# New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 28, 2014)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/new-canon-l-primes-but-not-until-2015-cr2/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/new-canon-l-primes-but-not-until-2015-cr2/">Tweet</a></div>
<p>We’re told to expect new Canon L primes, but none will be announced in 2014.</p>
<p>The first one we can expect is a new 35L in early 2015, this has been rumored since the 24L was announced. There have been lots of patents for the optical formula, but nothing has come of it.</p>
<p>The second is a new 50L in late 2015. The new lens is said to be a lot smaller and lighter, perhaps a drop to f/1.4?</p>
<p>There may have been development delays in L lens development as Canon has been working hard building a cinema lens lineup.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## CANONisOK (Jul 28, 2014)

I'm assuming this has zero bearing on the (rumored) upcoming 100-400mm ii... I'd feel more confident if there reports of the current 100-400mm being discontinued like the 7D.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 28, 2014)

2014 is the Yeah of the Lens!*


*disclaimer: may actually be next year



CANONisOK said:


> I'm assuming this has zero bearing on the (rumored) upcoming 100-400mm ii... I'd feel more confident if there reports of the current 100-400mm being discontinued like the 7D.


If anything, it basically confirms the 100-400. It won't be a new 200/300/400mm prime. It wont be an update to the 55-250, 18-135, etc (all just recently done with STM). So, what does that really leave?

I guess they could update the 15-85 or 17-55, but I'd doubt that. And they just re-did all their wide and mid-range zooms, so it cant be those. Basically only leaves the 28-135 and the 100-400. And since there really isnt any room for a 28-135 update...


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 28, 2014)

New 35L & 135L IS :


----------



## Viggo (Jul 28, 2014)

A new 50 L that's "a lot smaller" ?? Makes no sense whatsoever ..


----------



## Khalai (Jul 28, 2014)

Still having my hopes up for a new 50mm nonL prime for this year  All that I basicly need is 50/1.4 with reliable and predictable ring-USM AF motor. Better sharpness and contrast on par with new 35/2 IS could not hurt either


----------



## Haydn1971 (Jul 28, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> The second is a new 50L in late 2015. The new lens is said to be a lot smaller and lighter, perhaps a drop to f/1.4?



Exactly what I was suggesting just a few days ago on the Photokina thread, the new consumer 50mm IS at f1.8 or even f2.0 makes way for a much better 50mm f1.4 in the same mold as the 24mm f1.4 II L - same with the 85mm, which could also go to f1.4


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 28, 2014)

I'd still like to see them best Nikon's 12-24.

sek



preppyak said:


> 2014 is the Yeah of the Lens!*
> 
> 
> *disclaimer: may actually be next year
> ...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 28, 2014)

Canon has been working a lot on cinema lenses. Their broadcast group does not seem to be directly involved, so the DSLR design and production has been bogged down. Nikon also has a lack of resources for designing new lenses. Apparently, Sigma has added resources(Tooling, manufacturing, and designers) to put out a lot of new lenses. This is probably hurting Nikon more than Canon, but both must be feeling pressure.


----------



## dgatwood (Jul 28, 2014)

preppyak said:


> 2014 is the Yeah of the Lens!*
> 
> 
> *disclaimer: may actually be next year
> ...



I'd love it if they updated the 28–135 to be a 24–135, to be the full-frame equivalent for the 15–85. The crop bodies got that treatment back in 2009, but the full-frame cameras don't have anything similar. And while they're at it, they should tighten up the tolerances to fix the extreme lens creep problems (not a creep so much as a flop). Basically turn it into a solid full-frame kit lens.

Then again, I'd love a full-frame equivalent to the 18–135 lens—basically an IS update to the 28–200.


----------



## Khalai (Jul 28, 2014)

Haydn1971 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > The second is a new 50L in late 2015. The new lens is said to be a lot smaller and lighter, perhaps a drop to f/1.4?
> ...



They would lose their bragging rights for f/1.2 primes. I do not see this scenario as probable. At least not for the 85/1.2, which is amazing lens even wide open, so why "lessen" the lens to a "mere" f/1.4.


----------



## rs (Jul 28, 2014)

scottkinfw said:


> I'd still like to see them best Nikon's 12-24.


14-24?


----------



## Etienne (Jul 28, 2014)

Khalai said:


> Haydn1971 said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



f/1.4 is plenty, and it keeps the weight and price down a bit. I'm hoping for a 50mm with IS, equivalent quality to the 35 f/2 IS !


----------



## zlatko (Jul 28, 2014)

Etienne said:


> I'm hoping for a 50mm with IS, equivalent quality to the 35 f/2 IS !



Me too. That would be beautiful!


----------



## Khalai (Jul 28, 2014)

Etienne said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > Haydn1971 said:
> ...



I know, for me f/1.4 is more than enough, I rarely shoot below 1.8-2 anyways. I meant it as a marketing point. It implies something exclusive, something special, when you have 1.2 lens while other competitors start at 1.4 (and that the difference between 1.2 and 1.4 is barely noticeable etc. does not count in marketing gimmicks  )...

Personally, I'd settle for 50/1.8 IS USM anyday, if its IQ is comparable to 35/2 IS USM at equal aperture openings.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 28, 2014)

Every time a CR1, CR2, etc. drops regarding new lenses, I want to make a rival to CR's webpage that is _The Onion_-flavored. 

