# Canon Introduces New EF 50MM F/1.8 STM Lens



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 11, 2015)

```
<em>Compact and Lightweight EF Lens Features Stepping Motor (STM) Technology and is Ideal for First time DSLR Users as well as Advanced Amateur Photographers</em></p>
<p><strong>MELVILLE, N.Y., May 11, 2015</strong> – Canon U.S.A., a leader in digital imaging solutions, is proud to announce the new lightweight and compact Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM standard lens. Featuring a large maximum aperture of f/1.8, this single focal length lens (which has an effective focal length of 80mm when attached to an EOS camera with an APS-C sensor such as the EOS Rebel T6i) is ideal for creating portraits with beautiful, soft-blurred backgrounds. It’s also ideal for low-light photography and night scenes. Now incorporating Canon’s proprietary STM stepping motor technology, this new lens supports Canon’s EOS Movie Servo AF* (autofocus) function to provide smooth and quiet continuous AF during video recording, as well as when capturing still photos.</p>
<p>“Canon’s optical heritage of creating high-quality lenses is something we are very proud of ,” said Yuichi Ishizuka, president and COO of Canon U.S.A., Inc. “Regardless of skill level or budget, all photographers and videographers should have access to superb creative tools that enable them to capture not only beautiful images but images that tell the story of their lives. This new Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM lens, will provide photographers and videographers with outstanding images they will want to share for years to come.”</p>
<p><del></del><!--more--></p>
<p><strong>Sample Images</strong></p>

		<style type='text/css'>
			#gallery-1 {
				margin: auto;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-item {
				float: left;
				margin-top: 10px;
				text-align: center;
				width: 25%;
			}
			#gallery-1 img {
				border: 2px solid #cfcfcf;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-caption {
				margin-left: 0;
			}
			/* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */
		</style>
		<div id='gallery-1' class='gallery galleryid-20262 gallery-columns-4 gallery-size-thumbnail'><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon portrait'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-8-EOS-760D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259675.jpg'><img width="100" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-8-EOS-760D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259675-100x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="Canon EOS 760D | 1/250 | f/1.8 | ISO 100 | 50mm" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-7-EOS-750D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259674.jpg'><img width="150" height="100" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-7-EOS-750D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259674-150x100.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="Canon EOS 750D | 1/500 | f/1.8 | ISO 100 | 50mm" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-6-EOS-750D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259673.jpg'><img width="150" height="100" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-6-EOS-750D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259673-150x100.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="Canon EOS 750D | 1/1250 | f/2.2 | ISO 100 | 50mm" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon portrait'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-5-EOS-750D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259672.jpg'><img width="100" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-5-EOS-750D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259672-100x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="Canon EOS 750D | 1/500 | f/1.8 | ISO 100 | 50mm" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" /><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-4-EOS-750D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259671.jpg'><img width="150" height="100" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-4-EOS-750D-ISO100-med_tcm14-1259671-150x100.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="Canon EOS 750D | 1/1000 | f/2.5 | ISO 100 | 50mm" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-3-EOS-6D-ISO-800-med_tcm14-1259670.jpg'><img width="150" height="100" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-3-EOS-6D-ISO-800-med_tcm14-1259670-150x100.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="Canon EOS 6D | 1/250 | f/2.5 | ISO 800 | 50mm" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-2-EOS-6D-ISO-1600-med_tcm14-1259669.jpg'><img width="150" height="100" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-2-EOS-6D-ISO-1600-med_tcm14-1259669-150x100.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="Canon EOS 6D | 1/320 | f/1.8 | ISO 1600 | 50mm" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-1-EOS-6D-ISO-100-med_tcm14-1259668.jpg'><img width="150" height="100" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sample-Canon-Inc-1-EOS-6D-ISO-100-med_tcm14-1259668-150x100.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="Canon EOS 6D | 1/800 | f/2.2 | ISO 100 | 50mm" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" />
		</div>

<p> </p>
<p>The new Canon EF 50mm f/1.8mm STM lens is excellent for entry-level and advanced amateur photographers, as well as users looking to capture video. Featuring an improved exterior design, including a new focus ring placement, it provides photographers with the most compact Canon EF 50mm lens ever, at just 1.5 inches in length. In addition, this new lens uses a metal mount providing additional stability and ruggedness compared to its predecessor.</p>
<p>Composed of six elements in five groups, the new Canon EF 50mm f/1.8mm STM lens features an optimized lens placement and Super Spectra Coating (SSC), translating into less ghosting and flaring than the previous model, while at the same time helping to enhance light transmission and optimize color reproduction accuracy. The new lens features a seven blade circular aperture, improved from the predecessor’s five blade non-circular aperture, helping to deliver a more visually appealing blurring effect, and producing sharp images of subjects that truly stand out against beautiful, soft backgrounds. The minimum focusing distance for the lens has been shortened to 1.1 feet from 1.5 feet with a maximum magnification of 0.21x, allowing for more creative close-up photos and videos.</p>
<p><strong>Pricing and Availability

</strong>The new Canon EF 50mm f/1.8mm STM standard prime lens is scheduled to be available by the end of May for an estimated retail price of $125.99. For more information please visit <a class="bold_text underlink" href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_50mm_f_1_8_stm" target="_self">http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products…..</a></p>
<p><strong>MTF Comparison between EF 50mm f/1.8 II & EF 50mm f/1.8 STM</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/MTFcomparison.jpg"><img class="alignnone wp-image-20297 size-full" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/MTFcomparison.jpg" alt="MTFcomparison" width="466" height="237" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Standard Telephoto Prime Lens Specifications Summary</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Compact, lightweight, fixed focal length standard lens for EOS cameras</li>
<li>Large f/1.8 maximum aperture</li>
<li>80mm effective focal length when attached to EOS cameras with APS-C sensors</li>
<li>Canon STM gear type stepping motor technology provides quiet autofocusing to support Canon’s EOS Movie Servo AF function</li>
<li>Improved exterior design including new focus ring placement makes it the most compact Canon EF 50mm lens ever</li>
<li>New metal mount for stability and ruggedness</li>
<li>Super Spectra Coating for minimized ghosting and flaring</li>
<li>Circular seven blade aperture</li>
<li>14-inch minimum focusing distance</li>
<li>0.21x maximum magnification</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM $125: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1143786-REG/canon_0570c002_ef_50mm_f_1_8_stm.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA5018STM.html?kbid=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00X8MRBCW/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00X8MRBCW&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=VNB2NIVLZBSNT7XT" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>Canon ES-68 Lens Hood: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1143787-REG/canon_0575c001_es_68_lens_hood.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo $26.95</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CAES68.html?kbid=64393" target="_blank">Adorama $34.95</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00X8MS0JA/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00X8MS0JA&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=4QGK6XBRGDWCM5XN" target="_blank">Amazon $29.00</a></strong></p>
<p>You can also preorder a protective filter from Canon for the 49mm filter thread.</p>
<p><strong>Canon 49mm Protect Filter $29.95: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1143789-REG/canon_0577c001_49mm_protect_filter.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA49UVN.html?kbid=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00X8MSROS/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00X8MSROS&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=JIEMOVVYFR35XLCP">Canon 49mm Protect Filter</a><img src="http://ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=canorumo-20&l=as2&o=1&a=B00X8MSROS" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></p>

		<style type='text/css'>
			#gallery-2 {
				margin: auto;
			}
			#gallery-2 .gallery-item {
				float: left;
				margin-top: 10px;
				text-align: center;
				width: 25%;
			}
			#gallery-2 img {
				border: 2px solid #cfcfcf;
			}
			#gallery-2 .gallery-caption {
				margin-left: 0;
			}
			/* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */
		</style>
		<div id='gallery-2' class='gallery galleryid-20262 gallery-columns-4 gallery-size-thumbnail'><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493246.jpg'><img width="150" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493246-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="IMG_493246" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/1143786.jpg'><img width="150" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/1143786-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="1143786" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493249.jpg'><img width="150" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493249-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="IMG_493249" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493248.jpg'><img width="150" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493248-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="IMG_493248" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" /><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493247.jpg'><img width="150" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493247-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="IMG_493247" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/1143787.jpg'><img width="150" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/1143787-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="1143787" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493250.jpg'><img width="150" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/IMG_493250-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="IMG_493250" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/1143789.jpg'><img width="150" height="150" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/1143789-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail" alt="1143789" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" />
		</div>
```


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 11, 2015)

It sounds like a worthy successor to the Nifty 50. I'm even tempted to want one.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (May 11, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> It sounds like a worthy successor to the Nifty 50. I'm even tempted to want one.


Agree, I just hope it performs similarly to the 40mm f/2.8 lens and it will be in my bag. 
Hope it won't have the focus shift issues and wide open softness of the f/1.2L and f/1.4 versions.


----------



## deleteme (May 11, 2015)

Sounds like the simple, straightforward update everyone wanted.


----------



## rs (May 11, 2015)

MTF:







Old 50/1.8 MTF:


----------



## bluemoon (May 11, 2015)

rs said:


> MTF:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



that looks like the same lens with a minor tune up to me . . .

pierre


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 11, 2015)

rs said:


> MTF:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for the MTF comparison, I amended the post.


----------



## aceflibble (May 11, 2015)

Nice option to have, especially for those who do more video than stills. The MTF has me a little confused, though. I'd have expected a more obvious difference considering how old the previous version is. I suppose it makes sense for it to have barely changed optically, given it's at the same price point despite the STM and metal mount. Still, would have been nice to see a little more of an optical improvement, even if it's never going to be 1.4/1.2 standards.


----------



## Policar (May 11, 2015)

aceflibble said:


> Nice option to have, especially for those who do more video than stills. The MTF has me a little confused, though. I'd have expected a more obvious difference considering how old the previous version is. I suppose it makes sense for it to have barely changed optically, given it's at the same price point despite the STM and metal mount. Still, would have been nice to see a little more of an optical improvement, even if it's never going to be 1.4/1.2 standards.



The 50mm f1.8 was always optically superior to the 1.4/1.2, and that makes this Canon's best-performing 50mm at f1.8... It does appear to be the same ancient optical design, though. I'll buy it for the better AF and 7 blades, though.

Nikon's 50mm f1.8 G looks dramatically better wide open, but apparently has curvature of field or is at least reported to have poor corners stopped down, which this won't. Obviously I wanted a better lens, but this should be the main lens on my Mark III anyway if the AF is decent.


----------



## Haydn1971 (May 11, 2015)

Nice and cheap ! Roll on the f1.4 now ;-)


----------



## AvTvM (May 11, 2015)

Yawn. Minimal re-hash of the old formula. 7-bladed iris instead of going straight to 9 blades - how much mor could that have cost? 10 cents or 20?
STM AF is fine for video, liveview and use on mirrorless cameras.
Lens $ USD 115, proprietary lens hood 27 USD ... Likely not available anywhere for months ... How ridiculous. Same old stupid canon. Innovation? Zilch.


----------



## JohanCruyff (May 11, 2015)

+2 (and circular) aperture blades
Reduced minimum focus distance
Optically more than decent...
Price lower than expected

=> 1. Hard to resist the temptation to give it a try
=> 2. Leaves room for a better (and more expensive) 50mm 1.4 II


----------



## scottkinfw (May 11, 2015)

I two simple questions. 

First, I now little about this lens.

The questions are who intends to buy the lens, and what do you intend to use it for?

Thx

sek


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 11, 2015)

The lens is a replacement for the existing low cost 50mm, and is badly needed. Metal mount, better center resolution (at f/8), hopefully more accurate and repeatable autofocus. For beginning photographers and those on a budget, there is excellent performance when stopped down.

I do expect that it is a Gauss optical design as used for the past 100+ years, and similar to the existing optical design. The existing design is plenty sharp, but needs the improvements they have made, better AF motor, metal mount, 7 aperture blades. Taken together, its a substantial improvement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-Gauss_lens

There is only do much that can be done to a lens and sell it for a low price. Exotic glass, 22 elements, and the like would run the price way up. That kind of stuff is for the "L" lenses.


----------



## zlatko (May 11, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Yawn. Minimal re-hash of the old formula. 7-bladed iris instead of going straight to 9 blades - how much mor could that have cost? 10 cents or 20?
> STM AF is fine for video, liveview and use on mirrorless cameras.
> Lens $ USD 115, proprietary lens hood 27 USD ... Likely not available anywhere for months ... How ridiculous. Same old stupid canon. Innovation? Zilch.



Yes, same old Canon. Nuthin' innovative ever comes from them. And I mean ZILCH. 

Well ... except for a few things ...
Highest MP FF DSLR (currently)
World's only 14fps DSLR
World's only 8-15 fisheye zoom
World's only 11-24 zoom
World's only 17T-SE
World's best 24-70/2.8 AF zoom
World's only line of wide-angle primes with IS (24, 28, 35)
World's only 200-400 zoom with built-in 1.4X extender
World's only 24-70/4 zoom with built-in 0.7X macro function
World's best 24T-SE lens with free rotation feature
Two autofocus pancake lenses
f/1.2 AF lenses
1X - 5X macro lens
600/4 lens that is 2.5 lbs. lighter than Nikon's 600/4
500/4 lens that is 1.5 lbs. lighter than Nikon's 500/4
300/2.8 lens that is 1.2 lbs. lighter than Nikon's 300/2.8
DO lenses, including 400/4 (Nikon doesn't make a 400/4)
World's smallest & lightest DSLR
Low light autofocus sensitivity down to EV -3 in a budget FF camera (6D)
Dual pixel AF for video
World's only camera maker with dedicated radio transmitter & radio flash
World's only anti-flicker feature for shooting events in fluorescent light
Options for medium and small RAW files for many years now
User replaceable focusing screens on many models, not just the most expensive
Arguably the *best* ergonomics of any AF camera system

... but never mind that when their cheapest entry level budget lens has a crummy 7 _rounded_ blades instead of 9! Just ridiculous.


----------



## vjlex (May 11, 2015)

Sounds like a worthy upgrade to me; especially for the price! While the 50/1.8 is the fastest lens I own, it's the one I use the least. Mostly because it feels cheap, it's noisy when focusing, and the quality of the bokeh is not all that great. I think the metal mount and STM should take care of the first two issues. Is it reasonable to think that rounded 7-blade aperture will make the bokeh smoother than the 50 1.8 II?


----------



## JohanCruyff (May 11, 2015)

shunsai said:


> Is it reasonable to think that rounded 7-blade aperture will make the bokeh smoother than the 50 1.8 II?



Absolutely!
I think it is not reasonable to expect a smooth bokeh up to F/5.6, of course.


----------



## chromophore (May 11, 2015)

The MTF charts are a strong indicator that the lens has not received any optical redesign. The tiny differences in these theoretical charts (they are produced by computational simulations of the block diagram, rather than real-world testing of actual production samples) can be due to modifications other than the lens formula.

That said, the decrease in MFD to 1.1 feet is probably due to a mechanical redesign of the lens to permit greater extension of the optics. Double Gauss designs, being symmetric, are generally tolerant of extension. This is possibly a side benefit of changing the AF motor design.

I tried the old 50/1.8 II around the time I got into digital photography. I found it to be a reasonably sharp lens in the image center wide open under low contrast (i.e., no strong specular highlights) conditions. But it was not a very "punchy" lens. It shares a similar look to the 85/1.8, but the latter is definitely a nicer lens all around. I miss having the 85/1.8 in my bag. Sometimes, I just don't feel like dealing with the 85/1.2L.

What I really would like to see is for Canon to fix all the problems with the 50/1.4. It's an absolute embarrassment that Sigma can produce a stellar 50/1.4 that outperforms any 50mm lens in the Canon lineup, including the 50/1.2L. A durable 50/1.4 with improved corner performance is worth an increase in price. It doesn't need to be Sigma-level, but if it goes for $500, it will have to be a lot better than the existing design.


----------



## Maximilian (May 11, 2015)

MRSP $125.99? I am really surprised - positively. 
I think Canon did understand that their pricing policy at the higher level lenses would not work here.
So this seems to stay a good entry prime.

Technical data shows that this one seems to be more a mechanical then an optical update.
But MFD has changed significantly from 0.45 m to 0.35 m. 
So there seems to be someting more in the optics. 

Let's wait for the reviews.


----------



## Maximilian (May 11, 2015)

Some (few more than Canon US shows right now) sample pics from the German Canon HP:
http://www.canon.de/images/Sample%20Canon%20Inc%201%20EOS%206D%20ISO%20100%20med_tcm83-1259668.jpg


----------



## Woody (May 11, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Yawn. Minimal re-hash of the old formula.



I checked the performance of the recent (Sep 2014) Nikon 50 mm f/1.8G against the ancient (since 1990) Canon equivalent. Look very similar even though one is fairly recent and the other ancient. What's there to complain?


