doubt Canon would even want to out do them and create too good a competitor for the f/1.2 on the way.

 

[DomTomLondon]

I'm also waiting impatiently for a Canon 50 1.4 replacement. I've had the 50 1.4 for 8 few years, but after my gear was stolen in 2014, I decided not to buy a new one. Instead I went for the 35 f2 IS and love it. Now if Canon could make a 50mm in the same form factor with IS. Come on Canon do you not want our money?...

 

[Twostones]

For those of you that have never owned a 50mm1.4, it really is a good lens. The focus is easily stuck if the front extension is bumped but it still is a good lens. I would not hesitate to buy another if mine was lost. Sure I would love a 50mm with IS but until that day I am still enjoying my 1.4 version. I imagine we will see the new 50 in the near future. The delay could be due to the new fast IS primes are currently being made where the new 50 will be made. Changeover in tooling and calibration will probably be done when enough of the other focal lengths are stockpiled. The new fast primes, 24mm 28mm and 35mm, with IS are very good and very popular so it may be a while before the 50 with IS appears. I will buy one when they are available. I use my 50mm f1.4 on both full frame and cropped sensor and 35mm film. I like to shoot wide open when shooting film and the 50 is good enough for that. Having two 50's sounds good to me.