Stories would include:

_Canon, a business that profits from releasing new products, is reportedly working on more new products [CR1]

35L II is a certainty: Canon uses the terms '35', 'L', and 'II' in the same interview [CR2]

Mysterious 14-24L informant turns out to be a sadistic Nikon employee with no credible Canon intel whatsoever [CR3]

Sigma writes a love letter to photographers, asking, 'When will you love us back to the point where we can overcharge you as much as Canon does?' [CR0]

B+W admits UV Filters were invented solely because that dipsh#& Klaus forgot to polarize a batch of CPLs in 1949 [CR1]

Citing years of neglect, EOS-M formally sues Canon for parental negligence: "All we wanted were a few lenses, but they just gave us this [email protected]#$ty EF adapter..." [CR2]

Exclusive Scoop: 5D Mark IV to cost more than 5D Mark III [CR9]
_
- A


----------



## captainkanji (Jul 28, 2014)

I guess 2015 is the "Year of the Lens" ;D I'd totally be interested in a new 135L with IS. A new 50L would be too expensive for me though. Anything above $1300 would feel like passing a kidney stone.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 28, 2014)

Why not produce a 50L which is the 50 many photographers wanted as a robust, high quality L lens which is a razor sharp f1.4, and keep the current 50L as a specialist 'art' or portrait lens. 

It's annoying that those of us who like the 'standard' 50/1.4 have to put up with such a flimsy, cheap plastic lens, with appalling manual focus, no full USM, WS etc. 

Where would this leave the rumoured 50/2 or 50/1.8 IS ? Well maybe that lens is going to replace the current 50/1.8 as the cheapest prime that is very popular as a first lens to compliment the kit zoom.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 28, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> Why not produce a 50L which is the 50 many photographers wanted as a robust, high quality L lens which is a razor sharp f1.4, and keep the current 50L as a specialist 'art' or portrait lens.
> 
> It's annoying that those of us who like the 'standard' 50/1.4 have to put up with such a flimsy, cheap plastic lens, with appalling manual focus, no full USM, WS etc.
> 
> Where would this leave the rumoured 50/2 or 50/1.8 IS ? Well maybe that lens is going to replace the current 50/1.8 as the cheapest prime that is very popular as a first lens to compliment the kit zoom.



The topic of whether the new non-L 50 IS will be the base-level or the mid-level has been heavily speculated already in these forums. 

Personally, I think it will be mid-grade and replace the 50 F/1.4 (old-)USM. I just can't see the nifty fifty being retired -- it holds a unique price point and serves a common need as a photographer's first prime.

_But_ there are those that would correctly argue that all of the non-L IS USM refreshes to date (24/28/35) have replaced the cheapest _non-USM_ lenses so far.

Whatever line it replaces, that new lens will sell like hotcakes. It will be sharper than the 50L (heck the 20 year old 50 F/1.4 is already sharper today at some apertures), lighter, have IS, have true internal focusing (without the front element sliding inside the housing), and have proper modern USM. The only thing it won't have is weather-sealing and the widest possible aperture. But even at F/2, I'm probably buying that lens.

- A


----------



## l_d_allan (Jul 28, 2014)

zlatko said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > I'm hoping for a 50mm with IS, equivalent quality to the 35 f/2 IS !
> ...


For me, the 50mm FL would be too close to my beautiful 35mm f2 IS. I'd have a LOT more interest in an EF 85mm f2 IS (non L and priority on optical formula for fast focus). It should be "future proof" to have "buckets of resolution, acutance, MFT10, MTF50, MFT90, micro-contrast, color tonality" to nicely "feed" a 40 mpx full frame sensor with 14 EV of DR ... maybe 16 EV with an improvement over MagicLantern's Dual-ISO, but that's a different issue related to the sensor and body.


----------



## antonioleandro (Jul 28, 2014)

All I wish lenswise is that Canon would produce a 14-24mm (or better, a 12-24mm or, even better a 10-24mm) and announce if they will (or will not) produce a new 100-400mm.

I think that Canon´s new 50mm could be a behemoth 50mm f/1.4L just to compete with Zeiss or Sigma, but I would like to see a new 50mm f/1.2L or 50mm f/1.0L just for bragging rights.

[]´s
Leandro


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 28, 2014)

antonioleandro said:


> All I wish lenswise is that Canon would produce a 14-24mm (or better, a 12-24mm or, even better a 10-24mm) and announce if they will (or will not) produce a new 100-400mm.
> 
> I think that Canon´s new 50mm could be a behemoth 50mm f/1.4L just to compete with Zeiss or Sigma, but I would like to see a new 50mm f/1.2L or 50mm f/1.0L just for bragging rights.
> 
> ...


I ran (what I thought to be) an interesting poll on the nature of the 14-24 interest in this forum. I asked if people had a choice of the sharpness of Nikon's 14-24 or the focal length of Nikon's 14-24 -- and you could only have one -- what would you choose? 

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20915.15;viewresults
(See the question for how I phrased it, the specifics do matter.)

75% of respondents said they just wanted a sharper ultrawide than their current 16-35/17-40 options.

25% stuck to their guns that they'd accept the current (lack of) sharpness from their 16-35 lenses applied to the wider 14mm FL.

Keep in mind this was run before the very nice 16-35 F/4L IS was released. But I find it fascinating that (with this limited sample size), the majority of people clamoring for a 14-24 just want a sharper ultrawide. But, based on your comments, I have to assume you'd want the focal length over the sharpness (if you had to choose).

- A


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 29, 2014)

rs said:


> scottkinfw said:
> 
> 
> > I'd still like to see them best Nikon's 12-24.
> ...



Good catch.