----------



## mistaspeedy (May 11, 2015)

Absolutely amazing - they kept the price the same and any improvements made are welcome.
More accurate autofocus, better construction, better aperture blades, better lens coatings, closer minimum focus distance. I will certainly buy it


----------



## Policar (May 11, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The lens is a replacement for the existing low cost 50mm, and is badly needed. Metal mount, better center resolution (at f/8), hopefully more accurate and repeatable autofocus. For beginning photographers and those on a budget, there is excellent performance when stopped down.
> 
> I do expect that it is a Gauss optical design as used for the past 100+ years, and similar to the existing optical design. The existing design is plenty sharp, but needs the improvements they have made, better AF motor, metal mount, 7 aperture blades. Taken together, its a substantial improvement.
> 
> ...



The Nikon 50mm f1.8 G updated the double guess design significantly and Canon's pancakes all incorporate aspherical elements, which it appears this won't. 

Going to be hard to decide between this and the pancake for me. 40mm is a delicious focal length for landscape, but I already have it on my 17-40mm, just with brutally low mtf.


----------



## Sporgon (May 11, 2015)

Looks like it's coming with a new 8000D too 

http://www.lens-rumors.com/canon-ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-lens-sample-images/


----------



## benique (May 11, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Looks like it's coming with a new 8000D too



Nope. It came out already. It's the Japanese name for the 760D.


----------



## Sporgon (May 11, 2015)

benique said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like it's coming with a new 8000D too
> ...



Oh darn...! ;D


----------



## AlanF (May 11, 2015)

Is spending $30 on a protective filter for a $125 lens sensible, especially when the front element is deeply buried?


----------



## vjlex (May 11, 2015)

Ah, I just realized why the price seems so cheap. The dollar is really strong compared to the yen right now. The MSRP in Japan is 19,500 yen (historically about $195). That said, for anyone in Japan thinking about this lens, it can probably be picked up for about 14,000 yen if you know where to shop. Still a pretty sweet price for what it offers in my opinion.


----------



## Maiaibing (May 11, 2015)

It its good to see Canon understands that the cheap 50mm option fills a key role in the Canon lineup.

It comes at a price that allows each and every Canon DSLR owner to dramatically increase his/hers shooting options and flexibility when it comes to visual impact just as it adds a couple of extra shooting hours every day compared to the f/4-5.6 standard zoom options that many (most?) DSLR seem to rely on.

A lens that can add more to your photography than moving from a Rebel to a 5DIII - for 128$. Almost a must buy for anyone without a fast prime to work with.


----------



## Ashran (May 11, 2015)

Honestly I was hoping to change my old 50mm 1.8 with a new edition of the 50mm 1.4 ... but given the low price of the new 50mm 1.8 I think I'll end up buying it.


----------



## Bennymiata (May 11, 2015)

It's great to see Canon making a good update to the nifty fifty AND keeping the price so low.
This update makes the nifty fifty a very viable lens (especially for the money) and far more useable than the II.

I look forward to the test results and if they are decent, I'll add one to my collection.


----------



## PepeSilvia (May 11, 2015)

I'm really on the fence on this one. Happy that they gave it rounded 7 blade aperture, and improved minimum focus distance, these are a huge deal for me. Plus the price is much less than I was expecting.

I've never used an STM lens before and while it may be an improvement to the old lens, there are some oddities to the STM lenses. From my brief research it seems that the focus ring is not mechanically connected to the focusing mechanism, instead it sends digital signals to tell it to focus closer or further. This means that full time manual is possible but may require a few workarounds to achieve it, since the lens has to be powered and ready to accept the signals from the focus ring. The good news is that the ring isn't locked to the AF motor and won't move on its own while auto focusing, so you don't have to worry about damaging the lens from moving the focus ring in AF mode. The downsides I see is that there will be no hard stops at the ends of the focus range, and without a distance scale it may be hard to find "infinity" especially in dark environments.

If it weren't for the nearly identical MTF charts this would probably be an instant buy for me, but knowing that it's basically the same lens in an improved body, and knowing I probably won't be able to sell my old one has me hesitating. Most of all I'm personally facing the realization that I may actually prefer 35mm to 50mm, and upgrading my nifty fifty will mean I have to wait even longer before I can give the 35mm f/2 IS a try.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (May 11, 2015)

JohanCruyff said:


> +2 (and circular) aperture blades
> Reduced minimum focus distance
> Optically more than decent...
> Price lower than expected
> ...


Agreed, however, looking at the MTF charts there isn't any improvement in contrast and resolution for wide open aperture. Just slight improvement for the curves at f/8.
It sounds that Canon didn't want to canibalize the sales for current or a new 50mm f/1.4 (II) lens


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (May 11, 2015)

PepeSilvia said:


> If it weren't for the nearly identical MTF charts this would probably be an instant buy for me, but knowing that it's basically the same lens in an improved body, and knowing I probably won't be able to sell my old one has me hesitating. Most of all I'm personally facing the realization that I may actually prefer 35mm to 50mm, and upgrading my nifty fifty will mean I have to wait even longer before I can give the 35mm f/2 IS a try.



35mm f/2 IS runs in another (superior) league.


----------



## PepeSilvia (May 11, 2015)

Hjalmarg1 said:


> PepeSilvia said:
> 
> 
> > If it weren't for the nearly identical MTF charts this would probably be an instant buy for me, but knowing that it's basically the same lens in an improved body, and knowing I probably won't be able to sell my old one has me hesitating. Most of all I'm personally facing the realization that I may actually prefer 35mm to 50mm, and upgrading my nifty fifty will mean I have to wait even longer before I can give the 35mm f/2 IS a try.
> ...



Yes, that's why I said it was more of a personal concern. I had all but decided on purchasing the 35mm when I have the disposable funds to purchase one. But buying this lens would delay that.


----------



## meywd (May 11, 2015)

I have loved the nifty fifty since before I owned it, but the slow AF and the softness wide open makes me use it rarely, after getting the 70-200 2.8 IS II it only gets out when I am lazy or when its too dark, and even with the 5D3 I rarely get a picture I like due to the noise, which makes the photo extra soft, and so I plan on getting the Sigma 50 or 35 Art or if canon comes up with a new 50 1.4 that is as sharp as the Art series, still at this price point, if the focus issue is solved I might get it.


----------



## exquisitor (May 11, 2015)

Good news! This means the new 50 f/1.4 will come!
The new 50 f/1.8 is essentially in the same price and optical range as the old one, so there is definitely a room for 50 f/1.4.


----------



## NorbR (May 11, 2015)

Well I'm certainly happy with this price ! I really expected it to be introduced at $199. Excellent news. 

So it will be the same optically as the old nifty fifty. Hey, more good news. I never had any problem with the optical quality of that old lens, and at that price and for that small a lens, I'll take the slight softness wide open. What I couldn't bear on the old one was the crappy, inaccurate, loud micro-motor. And here I have no doubt that the new STM will be better on all counts.


----------



## Chaitanya (May 11, 2015)

I remember in India anyone who wants to grt serious with photography and move away from kit lens, old 50mm 1.8 was their first choice as it was cheap and had better IQ. Looks like this new lens will sell like hot cakes amongst that crowd. I would like to give it a try for use with extension tubes/bellows for macro work.


----------



## Joey (May 11, 2015)

scottkinfw said:


> who intends to buy the lens, and what do you intend to use it for?


I will buy it, for crop sensor portraits. My current portrait lens is the EFS 60mm f/2.8 macro, and the 50mm lens will be a better focal length in tight spaces, and will let in over a stop more light, so stronger differential focus effects. I don't currently have a nifty fifty or any other 50mm lens, so the new lens, which appears to be optically identical to the old one but with better coatings, closer focussing, different AF motor more suited to video work, and better construction quality, will be a valuable addition to my bag. 

Also it appears to have a deeply recessed front element, so I won't be buying a lens hood or 'protective filter' for it, saving pennies. 

The US price is $125.99 plus local taxes so about $140 for many buyers over there? The UK price (Wex Photographic the only supplier who have a price yet) appears to be £129 including VAT or about $199.70 - aren't you all glad you're US purchasers?!


----------



## ajperk (May 11, 2015)

For the same price as before, it looks like Canon improved all the major flaws of the nifty-fifty: bad focusing, bad bokeh, bad build quality (okay, it's still plastic and all, but if it's like the 40mm then it will feel plenty solid for it's price). It indeed looks optically nearly the same, but for me (and for the price) it was never the optical quality that I was bothered by.

I went ahead and pre-ordered one.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 11, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Yawn. Minimal re-hash of the old formula. ... How ridiculous. Same old stupid canon. Innovation? Zilch.



Well if there's one thing more boring and non-innovative than Canon, it's AvTvM's incessant complaining about their supposed lack of innovation.

:

As for the new lens, it's a straightforward and modest update to an entry-level fast prime, while maintaining a very reasonable cost.


----------



## drjlo (May 11, 2015)

"the new Canon EF 50mm f/1.8mm STM lens features an optimized lens placement and Super Spectra Coating (SSC), translating into less ghosting and flaring than the previous model, while at the same time helping to enhance light transmission and optimize color reproduction accuracy. The new lens features a seven blade circular aperture, improved from the predecessor’s five blade non-circular aperture, helping to deliver a more visually appealing blurring effect"

Well, if Canon doesn't come up with a new 50 f1.4 soon, I may need to pick this up, if only to re-live my first lens, Nifty-Fity


----------



## Phenix205 (May 11, 2015)

This will be a major hit to the sales of the Yongnuo clone.


----------



## Pixel (May 11, 2015)

Sigh....

I won't be happy until the 20mm 2.8 is updated.


----------



## K (May 11, 2015)

This is very positive by Canon. 

The fact that they released a better nifty fifty and kept the price at $125 USD is excellent. 

Had it been $200 or around there, that would not have been good, especially given zero improvements in optical quality at least based on the charts. Real tests in the coming months will tell the truth though. Hard to imagine that there isn't even a new coating on some of the lenses after all these years since the previous model. Whether this will lead to any noticeable difference, who knows. While I'm not betting the IQ is better, I still remain hopeful or open that it might be a tiny bit better.

To me the AF is not the big deal here. The real metal mount is. Yeah, I know - nothing wrong with the plastic one - but it just looks and feels cheap. It is awkward having that thing in your bag next to an L lens. Metal is better. Also, the overall exterior aesthetics of the lens looks higher quality than the previous, even if it is mostly the same in reality.

To the person who wondered about a protective filter - I would not add any kind of protective filter to this. Any protective filter, with optical quality high enough to avoid noticeably degrading the IQ of this lens will cost about 1/2 the price of the lens itself at minimum. Not worth it. 

Now the big question for new buyers is:

This or the 40mm? 40mm is a better focal length, but the 50mm is 1 stop better.


----------



## slclick (May 11, 2015)

Ordered. If it's not worth it, I'll return it. Simple. Plus Amazon Prime makes it easy.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 11, 2015)

K said:


> This or the 40mm? 40mm is a better focal length, but the 50mm is 1 stop better.



The 50/1.8 II really benefits from stopping down a bit, the 40/2.8 is quite decent wide open. We'll see how the 50/1.8 STM does at f/1.8 vs. f/2.8.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 11, 2015)

zlatko said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Yawn. Minimal re-hash of the old formula. 7-bladed iris instead of going straight to 9 blades - how much mor could that have cost? 10 cents or 20?
> ...



What grieves me is how often Nikon users point at Canon as a company and refer to their photocopier heritage. What amazes me is how Nikon who mostly make cameras and lenses mostly come 2nd place to a company who's primary focus isn't cameras. Canon is a brand whom I have trusted for the last 31 years of shooting. They have a consistency and product evolution which is 2nd to none.


----------



## K (May 11, 2015)

Of course, Canon's sample images shows all the headshots done with a crop camera (80mm perspective), and the rest with a 6D.

Not intended to start a "50mm isn't a portrait lens" war....

Carry on.


----------



## ronlane (May 11, 2015)

I had the old nifty 50 but wasn't really happy with it and got rid of it. This one makes me think I about getting it now.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 11, 2015)

K said:


> Of course, Canon's sample images shows all the headshots done with a crop camera (80mm perspective), and the rest with a 6D.
> 
> Not intended to start a "50mm isn't a portrait lens" war....
> 
> Carry on.


It's always amused me how often I use 50mm on my 24-70. But oddly, when I mount a dedicated 50mm prime on my 5DIII...it doesn't do much for me. Unlike the 35mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.2, which I like very much.


----------



## zlatko (May 11, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Yawn. Minimal re-hash of the old formula. 7-bladed iris instead of going straight to 9 blades - how much mor could that have cost? 10 cents or 20?
> STM AF is fine for video, liveview and use on mirrorless cameras.
> Lens $ USD 115, proprietary lens hood 27 USD ... Likely not available anywhere for months ... How ridiculous. Same old stupid canon. Innovation? Zilch.



I was absolutely _crushed_ to learn that this hitherto nonexistent lens will have a 7-bladed aperture instead of 9. The future of my photography _depended_ on those 9 blades in this cheap lens. I mean, isn't it reasonable to expect that this lens will have more aperture blades than it's $400 older sibling, the 50/1.4 (which has eight)? Or it's $1,500 older sibling, the 50/1.2 (which also has eight). All of my photos with the 40mm STM have been failures thanks to the 7-bladed aperture. How can anyone make good pictures with only 7 aperture blades? Surely, this lens a sign that Canon has abandoned its photographic heritage, that they are in full-on crippling mode, that Sony is the future, etc., etc., etc.

But somehow this morning I found a glimmer of hope. It's a 1994 pic by Michael Kenna, one of the most internationally acclaimed fine art photographers. It suggests that ... just maybe ... a decent photo can be made with JUST seven aperture blades ...
http://www.michaelkenna.net/gallery_images/815a8d1.jpg
So ... stay strong out there in Canon-user-land. Don't sell all of your Canon gear like I was about to after hearing of this new nifty fifty. There may still be a glimmer of hope for your photography.


----------



## JohanCruyff (May 11, 2015)

Seven blades are adequate only for people who shoot EXCLUSIVELY:
- heptagons
- dwarfs
- (seven-arms) candelabrums
etc.

In all the other cases, we all NEED "9 plus" aperture blades.


----------



## AvTvM (May 11, 2015)

haha. 

How much do you think is the cost differntial for Canon wehther they'd put a 5,7,8 or 9-blade iris into an EF 50/1.8? Are we talking 10 cents or a full dollar per lens? It is just so ridiculous that Canon is differentiating on every tiny little thing. And even worse, that they get away with it, thanks to so many uncritical users who are willing to defend and buy every bit of cr*p that Canon serves up. ;D


----------



## TeT (May 11, 2015)

K said:


> This or the 40mm? 40mm is a better focal length, but the 50mm is 1 stop better.



On a crop I like the 40mm but on ff I think 50mm is a better frame

Either way, it looks like we have choices and at the price, one of each...


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 11, 2015)

CR Forum discussion: "7 aperture blades are useless, Canon is evil for cheating their customers out of a full 9-bladed aperture."

Most actual buyers of a 50/1.8 lens: "Aperture... That's the setting for how much light, right? I think so. What's an aperture blade and why should I care?"

:


----------



## JohanCruyff (May 11, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> How much do you think is the cost differntial for Canon wehther they'd put a 5,7,8 or 9-blade iris into an EF 50/1.8? Are we talking 10 cents or a full dollar per lens?
> It is just so ridiculous that Canon is differentiating on every tiny little thing. And even worse, that they get away with it, thanks to so many uncritical users who are willing to defend and buy every bit of cr*p that Canon serves up. ;D


I'm happy with the bokeh I get from my (700€) 100mm IS F/2.8 Macro L "9 rounded aperture blades", until F/5.6, without asking myself "how much would it cost to have a F/2.5 max aperture instead?".
In a similar way, I consider buying the (130€) 50mm F/1.8 STM "7 rounded blades", which are much better than 5 linear ones, without asking questions.
And I'll tell you a secret: Canon doesn't force me to buy its products, nor to brand loyalty. If the gear interests me, I buy it. 
And I'm not buying anything Canon delivers: after this 50mm, I don't have any more items on my (minimalistic?) wish-list, until the 6D Mark II comes out.


----------



## EOBeav (May 11, 2015)

Just so we're clear, this lens isn't marketed for shooters who insist on 9 blades. It's marketed for those who are ready to step up from a kit lens. I applaud Canon keeping this lens priced right about where the other one was.


----------



## scyrene (May 11, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Yawn. Minimal re-hash of the old formula. ... How ridiculous. Same old stupid canon. Innovation? Zilch.
> ...



I nearly said this myself, but I didn't want to get in trouble


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 11, 2015)

I'm surprised at the low price, although the MTF chart show small optical improvements.

Far superior mechanical, fast and quiet AF, circular diaphragm aperture, metal assembly, minimum focusing distance 0,35 meter, lens hood that fits on the outer edge of the lens and protects the focusing mechanism.

Plenty of reasons to buy it. If I still had my F1.4 USM model (which I have not used in F1.4), I would be tempted by this new STM.

All in all, this new 50mm STM strikes me as a decent update, and will protect Canon of the attack super cheap Yongnuo.


----------



## kphoto99 (May 11, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> All in all, this new 50mm STM strikes me as a decent update, and will protect Canon of the attack super cheap Yongnuo.



Now we need somebody to compare this new lens from Canon to Yongnuo 50 and see how much better it is at twice the price (based on BH prices).


----------



## JonAustin (May 11, 2015)

*Blades, blades and more blades!*

I'm still satisfied with the measly 6 (straight!) blades in my f/2.5 Compact Macro. Plus it stops down to f/32 and has a 9" MFD! Should I be aspiring to a more multi-bladed optic?


----------



## verysimplejason (May 11, 2015)

It's time to sell my old 50mm... This one certainly is a lot better.


----------



## Luds34 (May 11, 2015)

AlanF said:


> Is spending $30 on a protective filter for a $125 lens sensible, especially when the front element is deeply buried?



Generally speaking... no. However I don't use front lens caps. So when not mounted to my camera the lens is face down in a messenger style bag. Typically I have a lens hood that keeps the lens from touching. However, I could see on this lens, similar to my pancakes, not bothering with a lens hood. So I'd probably put a filter on it instead. 

Incidentally I broke down a couple weeks ago and bought filters for the 24mm and 40mm pancakes.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (May 11, 2015)

GMCPhotographics said:


> What grieves me is how often Nikon users point at Canon as a company and refer to their photocopier heritage.



Strange, I haunt several Nikon forums and I can not recall reading anyone say that. Often? really? Sure you are not just making a strawman?


----------



## Luds34 (May 11, 2015)

The STM got me thinking...

Any chance we see these same optics/internals packaged in an EF-M prime? I tell you, this with the EF-M 22mm would make a nice versatile kit. Heck bring two M's, one mounted with each lens and just swap cameras.

The M is just too easy to bring along for those "out with the family but don't want to haul out the DSLR kit but don't want cell phone pics either" situations. 

This 50 in an EF-M packaged prime would be perfect.


----------



## dcm (May 11, 2015)

Seems like a good choice for my M/M3 while we wait for EF-M primes. I've already got the adapter (cost more than this lens). The EF 85 f/1.8 has already migrated to the M bag. This 50 would make a good companion. I may have to reclaim my old EF 35 f/2.0 since it's not getting much use anymore. These fast, small, cheap lenses seem to be the best use I've found for the adapter, other than the occasional reach extension on long telephotos.


----------



## zlatko (May 11, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> haha.
> 
> How much do you think is the cost differntial for Canon wehther they'd put a 5,7,8 or 9-blade iris into an EF 50/1.8? Are we talking 10 cents or a full dollar per lens? It is just so ridiculous that Canon is differentiating on every tiny little thing. And even worse, that they get away with it, thanks to so many uncritical users who are willing to defend and buy every bit of cr*p that Canon serves up. ;D



But if you really feel that way about Canon serving "crap", and if you can't seem to benefit from [or even notice] any of their innovation, then why the heck are you on a Canon rumors forum? Why slum with the uncritical Canon users who are willing to accept a 7-bladed round crap aperture when you could be with some other manufacturer who offers 9- or 12-bladed apertures for the same price?


----------



## bholliman (May 11, 2015)

I was pleasantly surprised with the $125 price tag. I have one on preorder at B&H. I don't expect it to replace my Sigma Art 50mm for studio work, but will make a nice little walk-around/travel lens.


----------



## ScottyP (May 11, 2015)

Bravo Canon on keeping the price identical while updating AF, barrel build, mount and lens coatings. 

This lens at this price point is needed to show new shooters why the kit lenses are not the end of your photography journey even though 2 of them seem to cover anything from 18mm to 250 or 300mm. It is an affordable entry point into better equipment and learning.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 11, 2015)

ScottyP said:


> Bravo Canon on keeping the price identical while updating AF, barrel build, mount and lens coatings.
> 
> This lens at this price point is needed to show new shooters why the kit lenses are not the end of your photography journey even though 2 of them seem to cover anything from 18mm to 250 or 300mm. It is an affordable entry point into better equipment and learning.



Blah blah blah. Can't you see this lens for what it really is – a shameful attempt to bilk unsuspecting consumers with a shoddy 7-bladed aperture?


----------



## slclick (May 11, 2015)

stocking stuffers


----------



## AlanF (May 11, 2015)

For those complaining that optically this is not much of an upgrade, read this report on slrgear comparing the 50mm 1.8 II with a range of expensive primes:

http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon50f18/canon50f18_jt.htm

It is remarkably good. I sold my vintage version 1 with a metal mount for what I paid for it.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 11, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> ScottyP said:
> 
> 
> > Bravo Canon on keeping the price identical while updating AF, barrel build, mount and lens coatings.
> ...


Just ignore the new Nikon 50mm F1.8G which costs more than $200 has 7 diaphragm blades too. :
Ignorance happiness is.


----------



## DRR (May 11, 2015)

At only 20 cents per aperture blade, I would like a 59 blade aperture. Tell me where to send my $10


----------



## sjp010 (May 11, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> CR Forum discussion: "7 aperture blades are useless, Canon is evil for cheating their customers out of a full 9-bladed aperture."
> 
> :



Why stop at 9 blades? Give the people the 10 they deserve. Aww, eff it - gimme 11! 

What do you mean it won't fit? Put some blades on the focus ring if you have to!



Inspiration:
http://www.theonion.com/blogpost/******-everything-were-doing-five-blades-11056


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 11, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ScottyP said:
> ...



What you utterly fail to grasp is that Nikon's more expensive, 7-bladed 50/1.8 is highly innovative because it can be natively mounted on a Nikon camera body with a sensor bought from Sony. That innovatively leads to higher Lens Scores on DxOMark.


----------



## ahsanford (May 11, 2015)

Sorry, all, late to the thread.

Three general musings about this announcement:


Some really bright dude predicted Canon would sell this cheaply -- perhaps even at a small loss -- to get this gateway drug of a lens in more beginners' hands as pull-through investment in pricier primes. Don't know the guy, but wow, what an oracle I -- err -- _he_ must be. 



I have yet to see a front-on or back-on view of this lens from Canon. Canon seems to be avoiding the large aperture money shot of how much light is let in because we all presume that this is some variant of a pancake with tiny elements on the front and back. Canon might be wise in this, as -- let's face it -- pancakes are not 'impressive looking' / premium / wow-factor-ish from a glass perspective.



I'm totally stoked this lens is happening. One less obstacle in the way for Canon to make the lens I really want (attached).

- A


----------



## zlatko (May 11, 2015)

sjp010 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > CR Forum discussion: "7 aperture blades are useless, Canon is evil for cheating their customers out of a full 9-bladed aperture."
> ...



Pssst! ... Hey ... buddy ... let me clue you in to the real deal. See, Leica makes some lenses with up to 12 aperture blades. Yeh, that's right, you heard me ... twelve! Don't let Canon cheat you with their lousy seven rounded when you can have 10 or even 12. That'll put you over the top, see. That's the golden ticket, see. It'll cost you a little more, but more blades = more better photography. Don't be a loser like those other 7-bladers.  ;D


----------



## JohanCruyff (May 11, 2015)

Be advised that a good knife thrower benefits significantly from a 12 blades lens, rounded or not.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 11, 2015)

Chaitanya said:


> I remember in India anyone who wants to grt serious with photography and move away from kit lens, old 50mm 1.8 was their first choice as it was cheap and had better IQ. Looks like this new lens will sell like hot cakes amongst that crowd. I would like to give it a try for use with extension tubes/bellows for macro work.



Since its a STM lens, watch out. Many of those extension bellows require manual focus. Extention tubes with signal carry thru should work fine.

For macros with bellows, a old fully manual 50mm lens adapted to Canon mount would likely be a better choice.


----------



## TeT (May 11, 2015)

AcutancePhotography said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > What grieves me is how often Nikon users point at Canon as a company and refer to their photocopier heritage.
> ...



Can I use this lens with my photocopier?


----------



## Mr_Canuck (May 11, 2015)

I would bet the price of this new 50stm that Canon will release within 18 months a new 50/1.4 that follows the same physical design approach as the 35/2 is. Let's only hope that they include stabilization on it. There's no reason why not except short-sightedness. And it will retail for $549-579. And the optics will be good but not great because it won't be built at the size/weight required to eliminate softness in the corners before f2. But it will have a revised formula slightly because they can't be shamed by Sigma. But Canon will only choose to fully contend with Sigma at the f/1.2 level L lens... My only surprise will come when it comes out this calendar year, which it won't because they'll only release one 50 per year, and they'll see how the 1.4 sells before worrying about a 1.2 update....... Remember me when it happens.

As for this new 50/1.8, it's expected and unsurprising and good. They had a good thing going and they've extended it and upgraded it. What do you want for 120 bucks? I don't use a 50mm often, but this one is perfect for occasional users and those who don't beat theirs up and those who want a great addition to their kit lens. Home run for all those customers.


----------



## RenKockwell (May 11, 2015)

This is the best budget lens in the world.


----------



## Dukinald (May 11, 2015)

Like other posters, I was expecting this to be in the $199 range and going down to about $150 after a few months. I was already considering it then even though I already have the "plastic fantastic" v-II. At $125 this is now a no brainer. Wanted to get this for the STM and use with the 70D.

I think YN forced Canon to "react" with this baby - competition is good


----------



## Roger Jones (May 11, 2015)

Front element is smaller than the old design


----------



## ahsanford (May 11, 2015)

Roger Jones said:


> Front element is smaller than the old design



We shouldn't be surprised. This is a sort-of-pancake, right? All of the three Canon pancakes have tiny front elements.

- A


----------



## bholliman (May 11, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> How much do you think is the cost differntial for Canon wehther they'd put a 5,7,8 or 9-blade iris into an EF 50/1.8? Are we talking 10 cents or a full dollar per lens? It is just so ridiculous that Canon is differentiating on every tiny little thing. And even worse, that they get away with it, thanks to so many uncritical users who are willing to defend and buy every bit of cr*p that Canon serves up. ;D



Don't buy one if you are not happy with the specs! Seems like a nice product at a good price to me.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 11, 2015)

bholliman said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > How much do you think is the cost differntial for Canon wehther they'd put a 5,7,8 or 9-blade iris into an EF 50/1.8? Are we talking 10 cents or a full dollar per lens? It is just so ridiculous that Canon is differentiating on every tiny little thing. And even worse, that they get away with it, thanks to so many uncritical users who are willing to defend and buy every bit of cr*p that Canon serves up. ;D
> ...



Oh, he has no intention of buying some non-innovative lens intended for use with antiquated mirrorslapping technology. 

That doesn't seem to stop him from complaining, though. :


----------



## greger (May 11, 2015)

After doing lots of research on the web I bought a used 50mm mark l for $30.00 more than a new Mark ll. I wanted a metal mount and felt the older version was optically better by a small amount. I don't manually focus this lens so I don't have to worry about damage to the focus ring. Version 3 is going to be equal to the Mark 1. I think this is a good move for Canon. People will scoop up this lens and love it. Warts and all.


----------



## YuengLinger (May 11, 2015)

1. Happy for those who want budget prime. (Including this uncle with 11 year old nephew just starting photography!)

2. Grateful CR had early, correct forecast.

3. Patiently waiting for rumored L version II.

You go, Canon, go!


----------



## Mitch.Conner (May 11, 2015)

It looks like the same lens with a new motor and a slightly better iris. With that said, at $125 I'm not going to complain.


----------



## TeT (May 11, 2015)

Mitch.Conner said:


> at $125 I'm not going to complain.



+1 ;

reading some of the comments, ppl are upset because what, it is not good enough to replace the 1.2L ?

very nice improvement over the 1.8 II,


----------



## dboris (May 11, 2015)

No optical improvement?

http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-lens-sample-images/

Look at those samples.

On 8000D/760D, at 1.8, 1/250.
Nice sharpness on the eye.
Impossible to get a such quality-shoot at 1.8 with the MKII version.

So I'm 100% sold on this. I will take one day 1.

Edit: I wonder if these pic are fake?
Only seen on this website 
I hope not...


----------



## ritholtz (May 11, 2015)

What are the chances of Canon releasing one 30mm stm prime. DPP doesn't show active focus point for my sigma 30mm 1.4. It only works with center point.


----------



## slclick (May 11, 2015)

We might have to name this one a 'Dutch Baby' since it's slightly larger than a pancake. Honestly I don't expect it to have better IQ than the 40 nor render color and contrast as well but I've still pre ordered one for a small lightweight 1.8 prime since at this time I have nothing faster than 2.0 (135L)


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 11, 2015)

ritholtz said:


> What are the chances of Canon releasing one 30mm stm prime. DPP doesn't show active focus point for my sigma 30mm 1.4. It only works with center point.


30mm lens is not a common focal lenght, and Sigma was pioneered in luminous prime lenses for APS-C.

When Canon launched the EF-S 24mm F2.8 I was sad because it means you will never see a EF-S 22mm F2 or a EF-S 30mm F1.4.

Maybe someday, Canon decides to update the EF 28mm F1.8


----------



## RLPhoto (May 11, 2015)

Ordered one. It will hold me over until the 1.2/1.4 replacement.


----------



## zlatko (May 11, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > What are the chances of Canon releasing one 30mm stm prime. DPP doesn't show active focus point for my sigma 30mm 1.4. It only works with center point.
> ...



I'm not sure it means we'll never see those, but I'd like to see those too. Such fast EF-S primes would help in the competition with mirrorless.


----------



## zlatko (May 11, 2015)

dboris said:


> No optical improvement?
> 
> http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-lens-sample-images/
> 
> ...



Those samples do look nice. I hope you're right about it being better than the MKII version.


----------



## rfdesigner (May 11, 2015)

Good, a 50mm I can justify buying... 7 blades will do, MTF suggest the f8 contrast is a smidge better (better coatings?), metal mount and a prooven AF.

I suspect the aperture as viewed from the front is identical, the image of the lens looks like it was taken really close up with a wide angle so the glass will look smaller as it's burried quite deep in the old lens on the MkII and the STM will still have some recess, also I can't see the MTFs being almost unchanged from the old 1.8 with a changed optical design.

As to the other 50s, if they "fix" the 1.4 the 1.2L will be overtaken, so I'm predicting the 1.2L will update next. If they update the 1.4 first I fear they won't fix the optics and the 1.4 really needs it, the 1.8 was good enough optically for a true "nifty fifty".

I'll pop a 50 1.8 STM in the bag unless we get rumors of a new 1.4 before I can get one over the counter, if a 1.4 turns up I'll only lose £20 or so selling the 1.8


----------



## meywd (May 11, 2015)

zlatko said:


> dboris said:
> 
> 
> > No optical improvement?
> ...



I don't think these are fake, looking at my pictures with the MKII, i find it has the same IQ.


----------



## NancyP (May 12, 2015)

I would be first in line for the Plastic Fantastic STM if I hadn't gotten the 40 pancake a year ago. If the new P.F. STM is pretty good at f/2, I may get it anyway. Light weight is really good.


----------



## slclick (May 12, 2015)

NancyP said:


> I would be first in line for the Plastic Fantastic STM if I hadn't gotten the 40 pancake a year ago. If the new P.F. STM is pretty good at f/2, I may get it anyway. Light weight is really good.



I have shot over 7k images with the 40 and I am still getting the 50. When it comes to longer FL's, spreads of 35-50 mm don't matter much at all to me but the perspective from 40 to 50 on FF is a big jump for me, YMMV. 40 is still wide and 50 is neither wide nor tele. I don't personally like 50 that much but for $125 it may just be the low light street lens I'd want to have on hand and not 'fuss' over.


----------



## e_honda (May 12, 2015)

Mitch.Conner said:


> It looks like the same lens with a new motor and a slightly better iris. With that said, at $125 I'm not going to complain.



Also looks to have much improved build quality, which is a huge welcome. Plenty of instances with the MK II of the front element just randomly separating from the rest of the lens. I'm very pleasantly surprised with the new metal mount. 

MK II had the optical performance of a $300 lens (comparatively) and the build quality of a $50 lens.


----------



## sdsr (May 12, 2015)

zlatko said:


> Pssst! ... Hey ... buddy ... let me clue you in to the real deal. See, Leica makes some lenses with up to 12 aperture blades. Yeh, that's right, you heard me ... twelve! Don't let Canon cheat you with their lousy seven rounded when you can have 10 or even 12.



12 is for amateurs. The old Russian Jupiter 9 has 15, the Tair 11 has 20!


----------



## Luds34 (May 12, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > What are the chances of Canon releasing one 30mm stm prime. DPP doesn't show active focus point for my sigma 30mm 1.4. It only works with center point.
> ...



I know it's popular to get bashed online, whether in forums or by reviewers. And I don't know if it's a product of purchasing the lens in recent years (better quality control, more consistent these days?) but as an owner of the 28mm f/1.8 I can say it is a solid lens. Sure it suffers from CA likes it's similar era 85mm f/1.8. And the corners can be a little soft. But in real world shooting you just don't see these things (or can compensate for them). In any case I really enjoy this lens. I shoot at f/2 plenty of times with it, it's small, compact, nice little lens hood, and it just takes great photos. To me the proof is in the photos and over the years I've come away with some nice shots. I want to say I thought it was commonly known, but this is a better bet then the crop only Sigma 30mm lens. USM, internally focusing to boot.