I have to say, you might just want to go and get the Nikon 14-24 if you want the Nikon 14-24.
Canon's 14mm prime is competitive compared to the Nikon Zoom, and Canon seems fairly set on the 16-35 zoom range. The Nikon 14-24 is already cheaper than the Canon prime as well, and if you're going to get both the prime and zoom from Canon it would probably cost just as much as the zoom lens and a cheap D600 from Nikon.


----------



## bellorusso (Jul 29, 2014)

It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft. Canon is too conservative but it doesn't mean that the market isn't living while Canon is sleeping on its throne.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 29, 2014)

I should also note that the 90mm TS is not an "L" lens.
I'm really hoping for a 135mm tilt shift, I already tried to buy the 90mm last winter and supposedly the dealer ordered one but I haven't heard from them since.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 29, 2014)

bellorusso said:


> It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft.



Oh...flashy, overpriced and useless versus dependable, reliable and built to get the job done?


----------



## scottburgess (Jul 29, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told to expect new Canon L primes, but none will be announced in 2014.


So much for the "year of the lens" bullshit. Once again the marketing hype has wound everyone up, but the package in the mail is empty.



> The second is a new 50L in late 2015. The new lens is said to be a lot smaller and lighter, perhaps a drop to f/1.4?


Much smaller than its predecessor, and a 50L, hmmm.... perhaps the oldest lens in the lineup, the 50mm f/2.5 Macro (released 1987), is about to meet its maker. That 50mm lens could be made noticeably more compact near its current aperture. And it would be sensible to upgrade that to an L series lens, much as with the 100L Macro, as it then could command a higher price. That would heat up profits on it, too, which are probably currently tepid. In addition, it might become an f/2.8, probably would get better autofocus, and probably would focus to life-size without an accessory. It is a lens replacement that would be best released about the same time as a new advanced amateur camera. It's something to think about, anyway.

Of course, the 50mm f/1.8 II (1990) and 50mm f/1.4 (1993) are also moldy, and the latter has significant competitive pressures that also favor an upgrade to L series status. So we shall see.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 29, 2014)

I know what prime I want. :


----------



## scottburgess (Jul 29, 2014)

Perhaps the new 50mm lens has already been released! It came out in Q1 2014, just like the article says. It's just not available to slobs like us! 

Rumor also has it that peace has swept the globe, Apple's new iPhone 6 will triple everyone's standard of living, and blisters are the quick road to a good afterlife.


----------



## can0nfan2379 (Jul 29, 2014)

I'd like a 50L 1.2 II without focus shift, would totally buy that with no second thoughts.


----------



## PhotoCat (Jul 29, 2014)

I hope the non-L 85/2.0 IS is still coming this year! :


----------



## antonioleandro (Jul 29, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> antonioleandro said:
> 
> 
> > All I wish lenswise is that Canon would produce a 14-24mm (or better, a 12-24mm or, even better a 10-24mm) and announce if they will (or will not) produce a new 100-400mm.
> ...



If I had to choose, I would choose focal length. I could even choose an extremely-wide-wide-angle fixed lens (for example, a rectilinear 10mm f/4L) over a less-wide zoom lens.

I have longed for the Canon 14mm f/2.8L II (too expensive) for years, but as I could not justify expending so much money on a lens (I am not a professional photographer, just an amateur), I bought the 17-40mm f/4L (which made me extremely happy for years) and recently, I bought the Sigma 12-24mm, which gave me an entirely new perspective. Since the 16-35mm f/4L IS was released, I am thinking about getting one to replace the 17-40mm, but I will wait until next year to see if Canon releases a wider lens.


----------



## Etienne (Jul 29, 2014)

PhotoCat said:


> I hope the non-L 85/2.0 IS is still coming this year! :



I'll take one of those too!


----------



## antonioleandro (Jul 29, 2014)

preppyak said:


> 2014 is the Yeah of the Lens!*
> 
> 
> *disclaimer: may actually be next year
> ...



Could you explain me how it confirms the 100-400?


----------



## tron (Jul 29, 2014)

Viggo said:


> A new 50 L that's "a lot smaller" ?? Makes no sense whatsoever ..


Maybe it will be a 50mm 1.8L IS with the size of 50mm 1.4 and the price of 50 1.2L ;D ;D ;D


----------



## chromophore (Jul 29, 2014)

Seeing as how Sigma already released a killer 50/1.4 at an extremely competitive price, I don't see how Canon could compete given that their latest offerings show that all they really care about are slow-aperture IS zooms at exorbitant prices. The idea that Canon will release something faster than f/2, patent filings notwithstanding, is not exactly something I have a lot of confidence in.

Canon simply does not care about high-quality fast-aperture primes for photographers. These days, it is all about cinema lenses and cheap consumer-level zooms they can crank out. Everyone keeps holding on...crossing fingers, hopeful that next year will be the "year of the lens." Again, just LOOK at what Sigma made. They have nowhere near the kind of optical expertise or production capability that Canon has, and they made an AF 50mm f/1.4 lens with corner sharpness that is closer to a $3500 manual-focus Zeiss than it is to ANY other such design on the market today. And then they priced it under $1000. I have no particular love for Sigma, mind you (their QC and customer service leave much to be desired). But this is just embarrassing.

Canon used to be a company that pushed the frontiers of optical design. They pioneered many lens technologies that we take for granted today, such as USM AF; fluorite elements; diffractive optics; image stabilization; all-electronic lens-body communication in the EF mount; and ultra-fast apertures of f/1.0 and f/1.2 that still have no equal today. I find it maddening that this is the same company that now seems to cr*p out a new EF-S 18-135mm cheapo zoom every six months, or produces some insane $35k cinema lens that only movie studios will buy, and leaves everyone else in the cold because we aren't their bread and butter.