I do echo the thoughts on the EF-S dedicated primes though. However I have given up waiting. I'm hopeful that Canon will maybe get it together with the EF-M line. Hitting it out of the gate with the 22mm prime gave hope!


----------



## Finn M (May 12, 2015)

Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open. 

This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 12, 2015)

Finn M said:


> Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.
> 
> *This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. *More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.



Great advice – a beginner or amateur looking for a cheap, compact lens should buy one that costs about the same as an entry-level Canon dSLR _plus_ the new 50/1.8 STM...and then spend double that for a camera on which to mount it. Can we get a reality check, please? :

And how about another reality check for all those people you and a couple of your friends switching to MILCs. You think that would mean an increase in MILC sales...but we're not seeing that.


----------



## SUNDOG04 (May 12, 2015)

Please....can we please not call this new 50 a "nifty fifty"? Fifty mm is a bit of an odd size for me and I would prefer the 40mm. I do use the 50 Compact Macro from time to time, but not really for landscape. It is an old piece of junk that does its job well and I would still use it over the new 50. If I had one of those old nifty-fifties I would probably throw it at he neighbors cat when it is in my yard after the birds. But, I think Canon did a nice job with it and I would not hesitate to buy it if I used 50mm more.


----------



## zlatko (May 12, 2015)

Finn M said:


> Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.
> 
> This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.



Good luck with that Fuji XF 35/1.4 lens. I did not have good luck with it. First, it is noisy. It makes a noise when it focuses and it makes a noise when the aperture stops down (unless you're shooting wide open). For lens at that price (about $500), it should not be noisy. It is noisier than all Canon lenses in that price range. Second, the ergonomics are poor. There is no place to get a good grip on it when removing the lens from the camera. And the aperture ring slips easily, so if you're not careful you may accidentally be shooting at f/16 when you thought the aperture ring was on A (Shutter priority mode).

The Fuji X-T1 is a perfect-sized camera and I really wanted to work with it. But I did not really get along with it. I posted about it previously:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=25917.msg510988#msg510988


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 12, 2015)

I have a mk1 50mm f1.8 from way back when I bought it new with an EOS 650. Yep...that's right, the original EOS slr...on film. So mine is from the first year of EOS cameras and lenses. All the other lenses from that period I have sold on, except this one. It's got an original metal mount and still produces great images. 

Will I sell mine for this new one? no not really...there's no point. The new one is the same optically. The only improvement is the quieter AF motor, but I'd loose the focus window.


----------



## sdsr (May 12, 2015)

Finn M said:


> This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.



Are you saying that someone who isn't a beginner/amateur would be better off with much more expensive Fuji gear or that a beginner/amateur would be? If the latter, it's not clear, as Neuro points out, why a beginner would want to spend far more for Fuji lens/body combination, and I suspect there aren't many beginners who are interested in manual focus rings, big or otherwise, and that stopped down a bit the new Canon is at least as good anyway. If the former, all bets are off, I guess (my preference would be for a compact mirrorless camera with a FF sensor, at least one of which costs less than the XT-1...).


----------



## SalAlexander (May 12, 2015)

Really looking forward to replacing my 50 1.8 II !
The focusing on that thing was just getting worse and worse :-\


----------



## ahsanford (May 12, 2015)

Finn M said:


> Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.
> 
> This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.



I fail to see how discussion of a $125 f/1.8 full frame lens -- i.e. _comically_ the best bargain in all of photography -- can be hijacked to discuss a mirrorless product in a completely different price class. Apples and oranges.

Enjoy your mirrorless rig. I hear they are great. When you buy that 35mm f/1.4, just remember to buy six extra batteries and avoid any moving subjects and you will have a _peach_ of a day shooting. 

- A


----------



## Sporgon (May 12, 2015)

Finn M said:


> Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.
> 
> This is a lens aimed at beginners and amateurs who want a cheap and compact lens of course, but then it is much better to buy a Fujifilm camera with the brilliant XF 35/1,4 lens. More compact, much better optical quality wide open, better ergonomics with a big manual focus ring. Many people in Europe are now switching now from Canon/Nikon to more compact mirrorless cameras like Sony and Fujifilm, me included. I still own a EOS 5D mk.III but it is being used less and less. I am now tired of waiting and order the Fujifilm XF 35/1,4 lens for my XT-1 camera instead.



That's a pretty strange conclusion. I'm quite a fan of Fuji, I like the _ethetics_ of the X-T1, but that 35mm lens you mention is poor across the frame for a crop, never mind if it was full frame. 

The Canon 50mm STM is going to spank that Fuji lens in resolution across the frame, and the Canon lens is FF ! As is usual when you start comparing crop to FF in terms of shallow dof and subject isolation the crop system starts to become more expensive than FF, unlike in the usual 'reach limited' situations when it is significantly cheaper.

You could take the same three quarter length portrait with the 35/1.4 on the Fuji and the 50/1.8 on the 1200D and I reckon you could get both an etheticslly and technically better picture on the Canon - for less than one third of the price.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 12, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> You could take the same three quarter length portrait with the 35/1.4 on the Fuji and the 50/1.8 on the 1200D and I reckon you could get both an etheticslly and technically better picture on the Canon - for less than one third of the price.



Yeah, but with the Fuji you'd look _good_ doing it, you know, in that retro hipster I'd look even better if this was a Nikon Df sort of way.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 12, 2015)

Phenix205 said:


> This will be a major hit to the sales of the Yongnuo clone.



True, Canon is really sending a message with this price. But Yn doesn't have lens hoods that cost 1/4th of the lens' price


----------



## ahsanford (May 12, 2015)

Crosswind said:


> The only downside I see, is that you have to set the focus to infinity before you lay it in your bag, so that you do not damage the tube or focus mechanism by a slight pressure. The front element does extend as it seems. Edit: hope it's not the same S___ as the canon 50 1.4, which is very prone to focus motor damage. I hate that.



+1. I am very deliberate in 'shortening the barrel' of my old 50 1.4 to not damage it in my tiny walkaround bag. However, I'm not sure a focus by wire STM lens has similar concerns.

Internal focusing is probably #3 on my list of reasons why I want want that 50 f/nooneknows IS USM (#1 being proper/modern/fast/reliable USM AF and #2 being better wide open performance). Internal focusing would eliminate the barrel extension and mechanical force on the AF gears/components and it would eliminate a sliding surface for dust/dirt/water/junk to get into (i.e. the front filter would better seal the lens than in a non-internally-focusing design). 

Also, if you goof around with bokeh shape stencils, telescoping in-and-out front elements kind of ruin it. It's best when the lens' physical length doesn't change when you use those.

- A


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 12, 2015)

zlatko said:


> Finn M said:
> 
> 
> > Canon have three old 50mm lenses from the 1990s which are soft wide open all of them. This new lens have the same optical system as the old 50/1,8. Dissapointing. No IS. No use of aspherical elements or UD elements to improve the sharpness wide open.
> ...



Oh you don't know what you're talking about! Everyone knows that amateurs cannot expose correctly and underexpose by 5 stops. Not to worry with the Fuji. You can just boost in post 5 EV with no problem and you end up with much better IQ than any Canon camera exposed properly.


----------



## ahsanford (May 12, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> Oh you don't know what you're talking about! Everyone knows that amateurs cannot expose correctly and underexpose by 5 stops. Not to worry with the Fuji. You can just boost in post 5 EV with no problem and you end up with much better IQ than any Canon camera exposed properly.



Someone's been reading DPReview's sensor testing of the 5DS. :

- A


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 13, 2015)

*EF 50MM F/1.8 STM Lens Sleazy Advertisement from Beach Camera*

I received a e-mail today with a title line saying to save $75 on the new lens. What it claimed was that the MSRP was $200 and I could get it for $125. Canon says estimated street price of $125.99 or close to that. I've lowered my already low opinion of them even lower. I have bought a lens from them several years back, and it was fine, but nothing since.

http://www.beachcamera.com/assets/thehub/23435/23435-bc.html



B&H and even Amazon do not claim a $200 MSRP.


http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00X8MRBCW/ref=sr_ob_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1431471914&sr=8-1


----------



## meywd (May 13, 2015)

*Re: EF 50MM F/1.8 STM Lens Sleazy Advertisement from Beach Camera*



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I received a e-mail today with a title line saying to save $75 on the new lens. What it claimed was that the MSRP was $200 and I could get it for $125. Canon says estimated street price of $125.99 or close to that. I've lowered my already low opinion of them even lower. I have bought a lens from them several years back, and it was fine, but nothing since.
> 
> http://www.beachcamera.com/assets/thehub/23435/23435-bc.html
> 
> ...



If you check Amazon Japan, you will see a different story, and as someone said earlier, the current exchange rate is affecting this price, if it were released in early 2013 it would have cost more.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 13, 2015)

*Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



dboris said:


> No optical improvement?
> 
> http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-lens-sample-images/
> 
> ...



Canon has confirmed that it uses the same optical formula.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=15070

"Does the new 50mm STM contain the same optics design as the 50mm f/1.8 II?" question, Canon U.S.A.'s extremely knowledgeable Chuck Westfall responded:

"Yes, the optics of the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM are the same as the original EF 50mm f/1.8 and EF 50mm f/1.8 II."

So, there it is, right from Canon. 

There is a long list of improvements, including a focus ring wide enough to actually use for manual focus.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> "Yes, the optics of the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM are the same as the original EF 50mm f/1.8 and EF 50mm f/1.8 II."



Ugh, that's not exactly exciting given the performance of the 50/1.8 which I own but never use for a reason - bad bokeh, blurry wide open & dangerous construction b/c a hit on the extended barrel is likely to kill the lens.

If I understand this correctly, the main reason seems to be to get ahead of Yn and add a patented tech (stm) that cannot be copied yet. Let's hope they'll do a real update of the 50/1.4 soon...


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



Marsu42 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > "Yes, the optics of the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM are the same as the original EF 50mm f/1.8 and EF 50mm f/1.8 II."
> ...



They improved nearly everything _but_ the optics, and kept the price the same. I think that is pretty exciting given that it's an entry level lens and the optics are pretty darn good for the price. 

If it's any consolation, DxOMark says it's as good as the 600/4 II which is >90x more expensive.


----------



## JohanCruyff (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



neuroanatomist said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...


Some people expect the new 50mm to have an improved T-value, which is a very important parameter according to DxOMark. It would be no surprise to discover that the 50mm F/1.8 STM outperforms the 600 F/4, as every creature living in this world expects.


----------



## chromophore (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



neuroanatomist said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Lens redesigns are not frequent events. They happen to a given model maybe once every 10-20 years, if that. So I see these updates as opportunities to make changes that look toward the future, because this version is going to be around for a long time.

In this context, the lack of any optical formula revision is a disappointment, not because the current formula is bad or unsatisfactory, but because the inherent nature of photographic optics design is that *there is always room for improvement*. Compromises are always made. For something as simple as a double-gauss design, I find it inconceivable that there should be such "perfection" attained at this price point that there is no further improvement possible, or that the state of lens design and materials science have not advanced in the past two decades to permit some kind of revision to the optics.

In fact, let's consider that there exist old, manual-focus lenses that were built with comparable or faster apertures that easily outperform the 50/1.8's formula. If this was possible with the processes available almost half a century ago, why can't it be done today for less?

I don't expect the 50/1.8 to be Zeiss quality for $125. It's a budget lens for a budget audience. But if a mechanical/cosmetic update is all that users get for yet another 20 years, does that not seem like a wasted opportunity for a company that professes to strive for the best possible products to offer their consumers?


----------



## ahsanford (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



chromophore said:


> I don't expect the 50/1.8 to be Zeiss quality for $125. It's a budget lens for a budget audience. But if a mechanical/cosmetic update is all that users get for yet another 20 years, does that not seem like a wasted opportunity for a company that professes to strive for the best possible products to offer their consumers?



This, of course, begs the question for those folks salivating for the 50 f/nooneknows IS USM:

If the 50 f/nooneknows IS USM has all the 'infrastructure' upgrades we're expecting (IS, modern/fast/reliable ring USM, internal focusing, etc.) _but it has the exact same optical formula as the EF 50 f/1.4 USM_, would you still buy it? 

I probably still would, as AF speed/reliability is a huge issue with that lens, but I'm guessing that many people would not. They want something sharper, especially on the wide open end.

- A


----------



## bereninga (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



chromophore said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



Couldn't agree more here.

I feel like Canon just gave the customers what they already could have given previously, and made this seem like an upgrade.


----------



## JohanCruyff (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



ahsanford said:


> chromophore said:
> 
> 
> > I don't expect the 50/1.8 to be Zeiss quality for $125. It's a budget lens for a budget audience. But if a mechanical/cosmetic update is all that users get for yet another 20 years, does that not seem like a wasted opportunity for a company that professes to strive for the best possible products to offer their consumers?
> ...


I think that 
a) I'll buy the new 50 F/1.8 STM,
b) then I'll see the specs (and the tests) of the 50 f/nooneknows IS USM,
c) then decide whether to keep the 1.8 STM or 
d) to sell the 1.8 STM (with an expected 20 Eur loss) and move to the f/nooneknows.
In case (d), it will be like renting a lens for a year (or two?) and paying a rental fee of about 1 Eur per month. I won't sue Canon for this unexpensive deal.


----------



## e17paul (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



neuroanatomist said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



Not to mention, the new aperture will probably fix the bokeh. I'm not sure whether the new aperture blades will do anything to change the wide open characteristics.

I sold my 50/1.8 II to move to a 50/2.5 macro. The new featurea, and newly acknowledged (or enabled) close focus (0.35m instead of 0.45m) may tempt me to switch back to the 1.8, but the new STM model.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



chromophore said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



R&D resources are finite. Would you have preferred a slightly improved optical formula but the same plastic lens mount? As you state, compromises are made – that applies not only to the product but also to the design process. 

Just to point out, they did add, "_Super Spectra Coating (SSC), translating into less ghosting and flaring than the previous model, while at the same time helping to enhance light transmission and optimize color reproduction accuracy._"


----------



## ahsanford (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



Crosswind said:


> You're right, sir. Well, the optics are the same - that doesn't mean it's delivering the same optical performance. I have a feeling that some people here are kind of disappointed with Canon's new 50. I can't see why. Is it because of the missing IS or focus window (lol)... or is it because of STM-only?
> 
> Is STM actually that bad when compared to USM-driven lenses? I never really had one. If it's slower... that's ok (as I expect it to be) - as long as the focus is precise.



Yes. I'm holding out for USM at the next-higher price point. It's markedly faster for stills. But I'm not upset about the new 50 1.8 STM at all -- it should be a fine lens. 

I think some folks are bummed that this 50 1.8 STM lens lacks a clear must-have over its predecessor, like IS, USM, or a new optical formula. But I'm sorry, folks are getting 2 more blades, curved blades, STM, increased max magnification -- *all for no increase in price*. _Photographers should say thank you to Canon for that_. 

Anyone with more demanding/exacting expectations should be ponying up more money for a more fully-featured lens, like the Sigma Art, the current EF 50 f/1.4, etc.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



ahsanford said:


> I think some folks are bummed that this 50 1.8 STM lens lacks a clear must-have over its predecessor, like IS, USM, or a new optical formula. But I'm sorry, folks are getting 2 more blades, curved blades, STM, increased max magnification -- *all for no increase in price*. _Photographers should say thank you to Canon for that_.



Blasphemy! We should get much more, and they should charge even less. 

I bet Canon is paying you to post here....


----------



## slclick (May 13, 2015)

Folks would complain if you gave them world peace


----------



## meywd (May 13, 2015)

slclick said:


> Folks would complain if you gave them world peace



+1 because what they really want is world domination


----------



## kphoto99 (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



ahsanford said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > You're right, sir. Well, the optics are the same - that doesn't mean it's delivering the same optical performance. I have a feeling that some people here are kind of disappointed with Canon's new 50. I can't see why. Is it because of the missing IS or focus window (lol)... or is it because of STM-only?
> ...


It may be that the "*all for no increase in price*" is true in US, but here in Canada, the old one is C$130 and the new one is C$170 (about US$140 at current exchange rate).

As a side thought, how long does it take from the time Canon decides to update this lens and announcing it for sale?
The reason I'm asking is I think that the process would be at least a year. A year ago there was no way of knowing how the Yongnuo 50 f/1.8 would compare to the 1.8II. So Canon felt safe not to update the optical formula for the 50 STM. Recent test have shown that the YN 50 f1.8 is a bit better optically then the 50 1.8 II.


----------



## zlatko (May 13, 2015)

I predict it will be an excellent lens at f/5.6. 

Just kidding. It might be good even wide open. Let's wait and see.


----------



## degos (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



kphoto99 said:


> It may be that the "*all for no increase in price*" is true in US, but here in Canada, the old one is C$130 and the new one is C$170 (about US$140 at current exchange rate).



Likewise in the UK, £129 versus various prices less than £88. The Mk II is currently £72 on Amazon UK, for example, and has been as low as £61 ( new, from Amazon ).

Still, better than what they did with the prices of the 24 / 28 / 35 primes!


----------



## slclick (May 13, 2015)

Yeah but you have all that great food and royalty we lack in the colonies.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 13, 2015)

Damn Bollocks, now you went and made me hungry for some boiled meat.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 13, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



Crosswind said:


> You're right, sir. Well, the optics are the same - that doesn't mean it's delivering the same optical performance. I have a feeling that some people here are kind of disappointed with Canon's new 50. I can't see why. Is it because of the missing IS or focus window (lol)... or is it because of STM-only?



For me, the main drawback of the 50/1.8 II is/was the build quality - but not the "plastic fantastic" characteristic, but the extended barrel when focusing.

This has been mentioned before, but this makes the lens *very* fragile. No problem if you're just shooting your aunt's birthday indoors, but if it's for street or outdoors you're bound to bang into something sooner or later - and there go your $125 (but you can keep the $35 lens cap ).

Disclaimer: I'm sure lotsa people will be just fine with this lens as STM or USM probably is a matter of preference and how important FTM is to you.



ahsanford said:


> But I'm sorry, folks are getting 2 more blades, curved blades, STM, increased max magnification -- *all for no increase in price*. _Photographers should say thank you to Canon for that_.



_Thank you, Yongnuo!_

Does anybody seriously believe Canon gracing us with this constant price and update just now is a coincidence?


----------



## scyrene (May 14, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Damn Bollocks, now you went and made me hungry for some boiled meat.



I dunno if you could handle our meat, it's not pumped full of antibiotics ;P


----------



## slclick (May 14, 2015)

scyrene said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Damn Bollocks, now you went and made me hungry for some boiled meat.
> ...



Why that's downright un Merikan!

(fwiw, neither is ours/mine)


----------



## dboris (May 14, 2015)

Please if someones finds any kind of more sample/reviews, post it here


----------



## PepeSilvia (May 14, 2015)

*Re: Canon Says Same Optical Formula*



Crosswind said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > "Does the new 50mm STM contain the same optics design as the 50mm f/1.8 II?" question, Canon U.S.A.'s extremely knowledgeable Chuck Westfall responded:
> ...



If I didn't already own the 50mm f/1.8 II, I would be all over this new lens. I wouldn't say I'm disappointed, I think they've made a ton of improvements here and it's a worthy successor to the super popular plastic fantastic. I would have no issues recommending it. I am just realizing I'm in the market for an upgrade rather than a replacement. As much as the drawbacks of the plastic fantastic annoy me I think I can live with it, considering I'd basically be getting the same images out of the new one (aside from the less pentagonal bokeh). I'd rather save the money for a 35mm f/2 IS, which is a more fully featured lens (USM and IS) to be my new "normal" prime.


----------



## zlatko (May 14, 2015)

dboris said:


> Please if someones finds any kind of more sample/reviews, post it here



There are a bunch of sample photos in the page linked in this post:
http://www.canonwatch.com/more-canon-ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-sample-pictures/

When you get to the page, click on the images for full size.


----------



## dboris (May 14, 2015)

Thanks!!

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review_2/20150514_701745.html


----------



## ahsanford (May 14, 2015)

dboris said:


> Thanks!!
> 
> http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review_2/20150514_701745.html



Fascinating. Those side by sides look more like three nifty fifties and less like two nifty fifties and a pancake. I recognize the physical height is similar, but now I see the front element baffle... it really looks more like a more efficiently packed 50 f/1.8 II than a standalone design.

Now we know that it's the same optical formula, this shouldn't surprise me (but it still kind of does).

- A


----------



## SpuTTer (May 14, 2015)

Found a video that shows the focus noise (or lack of!), 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7zm5xeVex4


----------



## slclick (May 14, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> Found a video that shows the focus noise (or lack of!),
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7zm5xeVex4



"Hey guys, I'm making a video here, how about you cut the chatter for a sec?"


----------



## SpuTTer (May 14, 2015)

Pic from the same person who did the above video:


----------



## SpuTTer (May 14, 2015)

Some more sample images here: (main page not English)

http://revela2estudio.com/objetivo/canon-50mm-18-stm-nuevo/


----------



## slclick (May 14, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> Some more sample images here: (main page not English)
> 
> http://revela2estudio.com/objetivo/canon-50mm-18-stm-nuevo/



Thanks!


----------



## Marsu42 (May 14, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> Some more sample images here: (main page not English)



Bokeh looks surprisingly fine, though there aren't tricky elements (like branches or grass leaves) in it that produce these artifacts on the old 50/1.8. And of course it's all fine for web size, the question is how this will perform on 20mp full frame on 100% crop...


----------



## slclick (May 14, 2015)

I wonder if this lens will fit any older hoods. Occasionally there's the rare compatibility and I do have 3-4 random Canon hoods laying around.


----------



## bereninga (May 14, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> Found a video that shows the focus noise (or lack of!),
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7zm5xeVex4



It's hard to determine how much noise it makes because there's so much background noise (intentional to hide the motor sound?). It's obviously quieter than the mkII, but if you listen closely it makes the 40mm STM, Robocop-like noise while focusing. A bit off topic, but do all STM lenses make that noise? How about the 24mm STM?


----------



## SpuTTer (May 14, 2015)

I was able to track down the originator of the video to this post here at Reddit:

http://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/35y57g/today_i_had_a_brief_handson_time_with_the_new/

He said he's open to questions if anyone had any.


----------



## msowsun (May 15, 2015)

slclick said:


> I wonder if this lens will fit any older hoods. Occasionally there's the rare compatibility and I do have 3-4 random Canon hoods laying around.



The ES-68 bayonet mount hood is unique to this lens. No other Canon hood will fit. None of them share the same 68mm internal dimension. 







Well there is the the EW-68A and EW-68B, but those are clip-on hoods and will not fit the bayonet hood mount of the 50mm 1.8 STM. (clip-on hoods barely fit the lenses they were designed for)


----------



## Marsu42 (May 15, 2015)

msowsun said:


> The ES-68 bayonet mount hood is unique to this lens. No other Canon hood will fit.



And no other 3rd party hood? Ok, that's the last straw (until a lens hood clone is there) for me, I'm definitely not going to pay $35 for a 35ct piece of plastic :-\ and a lens hood is simply required when shooting outdoors for protection from flare and damage.


----------



## rado98 (May 15, 2015)

bereninga said:


> SpuTTer said:
> 
> 
> > Found a video that shows the focus noise (or lack of!),
> ...



The 55-250 atm is truly silent and very, very fast, at least on the wide end. The 24 is supposed to be the same as the 40 which is not as fast or silent.
It's a shame, a really wanted the 50 to get the faster version of stm. I'll still get it though, unless the af is inaccurate.


----------



## msowsun (May 15, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> msowsun said:
> 
> 
> > The ES-68 bayonet mount hood is unique to this lens. No other Canon hood will fit.
> ...



There is no 3rd party hood right now, but there will be soon I expect.


----------



## jblake (May 15, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> msowsun said:
> 
> 
> > The ES-68 bayonet mount hood is unique to this lens. No other Canon hood will fit.
> ...


There are some aluminum 49mm screw in hoods that will work for this lens, they are around $8.50 each. I can see their thumbnail images from the B & H advertising on this page.


----------



## SpuTTer (May 15, 2015)

I suspect that China will have knockoff hoods on Ebay about the same time that Canon starts shipping these! They don't mess around. You may have to deal with a week or two of flare while it shows up or eat the $30 for Canons hood (I'll wait). Plus one of the things I like about the 50 is it's size, and it gets quite a bit bigger with a hood.


----------



## ahsanford (May 15, 2015)

rado98 said:


> bereninga said:
> 
> 
> > SpuTTer said:
> ...



Is there a decent list of the lenses with the slow STM vs. the faster STM? Is it a spec we can look up somewhere?

- A


----------



## SpuTTer (May 15, 2015)

My new dilemma: 40 vs 50

I'd just sold my 35F2 IS (I know, blasphemy) because I wanted something smaller to carry around and I honestly wasn't pulling it out of the bag very much (my go to lens is the 24-105). 

I was dead set on the 40mm until this was announced, and now I have it on pre-order. I'm not totally sold yet which way I should go. I shoot a 6D. I don't need anything wider than 2.8 for light gathering because of my 6Ds high ISO capability but then I'm stuck thinking the reason I have a full frame camera is to be able to embrace my inner bokeh whore as needed, and the 40mm just doesnt offer that for most situations where I'm hoping the 50 1.8 does. 

I think the 40mm focal length may be better for an all in one walk around lens, but all the keepers I typically care about right now are of people so the 50mm may be better for that. I'm obviously torn. 

Before this release it was a clear choice for me for the 40mm but the 50mm seems to fix the build and blades which were the bigger selling points for the 40. So now the 40's differences are now: size, focal length, and maybe a little more sharpness (albeit at 2.8 starting). 

Comparing the 40 to the 50 stm:

*40mm differences:*

Smaller size
More general focal length (this isnt necessarily an advantage)
Sharp across frame wide open (albeit at 2.8)
1oz lighter
Potentially louder focus motor (we dont know yet)


*50mm differences:*

Larger size (but still small)
1oz heavier (still light)
Potentially same focus motor (we dont know yet) but possibly the quieter motor
1 1/3 stop brighter (at least its an option even if softer in corners)


The 50mm seems like a winner if you can deal with or desire a 50mm focal length. You are basically giving up focal length and size for low light capability and maybe a tiny bit of sharpness.


----------



## SpuTTer (May 15, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Is there a decent list of the lenses with the slow STM vs. the faster STM? Is it a spec we can look up somewhere?
> - A



The only lens with the "slow" STM at this point has been the 40mm. The 18-55, 18-135, 55-250 used the "fast" type. The 18-135 is dead silent. If you didn't see the focus change in your viewfinder you may not know


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 15, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Is there a decent list of the lenses with the slow STM vs. the faster STM? Is it a spec we can look up somewhere?
> ...



Also the 24 STM. Both the pancakes.


----------



## SpuTTer (May 15, 2015)

Forgot about the 24mm thank you!!

Canon just released another couple of 50 1.8 images on their twitter feed. 

https://twitter.com/canonusaimaging


----------



## slclick (May 15, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> My new dilemma: 40 vs 50
> 
> I'd just sold my 35F2 IS (I know, blasphemy) because I wanted something smaller to carry around and I honestly wasn't pulling it out of the bag very much (my go to lens is the 24-105).
> 
> ...



I have the 40, used it extensively and do not put it in a class with the fifty. The 40 is a long wide, the 50 is normal. (49 degrees horizontally to the 50's 40 degrees)

10mm on this short of a focal length spectrum is quite a great deal in terms of angle of view. Plus I highly doubt the 50 will offer the color and contrast of the pancake. Personally my two prime kit consists of a 5D3+ 40 & 135L. I'm going for the 50 STM as well because of it's extra stop, pancake like size and price. Bag wise it's not a noticeable difference to be carrying 3 instead of two. Like a spare battery.


----------



## SpuTTer (May 15, 2015)

slclick said:


> I have the 40, used it extensively and do not put it in a class with the fifty. The 40 is a long wide, the 50 is normal. (49 degrees horizontally to the 50's 40 degrees)
> 
> 10mm on this short of a focal length spectrum is quite a great deal in terms of angle of view. Plus I highly doubt the 50 will offer the color and contrast of the pancake. Personally my two prime kit consists of a 5D3+ 40 & 135L. I'm going for the 50 STM as well because of it's extra stop, pancake like size and price. Bag wise it's not a noticeable difference to be carrying 3 instead of two. Like a spare battery.



I have heard great things about the 40 and that's why I'm so on the fence. I really can't see myself walking around with both so I feel like I need to make a decision. I should probably wait until the reviews are out but at this point Im putting the 50 as the same lens IQ wise with maybe better bokeh stopped down. The 40 IQ wise is awesome from all accounts.

My other low light lens is the 100 f2 so it would likely compliment either the 40mm or 50mm just fine, and actually may be a case for the 40mm so I have a portrait option already covered on the 50 if I need strong background blur.


----------



## bereninga (May 15, 2015)

Since the 50mm STM is stated to mainly be the same optical formula as the 50mm mkII, you could do a comparison here of the 40mm STM vs the 50mm mkII (at f/2.8):
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=810&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=105&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Or just wait until the 50mm STM is added there to really compare.


----------



## SpuTTer (May 16, 2015)

Yes, the 40mm looks really nice there. I'm thinking I'd be OK with a little edge sharpness loss at 2.8-5.6 in trade off for the ability to shoot at f1.8-2, which I'd mostly be doing for portraiture I imagine. I guess the problem I'm having is that both lenses have tradeoffs and somethings got to give and I'm struggling with what to give up


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 16, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> a lens hood is simply required when shooting outdoors for protection from flare and damage.



Is that really true, especially on a lens with the front element recessed so far? I've never used a hood on any my lenses and I've never seen flare before except when shooting into the sun. 

I don't understand the protection from damage requirement either, again the front element is like 3/4 inch back.....


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 16, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> Yes, the 40mm looks really nice there. I'm thinking I'd be OK with a little edge sharpness loss at 2.8-5.6 in trade off for the ability to shoot at f1.8-2, which I'd mostly be doing for portraiture I imagine. I guess the problem I'm having is that both lenses have tradeoffs and somethings got to give and I'm struggling with what to give up



Maybe get the 50mm for now, then grab the other on sale? I picked up my 40mm on sale at best buy for $100 if I recall. 

If I had to pick one or the other I would get the 50mm. I mean unless you have the money to burn to buy both, and unless you want the pancake lens because its pancake, 50mm will make nicer looking images in most cases. 50mm has a certain look that many prefer which you wont get with 40mm.


----------



## SpuTTer (May 16, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> Maybe get the 50mm for now, then grab the other on sale? I picked up my 40mm on sale at best buy for $100 if I recall.
> 
> If I had to pick one or the other I would get the 50mm. I mean unless you have the money to burn to buy both, and unless you want the pancake lens because its pancake, 50mm will make nicer looking images in most cases. 50mm has a certain look that many prefer which you wont get with 40mm.



That's my current plan. I have the new 50mm on preorder. I'm always second guessing so it's good to talk it off of you all  I do like that the 40 is a pancake but the 50 is so small it's not a huge issue. The 50 is certainly a classic format. I'll probably just get the 50 STM and see how it goes. I haven't shot a 50 since I moved to full frame (sold my 1.4 long ago). I guess if I absolutely hate the 50 I can sell it for close to what I paid so I should stop worrying and go shoot


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 16, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > a lens hood is simply required when shooting outdoors for protection from flare and damage.
> ...



The hoods for the 40/2.8 and M22/2 won't protect from either flare or damage.


----------



## e17paul (May 16, 2015)

I'm liking the shots at http://m.dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review_2/20150514_701745.html

I sold my old 1.8 mainly because of the focus ring and lack of close focus. I'm sure that the STM will be fine for AF, I just hope that it will be responsive enough to the electronically controlled manual focus. The fastest lend so far will be the sternest test for manual focus STM - I can't wait to try one in a shop.


----------



## mistaspeedy (May 16, 2015)

Anyone know something more about optics/glass in general?

I have read that the optical formula remains the same as the 50mm F1.8 II.
They have mentioned that it will be coated with the 'super spectra lens coating' and that we now have 7 rounded aperture blades instead of 5 straight ones.

Is it possible that the glass elements themselves are different at all? 
Better glass?, I'm not sure if there are various types or levels of quality besides totally different materials like Fluorite. (I realize we're not getting super expensive stuff like Fluorite)
Higher quality production/machining of those same elements?
Or are we getting the same glass elements from the same production line as the 50mm F1.8 II, just with the added lens coating? - I feel that this is the most likely option, but am just curious to hear your opinions.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 16, 2015)

dboris said:


> http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review_2/20150514_701745.html



The aperture series (esp. of the house with the caption 以下のサムネイルは四角の部分を等倍で切り出したものです) show that this lens is as wishy-washy wide open than its predecessors and needs stopping down to f5.6+ at 100% crop.

Yes-I-know-it's-only-$135-plus-$35-hood but with lens, it's about bokehlicious shots for web size output, or look elsewhere. Look elsewhere in any case if you want sealing or a sturdier build w/o extruding tubus :-o


----------



## Mr_Canuck (May 17, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> My new dilemma: 40 vs 50
> 
> I was dead set on the 40mm until this was announced, and now I have it on pre-order. I'm not totally sold yet which way I should go. I shoot a 6D. I don't need anything wider than 2.8 for light gathering because of my 6Ds high ISO capability but then I'm stuck thinking the reason I have a full frame camera is to be able to embrace my inner bokeh whore as needed, and the 40mm just doesnt offer that for most situations where I'm hoping the 50 1.8 does.
> 
> ...



If you want an all around lens for your 6D I'd suggest the 40. Shooting at 2.8 on full frame provides some noticeably attractive narrow depth of focus. And 40 is almost 35 which is a typical rangefinder, cell phone, moderate wide, safety length. And the 40 has great optics.

But if you are looking to do people photos, then I would suggest going with the 50, 85 or 100.