----------



## anthonyd (Jul 29, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> bellorusso said:
> 
> 
> > It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft.
> ...



That's funny, it almost sounded like you called Microsoft dependable and reliable.


----------



## HarryWintergreen (Jul 29, 2014)

Canon enthusiasts wishing for certain lenses and looking forward to a “year of the lens”, Canon senior management yawning and squinting to their favorite ideas not realizing that these are covered with dust.


----------



## KAS (Jul 29, 2014)

chromophore said:


> ...I don't see how Canon could compete given that their latest offerings show that all they really care about are slow-aperture IS zooms at exorbitant prices....



Yes you do. 



chromophore said:


> Canon pioneered many lens technologies that we take for granted today, such as USM AF; fluorite elements; diffractive optics; image stabilization; all-electronic lens-body communication in the EF mount; and ultra-fast apertures of f/1.0 and f/1.2 *that still have no equal today*.


----------



## EchoLocation (Jul 29, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> bellorusso said:
> 
> 
> > It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft.
> ...


1. how is Sony flashy? i don't see how an a7 or a a6000 is flashy(a99 maybe more so)
2. how are the a7's or NEX's overpriced? the NEX series are very affordable and offer great features, at a much cheaper price than the EOS-M(outside of firesale prices.) The a7's are very affordable compared to other full frame options on the market. I bought my a7 at launch with a kit lens for under 2000 bucks(in China.) 
3. my a7 isn't useless at all. I don't really understand how such an awesome camera can be dismissed so quickly as useless. My camera is small, easy to use, has lots of dials to change settings, programmable buttons, I love the EVF, and the image quality is superb. None of these aspects seem useless to me.

I do somewhat agree with the Apple Microsoft analogy, and I am actually an Apple hater(the only apple item I own is a 6 year old ipod,) however in this instance, I am greatly enjoying the Apple(Sony) offering while I am waiting optimistically that someday Microsoft(Canon) will copy their new innovations and make something a little more innovative and fresh.


----------



## Omni Images (Jul 29, 2014)

I'm turning blue here holding my breath waiting for a new version of the 400 F5.6 ... with some up grades, IS and closer focusing like the 300 F4.0 has ...
Sick of hearing about such new lenses being re-worked after a year or so, yet this lens was launched in 1993 !
The saying if it's not broke don't fix it comes to mind ... BUT... Canon could improve it now in leaps and bounds.

So what's going on Canon ?
Stop wasting time on short zooms .. the market is flooded with them. 
Get back to basics with these PRIMES


----------



## can0nfan2379 (Jul 29, 2014)

chromophore said:


> Seeing as how Sigma already released a killer 50/1.4 at an extremely competitive price, I don't see how Canon could compete given that their latest offerings show that all they really care about are slow-aperture IS zooms at exorbitant prices. The idea that Canon will release something faster than f/2, patent filings notwithstanding, is not exactly something I have a lot of confidence in.
> 
> Canon simply does not care about high-quality fast-aperture primes for photographers. These days, it is all about cinema lenses and cheap consumer-level zooms they can crank out. Everyone keeps holding on...crossing fingers, hopeful that next year will be the "year of the lens." Again, just LOOK at what Sigma made. They have nowhere near the kind of optical expertise or production capability that Canon has, and they made an AF 50mm f/1.4 lens with corner sharpness that is closer to a $3500 manual-focus Zeiss than it is to ANY other such design on the market today. And then they priced it under $1000. I have no particular love for Sigma, mind you (their QC and customer service leave much to be desired). But this is just embarrassing.
> 
> Canon used to be a company that pushed the frontiers of optical design. They pioneered many lens technologies that we take for granted today, such as USM AF; fluorite elements; diffractive optics; image stabilization; all-electronic lens-body communication in the EF mount; and ultra-fast apertures of f/1.0 and f/1.2 that still have no equal today. I find it maddening that this is the same company that now seems to cr*p out a new EF-S 18-135mm cheapo zoom every six months, or produces some insane $35k cinema lens that only movie studios will buy, and leaves everyone else in the cold because we aren't their bread and butter.



I agree the release of L series lenses has been a little stagnant since the massive super tele overhaul and the 24-70II. I'm hoping for more fast lens offerings (ie. 135 1.8L IS, 85 1.2L III, 35 1.4L II etc. )


----------



## jd7 (Jul 29, 2014)

Etienne said:


> PhotoCat said:
> 
> 
> > I hope the non-L 85/2.0 IS is still coming this year! :
> ...



An 85 IS sounds great, but I really hope it's faster than f/2!

A 135 IS would be interesting too.


----------



## TeT (Jul 29, 2014)

85 wont come until after Sigma's offering.... 

I expect the 35 II & the 50 II to wipe Sigmas eye on their comparable offerings. If it doesn't, will be very dissapointed.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 29, 2014)

TeT said:


> 85 wont come until after Sigma's offering....
> 
> I expect the 35 II & the 50 II to wipe Sigmas eye on their comparable offerings. If it doesn't, will be very dissapointed.



It depends on what you want. I'm not convinced Canon can just burp out a 35L II or new 50L that handily beats Sigma on the _resolution_ side of things -- Sigma has been formidable on that front. 

But on draw, weather sealing, color, etc. Canon historically does well here. We'll see. Competition in the lens world is always a good thing.