I'm planning on getting this new 50 because I like the normal focal length and I'd like something at least f2. I will be interested in how interested I am in the 40 after a while. I'm selling my 50/2.5 macro which is a nice lens but I got a 100 macro. But I still miss a fast 50. If they were coming out with the new 50/1.4 IS (that will look like your 35is and cost about the same) I might go that direction. But it's hard to lose at a mere 130 dollars and 160 grams. I won't bother with a filter, just a step-up ring for my 52mm polarizer. Left hand makes a great hood when needed.

And hey! We could all be forced to buy a $900 Sony FE 50mm/1.8... ironic that our 6D's with this lens will be every bit as light, and also a bit shallower, than the Sony a7 with their fancy 50. And I bet we can make just as nice photos, and now, just as quietly. I think those 7 rounded blades are going to make a lovely difference.


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 17, 2015)

mistaspeedy said:


> Or are we getting the same glass elements from the same production line as the 50mm F1.8 II, just with the added lens coating? - I feel that this is the most likely option, but am just curious to hear your opinions.



I was thinking the price on the new model is probably so low because of that reason. There is only slight improvement on the MTF charts which a number of people have suggested would be accounted for by the better coatings.

Somebody called the nifty fifty the gateway drug of the Canon lens lineup, so it would not surprise me if they are not making much/any money on the new version. I mean for the same price EVERYTHING has been replaced/upgraded but the glass itself. 

I think the fact that the optics did not change is a testament to how well tuned that design is. I mean if they could make it sharper, without making it making it larger or more expensive, they would have.


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 17, 2015)

Mr_Canuck said:


> If you want an all around lens for your 6D I'd suggest the 40. Shooting at 2.8 on full frame provides some noticeably attractive narrow depth of focus. And 40 is almost 35 which is a typical rangefinder, cell phone, moderate wide, safety length. And the 40 has great optics.



I don't use my 40 much cuz I have the 35 IS, and he had the 35 IS but sold it, so I'm not sure he'd like 40. All these lens choices... Definitely first world problems. lol


----------



## degos (May 17, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> I don't need anything wider than 2.8 for light gathering because of my 6Ds high ISO capability but then I'm stuck thinking the reason I have a full frame camera is to be able to embrace my inner bokeh whore as needed, and the 40mm just doesnt offer that for most situations where I'm hoping the 50 1.8 does.



ISO is good but really no substitute for pure light-gathering.

I used a 40mm STM on a 1D Mk IV and sold it due to anemic performance indoors. You really do notice the difference shooting at ISO1600 versus 3200.

Yes, the 6D has lower high-ISO noise but it is still noisy compared to what you could be using if you had f1.8 or f2 available.

The 40mm was so weak in poor light I ended-up using the 85mm f1.8 in its place ( I didn't have a 35 or 50mm at the time ) and having to keep distance from the subject. Not ideal but better than all that noise.

Out and about in the outdoors the 40mm is great, however, and a handy catch-the-moment substitute for a lens-cap.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 17, 2015)

degos said:


> ISO is good but really no substitute for pure light-gathering.



Pure light gathering is good but really no substitute for sufficient depth of field.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 17, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> degos said:
> 
> 
> > ISO is good but really no substitute for pure light-gathering.
> ...



+1 for that, the (English) term "fast lens" really cons into thinking it's all 'bout getting a nice and fast shutter speed, while the tradeoff is a ridiculously thin depth of field. The usual f4-zoomy-something is mostly working in every situation, but <=f2 makes a severe difference.

Of course dof is all subjective and so much depends on output size and subject isolation also depends on camera-subject-background distance. So essentially a "fast" lens is great for having more freedom of choice, but there's a reason you can still stop it down other than maxing out your shutter speed.


----------



## slclick (May 17, 2015)

degos said:


> SpuTTer said:
> 
> 
> > I don't need anything wider than 2.8 for light gathering because of my 6Ds high ISO capability but then I'm stuck thinking the reason I have a full frame camera is to be able to embrace my inner bokeh whore as needed, and the 40mm just doesnt offer that for most situations where I'm hoping the 50 1.8 does.
> ...



The 40's handling of CA blows the 85 out of the water. I guess you just need to buy and carry lots of lenses eh? Oh and weak in low light? Pish posh...


----------



## slclick (May 17, 2015)

Just checking on the Amazon page for the lens....Wow, a #1 and it's just a preorder.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 17, 2015)

slclick said:


> Just checking on the Amazon page for the lens....Wow, a #1 and it's just a preorder.


I would not be surprised if the new Canon 50mm STM become the'll sold lens (from any manufacturer) for the next five years.

That seems like a Bokeh-per-dollar ratio really unbeatable.


----------



## meywd (May 18, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Just checking on the Amazon page for the lens....Wow, a #1 and it's just a preorder.
> ...



Although I agree, it seem that Amazon list it as a newer version of the 50 f1.8 II, and another thing, its listed #1 in film SLR cameras lenses, while the 50 f1.8 II as #1 in digital camera lenses


----------



## Marsu42 (May 18, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> That seems like a Bokeh-per-dollar ratio really unbeatable.



Not quite - The Yn clone of the 50/1.8 II is only $55, and if you don't care about the 80s af sound the bare bones iq probably isn't that different for small export sizes: http://www.135shot.com/lens-accessories/standard-medium-telephoto-lens/yongnuo-yn-ef-50mm-f-1-8-af-lens-with-extra-large-aperture-for-canon-slr-cameras.html


----------



## SpuTTer (May 19, 2015)

First review I've seen is out, but its in chinese. Google translates it well enough.
http://dcdv.zol.com.cn/521/5210900.html


----------



## dboris (May 19, 2015)

Omg I'm so disapointed.. I thought it would have internal focusing like all stm lenses


----------



## Sporgon (May 19, 2015)

dboris said:


> Omg I'm so disapointed.. I thought it would have internal focusing like all stm lenses



If your 40mm and 24mm STM have internal focusing they are likely to be broken


----------



## NorbR (May 19, 2015)

Not all STM lenses, the pancakes have a similar extending barrel (including the EF-M). 
This just confirms that this 50mm is essentially an extra-thick pancake. So let's not expect miracles regarding AF speed.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 19, 2015)

NorbR said:


> The pancakes have a similar extending barrel (including the EF-M). This just confirms that this 50mm is essentially an extra-thick pancake.



The width of the extension makes a difference for sturdiness b/c of the lever. If you bang against anything with a fully extended 50/1.8 plastic prime, chances are it's broken. I don't own ef-m or the 40mm pancake, but I imagine the physical extension is shorter on these.


----------



## ahsanford (May 19, 2015)

I just checked every STM lens' listing at TDP:

All STM zooms have internal focusing.

All STM primes are _*not*_ internally focusing. Keep in mind they don't catalogue EF-M, so they only have listings for the EF-S and EF pancakes and not the 22mm EF-M. 

- A


----------



## slclick (May 19, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > That seems like a Bokeh-per-dollar ratio really unbeatable.
> ...



Ugh I tried a YN clone, it was R U B B I S H. Noisier than the Mark2 and forward focused so much it would have taken -40 AFMA. You get what you pay for.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 19, 2015)

slclick said:


> Noisier than the Mark2 and forward focused so much it would have taken -40 AFMA.



Magic Lantern allows you to set afma values outside Canon's limits  ... and if this would be a Canon lens, it would be argued that probably your individual lens sample was broken and you should get it replaced on warranty. As it's a Yn lens, of course we Canon folk know this is a deep, systemic problem :->


----------



## slclick (May 19, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Noisier than the Mark2 and forward focused so much it would have taken -40 AFMA.
> ...



Nah, Amazon Prime, sent it back with paid shipping.


----------



## bereninga (May 19, 2015)

dboris said:


> Omg I'm so disapointed.. I thought it would have internal focusing like all stm lenses



This definitely looks like it extends further than the 40mm STM. It's probably as much as the 50 f/1.4 even. Just make sure the lens is contracted before turning off the camera and storing. Saw this coming a mile away since it looks just like the pancake.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 19, 2015)

Bah, looks like it's back to waiting for a good Canon 50.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 19, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> Bah, looks like it's back to waiting for a good Canon 50.



If you are expecting 'good' for $125, you're in for a long wait.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 19, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> If you are expecting 'good' for $125, you're in for a long wait.



Even $125 is too much for something that dies if it gets bumped. Inexcusable.


----------



## zlatko (May 19, 2015)

slclick said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...



So much for the YN clone being a great "value". You get what you pay for is right!


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 19, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> Even $125 is too much for something that dies if it gets bumped. Inexcusable.



I don't know too many people who are clairvoyant like you. STM ≠ micromotor. I've bumped and knocked the extended portion of both my 40/2.8 and M22/2 a few times, they're working fine.


----------



## scyrene (May 19, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Even $125 is too much for something that dies if it gets bumped. Inexcusable.
> ...



I was gonna say... I used to leave the 85L II with the front bit extended when I stored it. It never did any harm. Not sure whether that's relevant though :/


----------



## Marsu42 (May 19, 2015)

bereninga said:


> This definitely looks like it extends further than the 40mm STM. It's probably as much as the 50 f/1.4 even.0



Thanks for posting the picture, from what I can see it doesn't look as fragile as the 50/1.8 II so there's hope still


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 19, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> I don't know too many people who are clairvoyant like you. STM ≠ micromotor. I've bumped and knocked the extended portion of both my 40/2.8 and M22/2 a few times, they're working fine.



Did I mistake your Cheerios for the toilet this morning? I was replying to a comment that stated the lens appeared to extend more than the 40 STM, and care should be taken to keep it retracted for storage. I don't want to be worrying about that, so if that's the case, I'm out, and waiting for ahsanford's 50/1.4 IS USM. If you have an issue with "clairvoyance" take it up with the person who made the claim I responded to, and get off my jock.


----------



## slclick (May 19, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know too many people who are clairvoyant like you. STM ≠ micromotor. I've bumped and knocked the extended portion of both my 40/2.8 and M22/2 a few times, they're working fine.
> ...



I find the 40 very solid. No wobble when mounted, has taken a beating in the field (due to it being on the body more than other lenses albeit a diminutive size) My most traveled lens by far... sand, sea, dry, humid...you get the picture. Now the Nifty Fifty, that's one fragile POS. I just can't see being so delicate with a pancake lens. Sure it's your choice to buy and then after buying to pamper your purchases but it's not made of rice paper by any means.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 20, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know too many people who are clairvoyant like you. STM ≠ micromotor. I've bumped and knocked the extended portion of both my 40/2.8 and M22/2 a few times, they're working fine.
> ...



Well, I generally prefer the expression 'did someone piss in your Wheaties' but you're making a judgement about a lens which hasn't been released yet. The reality is that care should be taken with any lens to retract an extending barrel before storage, from the cheap 50/1.8 II to the $2K 85/1.2L II. The problem with the 50/1.8 II is that a hard bump while in use could also cause a problem, something that doesn't seem to be the case for the recent pancake STM lenses - and the new 50/1.8 STM seems more like the newer pancake lenses in design, at least by appearance. The main point is, we just don't know yet – well, most of us don't know, anyway.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 20, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Well, I generally prefer the expression 'did someone piss in your Wheaties' but you're making a judgement about a lens which hasn't been released yet. The reality is that care should be taken with any lens to retract an extending barrel before storage, from the cheap 50/1.8 II to the $2K 85/1.2L II. The problem with the 50/1.8 II is that a hard bump while in use could also cause a problem, something that doesn't seem to be the case for the recent pancake STM lenses - and the new 50/1.8 STM seems more like the newer pancake lenses in design, at least by appearance. The main point is, we just don't know yet – well, most of us don't know, anyway.



And I was changing it up. To make it more fun.

And again, you'll note, I was responding to someone else's comment about their expectations for its durability. If you're right, great! However, you don't _know_ either.

And dammit, I really want ahsanford's 50/1.4 IS USM anyway.


----------



## ahsanford (May 20, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Well, I generally prefer the expression 'did someone piss in your Wheaties' but you're making a judgement about a lens which hasn't been released yet. The reality is that care should be taken with any lens to retract an extending barrel before storage, from the cheap 50/1.8 II to the $2K 85/1.2L II. The problem with the 50/1.8 II is that a hard bump while in use could also cause a problem, something that doesn't seem to be the case for the recent pancake STM lenses - and the new 50/1.8 STM seems more like the newer pancake lenses in design, at least by appearance. The main point is, we just don't know yet – well, most of us don't know, anyway.
> ...



For the record, I do not _own_ this lens. 

But I want to.

- A


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 20, 2015)

The spec sheets I saw _did_ say internal focus but I didn't really expect that just because it has the same optics, so how could it not have an extending barrel? 

The rest of the build is clearly new so you can't judge the new one by the old in that regard. 

For $125 there's really no room to complain. People call the old one the disposable lens, so I guess the disposable lens standards have gone to a new level. 

This will be nearly half the (retail)price of the 40, over a stop faster, and just as sharp at equivalent apertures. Is there even a valid complaint? Oh right, its an ounce heavier because of that pesky metal mount......


----------



## verysimplejason (May 20, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> The spec sheets I saw _did_ say internal focus but I didn't really expect that just because it has the same optics, so how could it not have an extending barrel?
> 
> The rest of the build is clearly new so you can't judge the new one by the old in that regard.
> 
> ...



+1. You get what you paid for. In this case, you get more than you paid for. So what's the problem?  Now, I'm patiently waiting for the 85mm F1.8 stm version (hopefully with IS). Same bokeh without the CA hopefully and sharper open wide. I've got no need for USM for this kind of lens. STM should be sufficient. Oh and make it smaller, lighter and as cheap. Now that'd be a dream.


----------



## jeffa4444 (May 20, 2015)

K said:


> Of course, Canon's sample images shows all the headshots done with a crop camera (80mm perspective), and the rest with a 6D.
> 
> Not intended to start a "50mm isn't a portrait lens" war....
> 
> ...


----------



## slclick (May 20, 2015)

verysimplejason said:


> Solar Eagle said:
> 
> 
> > The spec sheets I saw _did_ say internal focus but I didn't really expect that just because it has the same optics, so how could it not have an extending barrel?
> ...



Something that doesn't get talked about very often...an 85 1.? STM IS or some other similar variant. I think it would be a very good idea. Along the lines of the 24/28/35 IS group, same build, very well controlled CA and tack sharp for portraits. I'd be all over it.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 21, 2015)

slclick said:


> I think it would be a very good idea.



A good idea for you as a customer getting max "iq bang for the buck", or a good idea for Canon as a commercial enterprise aiming to maximize profits  ?


----------



## slclick (May 21, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > I think it would be a very good idea.
> ...



Should my consumerism desires always match the manufacturers business model? That is just so cold and non human.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 21, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > I think it would be a very good idea.
> ...



The merits of the idea itself aside, it'll only happen if Canon believes the latter is true.


----------



## slclick (May 21, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...




Well no shinola Sherlock! 

I inserted a winky so NA knows I love him.


----------



## SpuTTer (May 21, 2015)

Here is a video with a bunch of 50 stm pics...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKfuZdHjXl4


----------



## slclick (May 21, 2015)

Arriving today! (Just got my tracking)


----------



## mrzero (May 21, 2015)

Crosswind said:


> Does anyone know if the lens hood will be attached onto the lens or its barrel? The latter would be a deal breaker.



It looks like a standard bayonet mount on the body of the lens, which would be best. The next thing it leads me to wonder is if the hood will fit over a step-up ring to get off that weird 49mm filter size. 

I don't think it will matter for me, as I'm going to hold out for the 50mm with IS and bide my time with the current 1.8 II until it dies.


----------



## slclick (May 21, 2015)

Well I am pleased. The build is MUCH more robust than the previous incarnations and the STM works as expected. Very similar focus speed and sound as the 40. I did a few test shots, 1.8, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8.... and I think I'll need a slight AFMA on the 5D3. Maybe about +2. Let's see what FoCal says. The specular highlights are very nice, much more rounded than I thought they'd be. I'll do a more scientific set of test images and post later.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 21, 2015)

slclick said:


> Well I am pleased. The build is MUCH more robust than the previous incarnations and the STM works as expected. Very similar focus speed and sound as the 40. I did a few test shots, 1.8, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8.... and I think I'll need a slight AFMA on the 5D3. Maybe about +2. Let's see what FoCal says. The specular highlights are very nice, much more rounded than I thought they'd be. I'll do a more scientific set of test images and post later.



About go out and take some real shots - no crappy test chart shots 

Just got shipping notice from Adorama today, still no feeling of excitement in me :-\ This could be my 1st Canon lens I bought without BW Clear filter installed.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 22, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> The spec sheets I saw _did_ say internal focus but I didn't really expect that just because it has the same optics, so how could it not have an extending barrel?
> 
> The rest of the build is clearly new so you can't judge the new one by the old in that regard.
> 
> ...



Uh... the retail price of the 40, as far as I'm aware, is $149. What am I missing? The 50 STM is fully 5/6ths its price.


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 22, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> Uh... the retail price of the 40, as far as I'm aware, is $149. What am I missing? The 50 STM is fully 5/6ths its price.