- A


----------



## TeT (Jul 29, 2014)

I see the 24 70 4 IS and the 16 35 4 IS as better options for the 24 105 & 17 40 users without killing 2 wildly popular high selling basic L lenses in the 24 105 & 17 40.

They have not had opportunity to tackle faster 2.8 & wider lenses without jamming the market with all of them at once.

Makes sense for them to wait until Sigma is done with their releases. Canon with the 35 & 50 mark II has a real opportunity to totally deflate Sigmas recent ascention which is based partly on nothing else new out there (OTIS is a higher realm of quality)

Let me clarify; Sigmas lenses are great, but real world comparisons don't show them to be cadillacs to kias that a few loud and wildly optimistic individuals are claiming


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 29, 2014)

chromophore said:


> Seeing as how Sigma already released a killer 50/1.4 at an extremely competitive price, I don't see how Canon could compete given that their latest offerings show that all they really care about are slow-aperture IS zooms at exorbitant prices. The idea that Canon will release something faster than f/2, patent filings notwithstanding, is not exactly something I have a lot of confidence in.
> 
> Canon simply does not care about high-quality fast-aperture primes for photographers. These days, it is all about cinema lenses and cheap consumer-level zooms they can crank out. Everyone keeps holding on...crossing fingers, hopeful that next year will be the "year of the lens." Again, just LOOK at what Sigma made. They have nowhere near the kind of optical expertise or production capability that Canon has, and they made an AF 50mm f/1.4 lens with corner sharpness that is closer to a $3500 manual-focus Zeiss than it is to ANY other such design on the market today. And then they priced it under $1000. I have no particular love for Sigma, mind you (their QC and customer service leave much to be desired). But this is just embarrassing.
> 
> Canon used to be a company that pushed the frontiers of optical design. They pioneered many lens technologies that we take for granted today, such as USM AF; fluorite elements; diffractive optics; image stabilization; all-electronic lens-body communication in the EF mount; and ultra-fast apertures of f/1.0 and f/1.2 that still have no equal today. I find it maddening that this is the same company that now seems to cr*p out a new EF-S 18-135mm cheapo zoom every six months, or produces some insane $35k cinema lens that only movie studios will buy, and leaves everyone else in the cold because we aren't their bread and butter.



The Sigma 50A came out this year. It will take years for Canon to respond with something in kind unless they knew Zeiss and Sigma were playing with retrofocus designs years ago.

The 16-35 f/4 IS is a great lens and addresses a lot of concerns that people had in Canon's ability to design sharp ultrawide zooms. The new 10-18 was a surprise that many were not expecting, and the ef-m 55-200 shows that Canon has not abandoned that platform. The 24-70II sets the benchmark that the fast L primes will have to beat, and that IQ bar is high. And like or not, Canon's releases of the 24, 28 and 35 IS lenses has shown that Canon's days of producing non-L primes without IS is over. 

I'm hoping the 50 IS will be a small compact f/1.4 gaussian design that slots between the existing f/1.4 and Sigma's 50A, and I'm hoping that the 50L II will be a retrofocus design that competes against the 50A and the Otus. Releasing the 100-400L II this year will make it look a lot better than what has been released to date, and anything else will be gravy. I'm looking forward to the 35L II and the 100-400 II too, but I'm in no rush. Plus my wallet can't handle it all at once anyway...


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 29, 2014)

TeT said:


> I see the 24 70 4 IS and the 16 35 4 IS as better options for the 24 105 & 17 40 users without killing 2 wildly popular high selling basic L lenses in the 24 105 & 17 40.
> 
> They have not had opportunity to tackle faster 2.8 & wider lenses without jamming the market with all of them at once.
> 
> ...



There is much more to Sigma's recent success in the quality of their products than in their go-to-market timing. Sigma is doing well because it is putting out some fine lenses for terrific prices. And on the data side of things, specifically in resolution, Sigma is _handily beating_ Canon, not just keeping up. The 35 and 50 Art are the sharpest AF lenses in their respective focal lengths, and by a comfortable margin.

I haven't shot either of the Sigma Art primes, but many trusted reviewers hold both of those lenses in very high regard. But a lens is more than how sharp it is. So I could see 'real world' reviews possibly not seeing as large a gap between Canon and Sigma in these focal lengths.

Canon must be working on some next generation L-series standard primes (24/35/50/85) that are intended for very large MP sensors. I think we are _all_ waiting for those.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 29, 2014)

Random Orbits said:


> I'm hoping the 50 IS will be a small compact f/1.4 gaussian design that slots between the existing f/1.4 and Sigma's 50A, and I'm hoping that the 50L II will be a retrofocus design that competes against the 50A and the Otus.



+1

Agree on both fronts. Save the 'standard zoom sized' primes for the pros shooting portraiture and weddings and such -- I want that non-L 50 IS to stay small like the Canon 50 F/1.4, even if that means it will be a step behind w.r.t. resolution. 

And we know Canon can do it! The non-L 35mm F/2 IS is 66% of the length and 50% of the weight of the Sigma 35 Art, _yet it is nearly as sharp_. Sure, you lose a stop of max aperture, but for 3 stops of IS, I'll take it. 

That same value proposition in a 50 IS: IS + shorter + lighter + nearly as fast + nearly as sharp would be gold for me.

- A


----------



## PhotoCat (Jul 29, 2014)

jd7 said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > PhotoCat said:
> ...



An 85 f2.0 IS in hand is worth two 85 f1.4 IS in 2015 LOL!