You're confusing sale price with retail price. $149 is with a $50 manufacturer rebate being applied.

List price/regular price/retail price are all interchangeable terms. That's the price the manufacturer sets as the standard price.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 22, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> You're confusing sale price with retail price. $149 is with a $50 manufacturer rebate being applied.
> 
> List price/regular price/retail price are all interchangeable terms. That's the price the manufacturer sets as the standard price.



It's not even a mail-in rebate; it's "instant savings". You'd have a hard time spending $199 on it if you were trying. When you can go to Best Buy and walk out with your card charged that amount... that's retail, as far as I'm concerned, not a theoretical price. Any more than an item on HSN that claims to be "valued at" some random amount.


----------



## slclick (May 22, 2015)

Went across the street during a break from the rain to my neighbors yard. ISO 160 all shots, 1.8, 2.8, 4.0, 5.6, 8.0, 11, 16, 22

I have yet to AFMA the lens.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 22, 2015)

slclick said:


> Went across the street during a break from the rain to my neighbors yard. ISO 160 all shots, 1.8, 2.8, 4.0, 5.6, 8.0, 11, 16, 22



Given the specs and the unchanged optical design, the bokeh on the wide open shot looks quite ok to me. Such a pity the lens doesn't perform better concerning sharpness, alas, it's not expensive either.


----------



## Sporgon (May 22, 2015)

That's a difficult scene for f/1.8 on 50 ml; there's a real depth of tangle ! I see some promising bits, I'll be able to find out when mine arrives in a couple of days. Think it's going to be another good lightweight panoramic lens !


----------



## slclick (May 23, 2015)

I agree that that scene doesn't lend itself that well to critical focus and DoF comparisons. I've been holed up sick, in the rain and alone. When the family gets back I'll have portrait subjects!


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 23, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> It's not even a mail-in rebate; it's "instant savings". You'd have a hard time spending $199 on it if you were trying. When you can go to Best Buy and walk out with your card charged that amount... that's retail, as far as I'm concerned, not a theoretical price. Any more than an item on HSN that claims to be "valued at" some random amount.



Its still a sale price. I pulled the below text from Best Buy's website, which shows you the regular (retail) price, and the sale price. 

$149.99 
On Sale
Save $50 (Reg. $199.99) 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suggested_retail_price


----------



## SpuTTer (May 23, 2015)

Guys, no one cares about the great "sales price debate".


----------



## slclick (May 23, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> Guys, no one cares about the great "sales price debate".



Can we get all the Sales Price debaters, Pop up flash smugness accusers and DxO score folks in the same room? 


I have a big lock.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 23, 2015)

slclick said:


> SpuTTer said:
> 
> 
> > Guys, no one cares about the great "sales price debate".
> ...


Then only will miss the defenders of Dinamic Range in ISO100 ... :


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 23, 2015)

slclick said:


> SpuTTer said:
> 
> 
> > Guys, no one cares about the great "sales price debate".
> ...



That was tried ages ago. Then some foolish little girl named Pandora came along.......


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 23, 2015)

SpuTTer said:


> Guys, no one cares about the great "sales price debate".



Oops, I forgot there was an audience here. lol


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 24, 2015)

slclick said:


> SpuTTer said:
> 
> 
> > Guys, no one cares about the great "sales price debate".
> ...



Weird; I have literally never seen this debate before, here or on POTN. Sorry it's such a drag.  :


----------



## NYCPHOTO (May 24, 2015)

Will the lens shade from the previous 1.8 fit the new model? Love to avoid the additional expense if possible.


----------



## dboris (May 24, 2015)

It will not fit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXPLam3sico

People in the US have already received it while... In france I can't even find a place to pre-order it :


----------



## DominoDude (May 26, 2015)

It has been seen in the wild now -> http://weeder.org/rLH6kRw
(Found this through Rob Tullis [@PreveaArt] on Twitter.)


----------



## jeffa4444 (May 26, 2015)

dboris said:


> It will not fit.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXPLam3sico
> 
> People in the US have already received it while... In france I can't even find a place to pre-order it :


I was told European pre-orders start shipping on May 28th. Guess the US is more important!


----------



## Sporgon (May 26, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> dboris said:
> 
> 
> > It will not fit.
> ...



Dale Photographic in Leeds have them now, in fact they've had them since Friday, so if you want one now........


----------



## drjlo (May 26, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> dboris said:
> 
> 
> > It will not fit.
> ...



Seems fairly soft at f/1.8, as expected from the old lens, but bokeh seems definitely better. Would like to have seen more shots stopped down a little..


----------



## Marsu42 (May 26, 2015)

drjlo said:


> Seems fairly soft at f/1.8, as expected from the old lens, but bokeh seems definitely better. Would like to have seen more shots stopped down a little..



From the sample shots I've seen (there's a link to some chinese site further up) stopping down a little is of no use until you're in "landscape" f8 territory - so either take it or leave it for web-sized shots.


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 27, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> From the sample shots I've seen (there's a link to some chinese site further up) stopping down a little is of no use until you're in "landscape" f8 territory - so either take it or leave it for web-sized shots.



People with the lens don't appear to agree with that sentiment:

Most significantly, vivid and sharp images wide open.

Sharp as all hell wide open at 1.8 in the center.

At 1.8 the corner were not as sharp as the center of the frame, 2.8 and higher resolves this.

Once you knock it down to around f2.8 this lens is about as sharp as you’d get for any lens around this price range.

It is sharp right at 1.8

I feel it looks much sharper at wide open

It's beyond sharp!


----------



## drjlo (May 27, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> It's beyond sharp!



Nifty Fifty was my first lens, and I did think it was sharp back then.
My most-used 50mm/normal lens these days is the Sony/Zeiss FE55 f/1.8, which actually "is" beyond sharp


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 27, 2015)

drjlo said:


> Solar Eagle said:
> 
> 
> > It's beyond sharp!
> ...



Yes but do these incremental improvements at the pixel level mean anything in the real world? If you are requiring enlargements to the level where the pixel matters that much wouldn't you be using a fancy $20,000 camera? 

I just picked up my copy of this lens today and if anybody is deciding not to have this lens for $125 they're either broke or arrogant. lol Seriously. 

I mean if the 40mm STM <retails> at $200 this lens <retails> at $250, easily, yet we pay $150 and $125, respectively. Canon is giving this lens away, if you ask me. It's the lens anybody can have, or could I say should have?

This thing is a real lens. Its no nifty fifty.


----------



## Gnocchi (May 27, 2015)

I've just received my 50stm, and I must say that it's a HUGE improvement over the mk2. Build is nice, light, metal mount, accurate focus its a win win as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## mistaspeedy (May 27, 2015)

Well... Yongnuo had to go and mix things up again!

We all know that Yongnuo offers a clone of the Canon 50mm F1.8II. But recently they have just started shipping another clone. This time a 35mm F2! They are also going to sell a 50mm F1.4 lens (not available yet).

They say the 35mm F2 lens should cost about $115 (I've seen it for about $140 with international shipping on eBay).

I have no idea how the Yongnuo 35mm F2 or 50mm F1.4 lenses perform, so I will be waiting for those reviews. 

The reason I mention all these lenses, is because they are possible competitors to Canon's new 50mm F1.8 STM.


----------



## Solar Eagle (May 28, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> From the sample shots I've seen (there's a link to some chinese site further up) stopping down a little is of no use until you're in "landscape" f8 territory - so either take it or leave it for web-sized shots.



Ok so speaking for copy I see almost no difference between f2.8 and f8, and that is not true of my my Mk II, which shows f8 as being a fair bit sharper than f2.8. Wide open is soft on both, but the STM does show a slight improvement over the Mk II. 

Nailing the focus with the Mk II is a lot harder though. It's a breeze with the STM, which seems to have 2-3x finer control. 

My Mk II saw more use as a loupe than a lens, but the STM ain't no loupe. lol


----------



## Marsu42 (May 28, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> Nailing the focus with the Mk II is a lot harder though. It's a breeze with the STM, which seems to have 2-3x finer control.



Good point there, the new lens is bound to be sharper with af simply b/c the lens's af system doesn't originate in 1980 like the mk2.



Solar Eagle said:


> My Mk II saw more use as a loupe than a lens, but the STM ain't no loupe. lol



I tried to use mine as a reverse macro lens, but it's useless as it isn't sharp enough wide open and there's no manual aperture control.


----------



## exquisitor (May 29, 2015)

Bryan at TDP has just published the lens image quality results for the 50 f/1.8 STM:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

Looks really better to me, especially in the center.


----------



## meywd (May 29, 2015)

exquisitor said:


> Bryan at TDP has just published the lens image quality results for the 50 f/1.8 STM:
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1
> 
> Looks really better to me, especially in the center.



I am sorry, I wear glasses and my vision is not very strong, but are you sure its not your imagination?


----------



## exquisitor (May 29, 2015)

meywd said:


> exquisitor said:
> 
> 
> > Bryan at TDP has just published the lens image quality results for the 50 f/1.8 STM:
> ...



Common, the center is really better. This would be especially appreciated by APS-C camera users.


----------



## Sporgon (May 29, 2015)

meywd said:


> exquisitor said:
> 
> 
> > Bryan at TDP has just published the lens image quality results for the 50 f/1.8 STM:
> ...



More likely to be your screen. 

I've just had a look at the TDP crops and the new 50 STM is significantly better in the center at f/1.8. In fact it is better wide open in the center than the 50 f/1.4 is at f/1.8. 

The extreme corners at smaller apertures are also better, in fact fantastic if you ignore the vignette.

Looks like the 'improved coating and 'precise optical alignment' isn't just sales flannel; Really a 'no brainer' at this price.


----------



## Maximilian (May 29, 2015)

exquisitor said:


> Bryan at TDP has just published the lens image quality results for the 50 f/1.8 STM:
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1
> 
> Looks really better to me, especially in the center.


Impressive improvement. If this is not a good new against bad old sample comparison I must say I am very surprised to see so much difference. If this is "standard" I'd say "well done, Canon!". 
(and now let's hope for a fast 50 mm f1.4 replacement  )


----------



## ajperk (May 29, 2015)

*TDP: 50mm 1.8 MkII vs. STM Image Quality*

Bryan over at The-Digital-Picture has put up his first look at the new Canon EF 50mm STM image quality. You can compare it to the samples he has from the 50mm 1.8 MkII. My preliminary experience concurs with what I see in the comparison, the STM definitely has better contrast wide open than the 50mm MkII. It also looks like there may have been modest improvements in resolution, perhaps due to better QC (more precise placement of elements and less de-centering?).

Anyway, what do you all think?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=15180


----------



## Sporgon (May 29, 2015)

Photozone have actually got a review of a newly introduced lens out quickly for once ! Their results for the 50 STM support TDP.

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/905-canon_50_18stm?start=1


----------



## Marsu42 (May 29, 2015)

Maximilian said:


> Impressive improvement. If this is not a good new against bad old sample comparison I must say I am very surprised to see so much difference.



It's surprising they get so much out of the old optical design, so this puts the lens on my "to be considered" list again! Btw did you ppl notice that the corners have actually *decreased* in sharpness old vs new wide open?

Here's the link for f1.8 (above is f2.0): http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

It's weird that this persists even stopped down, maybe the stm lens they tested has an issue? Here's f2.8: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=105&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 29, 2015)

The improved contrast and sharpness in the center seems very impressive. In the image corners, it looks the same.

I would say that the new 50mm STM is a great cost-effective option for APS-C. For full frame, if you want sharpness corner to corner, there is no escape from Sigma 50mm Art.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 29, 2015)

*Re: TDP: 50mm 1.8 MkII vs. STM Image Quality*

The sharpness and contrast in the center looks so much better than the old plastic fantastic. In the image corners, it looks the same.

I would say that the new 50mm STM is a great cost-effective option for APS-C. For full frame, if you want sharpness corner to corner, there is no escape from Sigma 50mm Art.


----------



## ahsanford (May 29, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> I would say that the new 50mm STM is a great cost-effective option for APS-C. For full frame, if you want sharpness corner to corner, there is no escape from Sigma 50mm Art.



Which is one of many reasons why so many people are holding out for the 50 f/nooneknows IS USM. 

I doubt such a lens would outperform the 50 Art, but if it stacks up to the 50 Art as well as the 35 f/2 IS USM did to the 35 Art (_nearly_ as sharp + IS + only half the weight - one stop), it will be a hit. 

- A


----------



## Zv (May 29, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > Impressive improvement. If this is not a good new against bad old sample comparison I must say I am very surprised to see so much difference.
> ...



Looking at it on my iPad I can see what you mean about the corner performance. It ever so slightly gets blurrier in some places, not all, and most notably at f/1.8 and f/2.8 (I didn't check other apertures though). 

Even if that's how they all are I'd take softer corners for sharpness in the center and mid frame as that's where people's faces are likely to be. Might actually make for a nice look with less time in post blurring the edges! 

I might just buy this as a throw in the bag lens to always have on hand. I'm missing that.


----------



## ahsanford (May 29, 2015)

I have to compare the new 50 to my current yoda-aged EF 50 f/1.4 USM.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Using TDP's tool to compare those, I'm seeing something weird:

At f/1.8: Both are pretty wretched -- I wouldn't use either lens there. The new STM lens vignettes a lot more at that aperture.

At f/2 - f/2.8: The older f/1.4 lens is clearly better. (f/2 is the widest I typically shoot that older f/1.4 lens today.) 

At f/4: I actually think the newer STM lens outperforms the older f/1.4 lens here. It's a small difference, but it's there. 

At f/5.6 - f/11: I'm hard-pressed to see a difference as we might expect.

I'm likely sticking with my EF 50 f/1.4 USM until I see it upgraded. Someone would have to show me that the slow STM focusing without hunting is faster than my micro-crappy-USM with hunting. If the EF 40 pancake is any indicator, crappy/hunty USM trumps slow STM and I'll miss fewer shots with the older lens I own today.

- A


----------



## Marsu42 (May 29, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> I have to compare the new 50 to my current yoda-aged EF 50 f/1.4 USM.



Well, for a good giggle look at this: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


----------



## Marsu42 (May 29, 2015)

*Re: TDP: 50mm 1.8 MkII vs. STM Image Quality*



ajfotofilmagem said:


> I would say that the new 50mm STM is a great cost-effective option for APS-C.



I dunno, imagining even this center "sharpness" magnified on a 24mp crop sensor doesn't sound too exciting - remember the pixel density of the ff sensor in the tdp is much lower.

Edit: this thread is a dupe, see http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=26319.msg523631#msg523631


----------



## Maximilian (May 29, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > Impressive improvement. If this is not a good new against bad old sample comparison I must say I am very surprised to see so much difference.
> ...


I reconized that, too, but don't see that as an issue, because it is not that much. In RL I think you won't recognize that. 
And I don't believe in a lens issue/problem because the midframe of the STM is also still much better than the 50 II.


----------



## exquisitor (May 29, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> I have to compare the new 50 to my current yoda-aged EF 50 f/1.4 USM.
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
> 
> ...



I've also made the same comparison out of curiosity as I have 50 f/1.4 too. Actually even at f/2.8 the new 50 STM looks better in the very center. But as you mentioned the difference is so small, it wouldn't be visible in the real life.

However it looks intriguing what can be achieved through the simple optimizing of the design. I would be curious to see how the 50 f/1.4 would perform with an optimized design and new coatings. If it would be at the same price point as the old one, I would grab it immediately.

About f/1.4 with the actual 50 f/1.4: what is a point of the f/1.4 lens if it is not used at that aperture?  Here is one example of the performance at f/1.4:
https://500px.com/photo/64874145/at-the-lake-by-erwin-nedel?from=user_library


----------



## exquisitor (May 29, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I have to compare the new 50 to my current yoda-aged EF 50 f/1.4 USM.
> ...



Well, if I consider the weight and size of the 50 STM and the 50 ART, then it's not so funny anymore.


----------



## ahsanford (May 29, 2015)

Photozone just posted their results:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/905-canon_50_18stm?start=1

It would appear the same optical formula (as others have said) isn't telling the whole story. It's a shade sharper wide open and slightly better in the corners throughout. 

Not bad at all for such a cheap lens.

- A


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 29, 2015)

*Re: TDP: 50mm 1.8 MkII vs. STM Image Quality*

Since Chuck Westfall of Canon has already said that the lenses use the same optical formula, and difference is likely to be sample related.


----------



## exquisitor (May 29, 2015)

*Re: TDP: 50mm 1.8 MkII vs. STM Image Quality*



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Since Chuck Westfall of Canon has already said that the lenses use the same optical formula, and difference is likely to be sample related.



And what about new coatings? That would definitely make difference, what we also see.


----------



## ajperk (May 29, 2015)

*Re: TDP: 50mm 1.8 MkII vs. STM Image Quality*




Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Since Chuck Westfall of Canon has already said that the lenses use the same optical formula, and difference is likely to be sample related.



It's potentially just sample variation, but The Digital Picture shows about the same results when you compare the STM to the MkII. They both may have gotten their hands on copies on the high quality side, but I think it's evidence that there is some measurable difference between the two. The same optical formula doesnt necessarily rule out improvements in manufacturing tolerances, materials, coatings, etc... Time will tell as more reviews come out and people go out and take pictures. Certainly the difference isn't large if there is one.