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 29, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> There is much more to Sigma's recent success in the quality of their products than in their go-to-market timing. Sigma is doing well because it is putting out some fine lenses for terrific prices. And on the data side of things, specifically in resolution, Sigma is _handily beating_ Canon, not just keeping up. The 35 and 50 Art are the sharpest AF lenses in their respective focal lengths, and by a comfortable margin.
> 
> I haven't shot either of the Sigma Art primes, but many trusted reviewers hold both of those lenses in very high regard. But a lens is more than how sharp it is. So I could see 'real world' reviews possibly not seeing as large a gap between Canon and Sigma in these focal lengths.
> 
> ...



Don't forget some other Sigma Global Vision releases: 30 f/1.4, 18-35 f/1.8, 120-300 f/2.8 and 24-105 f/4. Some like the 35A, 50A and 18-35A are world class. The 30A and the 12-300S offer slight improvements compared to their predecessors but aren't that much better. And then there is the 24-105, which may offer slight improvements compared to Canon's 24-105 but also streets at a higher price.


----------



## vscd (Jul 29, 2014)

In my point of view a good 50 1.4L IS would be a great lense in the lineup or maybe a 1.8L IS. The 1.2L could exist for artistic purposes and the plastic 50mm 1.8 II is still a cheap entrypoint. The 50mm 1.4 would be replaced.

For me it's far more important to get a *smaller* fast standard-prime. I could easily skip one or two lines of MTF... the pixelpeeping with an Zeiss OTUS is fantastic, but I don't want to carry 2 pounds of 12 lenses in 10 groups. 

I don't need a lense longer than a 100mm L Makro for daily use... 

Better a 50mm, sharp wide open @f1.8 or f2 than a 1.2/1.4, which is usable after stepping 2 stops down. That's the reason why I like the 40mm STM. It's just f2.8 which is sad for separating objects, but those f2.8 are just awesome and useable. A good lense is a lense you're willing to carry with you.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 29, 2014)

vscd said:


> That's the reason why I like the 40mm STM. It's just f2.8 which is sad for separating objects, but those f2.8 are just awesome and useable. A good lense is a lense you're willing to carry with you.



Agree in principle, but the 40mm pancake's much-slower-than-USM focusing speed is a dealbreaker for me. That lens sits in the cabinet while I shoot with the venerable Canon 50 f/1.4. Even with the 50 F/1.4's occasionally hunting AF, I miss fewer shots with that one than I do with the pancake.

Now, for a walkaround lens _shooting non-moving subjects_, the 40mm pancake is a peach of a lens. Sharp right out of the gate at max aperture, and you can't beat the size and weight.

- A


----------



## anthonyd (Jul 29, 2014)

Guys, you all misunderstood. This is the year of the lens. That means that they will release just one lens this year, that's it! ;D


----------



## Haydn1971 (Jul 29, 2014)

I suspect people are forgetting that Canon are in the business of lens manufacturing to make money, not to satisfy photographers economic needs. 

The facts are as I see them, both Sigma & Nikon now have super duper high price 50(58)mm f1.4 lenses for £800 and £1500 respectively, both very likely to be selling at a price that makes a tidy return for both Sigma and Nikon, let's not even talk about the Otus range ! So, Canon has four 50mm lenses, f1.2, f1.4, f1.8 & f2.5 Macro, the last three are all cheap, long in the tooth, possibly getting difficult to manufacture, likely to have limited return on manufacturing costs and are flawed in numerous ways. Whip out a new design, add a healthy 100-200% margin above the current margin, bingo, great up to date lenses, that photographers will fall over themselves to buy, offer a premium f1.4 in the mold of the 24mm f1.4 II L, sell for about 75% of the 24mm, add a second 50mm f2.0 IS, in the mold of the 35mm f2.0, sell for a similar price as the 35mm.... But what about the f1.2 ? It's prime for pushing into towards the Otus range, give it AF that works to perfection, deal with the flaws of the current lens, sell for £2k - bingo, profits go up on the 50mm range. Photogs on here will hate the extra costs, though :-/


----------



## Haydn1971 (Jul 29, 2014)

Also, the 40mm f2.8 is the new 50mm f1.8 - the first prime


----------



## EOBeav (Jul 29, 2014)

Since the 50 f/1.4 replacement is rumored to be the f/1.8 mkIII IS, it's entirely plausible that the new 50L will be a 50 f/1.4 mkII IS.


----------



## scottburgess (Jul 29, 2014)

Haydn1971 said:


> I suspect people are forgetting that Canon are in the business of lens manufacturing to make money, not to satisfy photographers economic needs.
> 
> The facts are as I see them, both Sigma & Nikon now have super duper high price 50(58)mm f1.4 lenses for £800 and £1500 respectively, both very likely to be selling at a price that makes a tidy return for both Sigma and Nikon, let's not even talk about the Otus range ! So, Canon has four 50mm lenses...



Spot on, Haydn! Except that one can argue that there are more than four lenses in roughly this focal length... The 40mm you mentioned, the 45mm TS-E, and the 60mm macro (APS-C only). 

Still your point that Canon will push new lenses out _when it is to their financial advantage to do so_ is well considered. Are they waiting for greater economic recovery/certainty? Minimizing their plant investments? Considering moving some manufacturing back to Japan? There is a lot more to think about from a business perspective than "let's make some cool lenses." On the other hand, if they're waiting on external conditions it might be good for them to stop overpromising.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 29, 2014)

EOBeav said:


> Since the 50 f/1.4 replacement is rumored to be the f/1.8 mkIII IS, it's entirely plausible that the new 50L will be a 50 f/1.4 mkII IS.



If they followed decades of nomenclature that would make an EF 50mm f/1.8 IS USM, no MkIII, nor, in time, would it become a MkI or a C for _"classic"_. And an EF 50mm f/1.4L IS USM, also not a MkII, hopefully this would mean people never call the current EF 50mm f/1.4 USM a MkI or a _"classic"_, I live in hope.

My favourite is the 1D, rather confusingly now often referred to as a 1Dc, meaning _"classic"_ but changing its value from $100-200 to around $8,000-10,000, but what's in a name


----------



## Dekaner (Jul 29, 2014)

I wonder if they considered the 800mm in this equation. I would have expected the mark II to come out sooner rather than later.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 30, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> I'd love it if they updated the 28–135 to be a 24–135, to be the full-frame equivalent for the 15–85.


Thing is, they'd have to sunset the 24-105 lens at that point...which is something they seem hesitant to do. I certainly can't see them even imagining starting a new, cheap kit lens product line when they have a successful one already, and backlogs on lenses that need updates.

Likewise for anything like the 28-200/28-300. Just too hard to get it down to a reasonable price that people will buy it, knowing it inherently has IQ and performance trade-offs


----------



## chromophore (Jul 30, 2014)

Haydn1971 said:


> I suspect people are forgetting that Canon are in the business of lens manufacturing to make money, not to satisfy photographers economic needs.



Yes, and so are Canon's competitors. So how does that explain the fact that Sigma released a 50/1.4 under $1000 that is better than any Canon 50mm prime out there? I can assure you that Sigma wants to make money as much as Canon does. What's Canon's excuse for not offering a high quality fast aperture 50mm prime--something that is arguably the foundation for any 135 format system?

The current 50mm lineup is no more or less difficult to manufacture now than they were when they were designed. Production comes and goes in batches; when they want to adjust their manufacturing processes for a different optical design, it is not as if they are reinventing the entire lens from the drawing board. All of these lenses have been out so long they have long since recouped the development overhead and then some.

The bottom line is that Canon makes crappy 50mm primes. There is no escaping that. They do not satisfy the basic criteria of reasonable price, quality construction, fast aperture, and good sharpness. No, I am not demanding that they make an AF version of the Otus 55/1.4 and sell it for $25. I am saying that their existing 50mm lineup has been lacking for years, and I claim this is in large part due to their apparent interest these past several years in making cheap consumer zooms or disproportionately expensive L zooms and superteles. And so we have competitors like Sigma swooping in and eating their lunch.

Again, that's *SIGMA* we are talking about here. This the same lens company that used to make knockoff cr*p designs. If even THEY can design something like the 50/1.4 Art, then Canon has ZERO excuse not to do even better AND for less. Lens design is still difficult these days, but it is a lot more computer- and data-driven than it was even back when the 50/1.2L was designed. Had Canon done its homework in lens R&D, they wouldn't need years to make a competing product.

Oh, and for those of you fantasizing about an f/1.4 IS design--it's not going to happen. We will be insanely fortunate to just get ANY new f/1.4 design from Canon these days, much less one with IS. Canon's lens design philosophy these days is to slap IS on everything, reduce the aperture diameter, and call it a wash when it clearly isn't. They do this because it's cheaper to throw in IS than to design and manufacture for the much tighter tolerances of an extra few stops of light. It's easier and more profitable for Canon to make a lens that is sharp starting at f/4 rather than design a f/2 lens that is soft in the corners.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 30, 2014)

chromophore said:


> What's Canon's excuse for not offering a high quality fast aperture 50mm prime--something that is arguably the foundation for any 135 format system?



They aren't very useful, and therefore don't sell very well?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 30, 2014)

chromophore said:


> What's Canon's excuse for not offering a high quality fast aperture 50mm prime--something that is arguably the foundation for any 135 format system?



Well if you discount the high quality fast aperture they do make, and I am not sure why you would, then we could start discussing your other _"arguable point" _, the 50mm lens has not been the basis of any 135 format system for decades, literally decades. Recent comments suggest that only 4% to 5% of DSLR purchasers actually buy any other lens than the slow midrange zoom that came in the kit. So, we have reduced the people interested in a 50mm lens to considerably less than 5% of DSLR owners, Canon already make four 50mm lenses that all have good product differentiation and they know exactly how many of each they sell, most of those actual potential purchasers are happy with one of the four offerings Canon already make, if not they have the choice of several other manufacturers also at different price and specification points. 

Where is the upside in making a new 50? At least a 50 f2 IS fits in with their current prime series and offers yet another feature set to differentiate it from the competition. Time and money is better spent on more interesting lenses with _mass appeal_, to that <5% of owners, like a 100-400 etc etc.


----------



## e17paul (Jul 30, 2014)

preppyak said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > I'd love it if they updated the 28–135 to be a 24–135, to be the full-frame equivalent for the 15–85.
> ...



A replacement for the 28-135 will become important as full frame reaches the Rebel price range. This won't happen soon, but probably in 5 years, certainly before 10. I'm predicting an STM version, but not for a few years yet.


----------



## dgatwood (Jul 30, 2014)

preppyak said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > I'd love it if they updated the 28–135 to be a 24–135, to be the full-frame equivalent for the 15–85.
> ...



Not necessarily. The 28–135 isn't an L lens, and a 24–135 probably wouldn't be, either.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Aug 13, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > dgatwood said:
> ...


Sorry, I couldn't resist... just got this gift from my brother and sister-in-law


----------



## vscd (Aug 16, 2014)

Nice Try... there is no EF-S L-Lense


----------



## Antono Refa (Aug 16, 2014)

chromophore said:


> Haydn1971 said:
> 
> 
> > I suspect people are forgetting that Canon are in the business of lens manufacturing to make money, not to satisfy photographers economic needs.
> ...



The Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 is a crappy 50mm prime? It's made for purpose portrait lens, just like the 85mm f/1.2 II, but it isn't crap.

As for general purpose fast 50mm prime, the Otus 55mm f/1.4, the Nikon 58mm f/1.4, and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 are all less than a year old.

Before that, none of the manufacturers made great fast 50mm primes. My impression is the Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4 G is better than Canon's 50mm f/1.4, then the former is 6 years old digital era lens, and the later is a 20 years old film era lens.

I agree it's time Canon refreshed it's time Canon released new 50mm primes, but things aren't as bad as you present them.


----------



## Andrew Davies Photography (Aug 16, 2014)

There seems to be some odd concensus that Canon have not made anything new for years and are neglecting primes.

I have recently purchased both the 24 2.8 IS and the 35 F2 IS both new lenses and both are fantastic, the 35 F2 IS has replaced my 24-70 L and walks all over my 50mm 1.2L which is now sold.

It logically follows that it would be easy enough using those new designs to bring in a 50 1.8 IS with the build quality and optical quality of the 35 F2 IS which would then be on a par with the Sigma.

I am also hoping more for an 85 1.8 IS to replace my 85 1.8 which although great needs an update !

www.andrew-davies.com


----------



## Hector1970 (Aug 16, 2014)

I always find these debates interesting but also people spend too much time saying certain lens are crappy. I think people often blame equipment before themselves. A good photograph is 90% creativity and 10% equipment. I'd say in a blind test 99% of Canon shooters couldn't tell a photo taken from an Otus from a 50mm 1.4.
People should push to the limit what they have before moving to more expensive equipment.
I have the 85 1.2 . This lens is amazing at times. It's not amazing all the time because the photographer isn't precise enough with their technique. Similarily the 50 1.2 is a great lens in the right hands. It's a specialist portrait lens. I doubt they had walking around in mind. In a studio with lights and stopped down a bit those two lens are too sharp. You can see every pore, every blemish and piece of food stuck in their teeth.
It's scary at times. I have to jump past photoshop to portrait professional to not shock the person in the photo.
More practice with your existing prime is my advice. Work on your creativity and technique and worry less about the lens performance. It's good enough.
Ps my canon 1.4 isn't the sharpest lens in the world but it takes a lovely photo (as long as you don't pixel peep).
Perfectly fine for flickr or Facebook and printing to A4


----------



## mackguyver (Aug 16, 2014)

Viggo said:


> A new 50 L that's "a lot smaller" ?? Makes no sense whatsoever ..


Makes, sense, that's just like the Otus. Oh wait.


----------



## vscd (Aug 18, 2014)

> I doubt they had walking around in mind. In a studio with lights and stopped down a bit those two lens are too sharp



Yepp, and there you mark the problem by yourself. Why do you want to stop down a f1.2 lens? Of course it's not clever to use the f1.2 on portraits in short distances, but the f1.4 is even better @f1.4...

The weathersealing and a little bit brighter viewfinder makes not a grand on money. On the other side, the 85 1.2L is totally useable @f1.2...


----------



## Ruined (Aug 21, 2014)

chromophore said:


> So how does that explain the fact that Sigma released a 50/1.4 under $1000 that is better than any Canon 50mm prime out there? ... The bottom line is that Canon makes crappy 50mm primes. There is no escaping that.



Because Canon's first priority is professionals who depend their livelihood on the unmatched portrait performance of the 50mm f/1.2L. While enthusiasts who put test chart performance as first priority are marketed towards also, they are not Canon's first priority. So, I would recommend simply buying the Sigma and being happy with it if it meets your needs. There is not a single 50mm lens I would use in place of the Canon 50mm f/1.2L, and the only lens that offers similar quality of portrait results is the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II - but that is a different focal length and it is good to own both if portraits are a priority as each lens has its set of advantages & disadvantages plus different focal lengths.

Also, have you missed the mountain of posts where people cannot get the Sigma 50mm to autofocus even remotely close to correctly on outer focus points (despite center point working fine)? That does not sound too great to me.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 21, 2014)

Ruined said:


> chromophore said:
> 
> 
> > So how does that explain the fact that Sigma released a 50/1.4 under $1000 that is better than any Canon 50mm prime out there? ... The bottom line is that Canon makes crappy 50mm primes. There is no escaping that.
> ...



As time goes on I'm having more respect for the 50 f1.4. It's a lens that is capable of producing images that boast a very expensive signature, even at f1.6 if you get the subject, distance and lighting right. Certainly not 'crappy', unless of course, you happen to be a 'crappy' photographer, then maybe an Otus is 'crappy' too.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 22, 2014)

I have always liked my 50 f1.4, it is a great little lens, it works well at wide apertures and is incredibly sharp when you stop it down to f5.6 or f8, AF is good and reliable it takes no space in the bag and is light and cheap. It is very good for stitched panos too.


----------



## mackguyver (Aug 22, 2014)

My 50 f/1.4 wasn't great until f/2, but at f/2 and above, it was an awesome lens. I would never have bought the 50L if it hadn't been for my love of the f/1.4.


----------