----------



## Zv (May 30, 2015)

I did a quick test in store with both the MkII and STM on a 70D. From the very brief time looking at the preview (no memory card in it) I could clearly see the STM was sharper and had much better contrast in the center when shot wide open. 

It's the same optical formula but the results are different. How many years has it been since the MkII? Surely Canon has figured something out in regards to improving IQ using the same formula in that time?


----------



## ahsanford (May 30, 2015)

Zv said:


> I did a quick test in store with both the MkII and STM on a 70D. From the very brief time looking at the preview (no memory card in it) I could clearly see the STM was sharper and had much better contrast in the center when shot wide open.
> 
> It's the same optical formula but the results are different. How many years has it been since the MkII? Surely Canon has figured something out in regards to improving IQ using the same formula in that time?



We'd expect to see less copy to copy variation with (presumably) a 20 year newer manufacturing process, but it's possible Canon's been updating the 50 f/1.8 II process (for cost reasons) all along it's history. 

- A


----------



## Marsu42 (May 30, 2015)

Zv said:


> It's the same optical formula but the results are different. How many years has it been since the MkII? Surely Canon has figured something out in regards to improving IQ using the same formula in that time?



I expect so - and that's not very hard to do considering the 50/1.8 II was intended to be a cheap low-iq lens even back then, plastic mount at all. So a relative improvement is all nice and such, but not necessarily something to get excited about in the year 2015 a.d. unless this is just what you're looking for. A decent usm 50/1.4 update, anyone?


----------



## wsmith96 (May 30, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> A decent usm 50/1.4 update, anyone?



I'm up for a 50/1.4 update.


----------



## Zv (May 30, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > It's the same optical formula but the results are different. How many years has it been since the MkII? Surely Canon has figured something out in regards to improving IQ using the same formula in that time?
> ...



Plastic fantastic was my first prime and I loved it and yes a slightly better version for cheap is exactly what I'm looking for! Placed my order today!


----------



## ahsanford (May 30, 2015)

wsmith96 said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > A decent usm 50/1.4 update, anyone?
> ...



Sight unseen, I'd pre-order on day one if it's the non-L IS refresh that we expect is coming.

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 30, 2015)

Zv said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Zv said:
> ...



Me too. Damn you all!


----------



## jocau (May 31, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> I tried to use mine as a reverse macro lens, but it's useless as it isn't sharp enough wide open and there's no manual aperture control.



It's not useless because for macro you just don't use it wide open. Way too little DoF that way. Set it to F/8 and then use it as a reverse macro lens. At least that's the way I do it. To achieve this you...

- Mount the lens normally on a Canon DSLR.
- Set the camera to e.g. Av or M mode.
- Set the desired aperture (e.g. F/8).
- Press and hold the DoF Preview Button (near the lens mount).
- While holding down the DoF Preview Button, unmount the lens. The aperture will stay at your selected aperture.
- Attach the lens to the macro reverse ring and the macro reverse ring to the camera.


----------



## Solar Eagle (Jun 1, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Well, for a good giggle look at this: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=941&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0



Same image quality at f4 and beyond for 1/5 the weight and 1/7 the price? That IS good for a giggle. Wide open to wide open is not that far off either.


----------



## Solar Eagle (Jun 1, 2015)

*Re: TDP: 50mm 1.8 MkII vs. STM Image Quality*



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Since Chuck Westfall of Canon has already said that the lenses use the same optical formula, and difference is likely to be sample related.



The elements do have a totally different appearance. The formula is the same but I don't think the lenses are. Maybe its just the coating that gives that look but I would think all Mk II were made with aged glass and machine standards while the STM is made with their current methods.


----------



## tolusina (Jun 1, 2015)

jocau said:


> ......
> 
> It's not useless because for macro you just don't use it wide open. Way too little DoF that way. Set it to F/8 and then use it as a reverse macro lens. At least that's the way I do it. To achieve this you...
> 
> ...


How does one adjust focus on an STM lens when it's reverse mounted and electrically disconnected from the camera body?


----------



## jocau (Jun 1, 2015)

tolusina said:


> jocau said:
> 
> 
> > ......
> ...



The way I do it with my EF 50mm F/1.8 II and my reverse ring is by moving towards or away from the subject. You can clearly see (parts of) the subject come into focus that way.


----------



## Solar Eagle (Jun 1, 2015)

jocau said:


> - Mount the lens normally on a Canon DSLR.
> - Set the camera to e.g. Av or M mode.
> - Set the desired aperture (e.g. F/8).
> - Press and hold the DoF Preview Button (near the lens mount).
> ...



THANKS for posting this.


----------



## jocau (Jun 1, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> jocau said:
> 
> 
> > - Mount the lens normally on a Canon DSLR.
> ...



You're welcome.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 1, 2015)

jocau said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > I tried to use mine as a reverse macro lens, but it's useless as it isn't sharp enough wide open and there's no manual aperture control.
> ...



Thanks for pointinting out this method, I didn't know that back than... but now I've got a "real" macro lens . 

In any case, 50mm isn't the optimal focal length for this purpose b/c in reverse mode you usually want to have something as wide as possible for larger magnification.


----------



## Zv (Jun 2, 2015)

I got mines yesterday. Only had a quick play about with it but I'm liking the results at f/1.8!


----------



## Bennymiata (Jun 2, 2015)

I bought one today in Sydney for Aus$166.00 from a bricks and mortar retailer.
This includes a 10% tax, and with today's exchange rate, it's actually a few $$ cheaper in Oz than it is in the US including our tax.

Seems to work OK, especially for the money.


----------



## guidoz (Jun 2, 2015)

any good review already available?


----------



## markdc70 (Jun 2, 2015)

Here is the only one I have found so far: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/905-canon_50_18stm Although they haven't completed the review yet, the digital picture has it in their lens comparison tool data banks.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 2, 2015)

guidoz said:


> any good review already available?



PZ's is up:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/905-canon_50_18stm


----------



## Meerkat (Jun 2, 2015)

This lens is a lot of fun. Small and focuses accurately. Feels very good on a 6D. The out of focus areas look ok most of the time, sometimes ugly...

I'm having a great time with it.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 2, 2015)

Meerkat said:


> This lens is a lot of fun. Small and focuses accurately. Feels very good on a 6D. The out of focus areas look ok most of the time, sometimes ugly...
> 
> I'm having a great time with it.



I guess you got a lens and she got a handbag ? Guys toys are so much better value !


----------



## Meerkat (Jun 2, 2015)

Right on, Sporgon! But this lens doesn't count because of the low cost


----------



## dcm (Jun 2, 2015)

Just received mine. Plan to use it mostly wide open for low light, sometimes for background blur. Initial tests with the M3 are promising. MF with focus peaking works well for DOF control, but the MF-by-wire can be a little clumsy. Doubt I will use it much with the 6D.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 2, 2015)

Meerkat said:


> This lens is a lot of fun. Small and focuses accurately. Feels very good on a 6D. The out of focus areas look ok most of the time, sometimes ugly... I'm having a great time with it.



No doubt it's just fine in an absolute sense for smaller export sizes, but considering the wisdom of "glass first" one could question the combination of a €140 lens on a €1400 camera body.

I have to admit the longer I read this thread, the stranger it feels that Canon is - of all things - updating their ancient 50/1.8 with a rather similar version with same optical design after decades.

For a full frame camera, an update of their equally ancient micro-usm "hit or miss" 50/1.4 would be what what should have taken place, but obviously Canon marketing vetoed that b/c they want to keep selling their L...


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jun 2, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Meerkat said:
> 
> 
> > This lens is a lot of fun. Small and focuses accurately. Feels very good on a 6D. The out of focus areas look ok most of the time, sometimes ugly... I'm having a great time with it.
> ...


In fact, it is easy to see that Canon did ...

"Engineers, we need to react immediately to YongNuo!" 
Yes Boss. ???
We will use the same optical design, improved coatings, rounded aperture blades and keep the price of the old nifty fifty. 

"Engineers, we need to react immediately to the Sigma Art!" 
We can not, boss. :-[
We need a few years to design a new competitive lens with Sigma. :-X

"Engineers, we need to react immediately to Zeiss Otus!" 
We can not boss.  :-\
We need many years to design a new lens with extremely precise autofocus, which does not cripple the sharpness of such a lens. And we have to find a way to the great sharpness and contrast not harm the dreamy bokeh.  :'( :'( :'(


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 2, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> For a full frame camera, an update of their equally ancient micro-usm "hit or miss" 50/1.4 would be what what should have taken place, but obviously Canon marketing vetoed that b/c they want to keep selling their L...



As much as I've been screaming for the 50 f/nooneknows IS USM, I'm not convinced that it would tremendously undercut L sales, even though it will certainly be sharper. That new lens won't open up to f/1.2, generate that magical draw, be weather-sealed or have that fancy red ring.

I think if there's any reason the 50 f/nooneknows IS USM is deliberately delayed, _it is because of Sigma_ -- but *not* from an 'Oh no, we're Canon and we're shaking in our boots at Sigma's performance!' perspective because we all know Canon doesn't look over it's shoulder like that (at least not for third party products). But I think Sigma undercut the _profitability_ of the non-L refresh lenses, and in turn, Canon may be questioning their strategy to offer more of them in light of that.

Consider: the 24/28/35 non-L IS refresh lenses were a failure from a commercial standpoint -- they were green lit based on an expectation of commanding a $749-849 asking price, which as we all know, they could not maintain. They are currently 549/499/549 at B&H right now. Since that time, the Sigma Art lenses have swooped in with top notch products at mid-level prices. 

So if you're Canon executives reviewing business cases of future products, do you roll the dice on a lens that only makes Canon the profit it's gunning for if it can hold a high asking price? (Once bitten, twice shy perhaps?)

Perhaps Canon gives up on the non-L IS refresh business for now and focuses on:


Inexpensive lenses with proprietary (STM) features -- where _volumes_ are high
Pricey unique items no one else can reasonable build -- where _margins_ are high (i.e. superteles and tilt-shift)
Brand specific things only Canon can sell, like L lenses, which command a nice margin on reputation and past history.

Just a thought. I could entirely be wrong. I hope I am because I want that 50 f/nooneknows IS USM.

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 3, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Perhaps Canon gives up on the non-L IS refresh business for now and focuses on:
> 
> 
> Inexpensive lenses with proprietary (STM) features -- where _volumes_ are high
> ...



Bite your tongue! That would be horrible. I'd pay Sigma Art money for a _good_ Canon 50 with reliable AF... but no other Canon 50 (now that I have the STM coming my way). It would seem very odd for Canon to abdicate a significant portion of the lens range to Sigma. Also, what would they do as the Art line increases? Abandon the 85mm market? Then the 135? Seems like a losing proposition, and they have to realize that.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 3, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps Canon gives up on the non-L IS refresh business for now and focuses on:
> ...



You know I agree with you -- I'm just playing Devil's Advocate to make a point about the profits.

Many people on this forum would $899-999 for a smaller-than-50-Art 50mm f/2 IS USM if it was sharp wide open. But would the market at large do the same when the 50 Art is likely to be faster and sharper for about the same money? I'm not so sure.

What I'm saying is that Canon may be giving a re-think to it's value proposition with the non-L IS refresh lenses. Perhaps they need IS + larger max apertures to justify a higher price, or perhaps they settle in at a $599-ish price but try to maximize profits with STM instead of USM to keep production costs down. Now _I don't like any of those options_, but any way you look at the 24/28/35 non-L IS lenses, their prices plummeted in the first 18 months or so. Canon is probably not so sure they want to go through that again.

- A


----------



## zlatko (Jun 3, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Consider: the 24/28/35 non-L IS refresh lenses were a failure from a commercial standpoint -- they were green lit based on an expectation of commanding a $749-849 asking price, which as we all know, they could not maintain. They are currently 549/499/549 at B&H right now. Since that time, the Sigma Art lenses have swooped in with top notch products at mid-level prices.



Or that price drop could have been the plan all along, pushed further by the strengthening dollar vs. the yen. Not everyone wants the giant sigma 1.4 lenses, and not everyone considers them top notch (that is, in terms of AF). I have the L lenses that I need, and really wanted small primes as an addition, so the new 24, 28, 35 non-L IS lenses looked pretty perfect. I bought all three of them, and none of the Sigmas that are swooping in.


----------



## zlatko (Jun 3, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Meerkat said:
> 
> 
> > This lens is a lot of fun. Small and focuses accurately. Feels very good on a 6D. The out of focus areas look ok most of the time, sometimes ugly... I'm having a great time with it.
> ...



From the cynical perspective, everything is obvious. So we know, obviously, that Canon marketing "vetoed" an improved 50/1.4, just as we know that Canon marketing runs the company and can veto anything. So we know that a new 50/1.4 is not about to happen any time soon. And we know that if it were released, it would hurt sales of the 50L, and that would mean less profit. Because we know that there's more profit in selling a smaller number 50L's vs. a larger number of improved 50/1.4's. Similarly, we know that improving the product line (vs. competitors) with a hot new much-demanded 50/1.4 lens does not help the company as much as selling a few more of the expensive focus-shifting much criticized 50L's. All of this is somehow obvious from the cynical perspective.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 3, 2015)

zlatko said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Meerkat said:
> ...



I agree that Marsu42 is being a bit cynical. Canon can't change/upgrade everything at once, sure a road plan would be nice bit that would play into the hands of their competitors as much as their customers. 

Personally I don't think many people in the 35 f1.4L and 50 f1.2L market even consider the very good 35 f2 IS and the 50 f1.4 (I have a 50 f1.4 and mine is a very good lens), a new 50 f1.4 IS isn't going to steal any 50 f1.2L customers and besides, we don't know the profit margins on these lenses, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Canon made as much profit on a 35 f2 IS at $545 as they do on a 35 f1.4 at $1,329, given economies of scale, manufacturing setups and materials and everything else involved in bringing a lens to market. Even if they don't make as much per lens, I am sure they make more profit from the cheaper models overall sales. Don't forget, for many years the Canon corporate profit cash cow has been entry Rebel kits and the sheer volume of those sales.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 3, 2015)

zlatko said:


> From the cynical perspective, everything is obvious.



Well, I'm never stating I know what exact reasons are Canon acts upon - on the contrary, I usually write we'll never know but just can theorize or state opinions. But the 50mm "standard" lens lineup has been a point of debate for a long time with two lenses that are rather outdated and an L offering that has some special purpose appeal. 

But continuing the cynical reasoning (I'd rall it accepting that Canon is a business), let's hope once Yongnio actually manages to deliver the 50/1.4 clone we'll see a Canon update of their original lens, too  ... that's because I guess Yn is (part of) the reason Canon finally did the 50/1.8 update now.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 3, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> No doubt it's just fine in an absolute sense for smaller export sizes, but considering the wisdom of "glass first" one could question the combination of a €140 lens on a €1400 camera body.



Not half as much as one might question the wisdom of that statement.

Lenses such as the 40mm pancake and 50mm f/1.8 are relatively simple but produce stellar results.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 3, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > From the cynical perspective, everything is obvious.
> ...



The 50mm 'standard' lenses have been a debate here, meanwhile the 50/1.8 II sold like hotcakes. Canon seems to be updating most of their less expensive lenses to STM versions, this seems a logical extension. I don't think Canon cares all that much about what Yongnuo does.


----------



## Roo (Jun 3, 2015)

Bennymiata said:


> I bought one today in Sydney for Aus$166.00 from a bricks and mortar retailer.
> This includes a 10% tax, and with today's exchange rate, it's actually a few $$ cheaper in Oz than it is in the US including our tax.
> 
> Seems to work OK, especially for the money.



I saw that price too but the same day I got an email for a 10% off everything one day sale at the local Ted's  Very happy with it for the price.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 3, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Lenses such as the 40mm pancake and 50mm f/1.8 are relatively simple but produce stellar results.



Depends on what "stellar" is - in absolute terms or in relative terms of how a better lens could perform with a current 20mp ff sensor. Yes, a 50/1.8+6d performs stellar when stopped down, but then again so it really should for €1550.

Though the idea of "glass first" is coupled to the fact that it's a better long-term investment.



neuroanatomist said:


> I don't think Canon cares all that much about what Yongnuo does.



Just out of curiosity, I'd like to learn how it really is (but we'll never know)... we'll see how Canon fares with the Yn competition in the rt flash segment and the upcoming 50/1.4 clone - though the latter doesn't seem to be as "budget" as their 50/1.8.

You might be correct, with the flood of clones and cheap flashes Canon might have decided not to enter the competition at all, but then again it might affect their mid-term policy (like working on an ettl3 protocol).


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 3, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> You know I agree with you -- I'm just playing Devil's Advocate to make a point about the profits.
> 
> Many people on this forum would $899-999 for a smaller-than-50-Art 50mm f/2 IS USM if it was sharp wide open. But would the market at large do the same when the 50 Art is likely to be faster and sharper for about the same money? I'm not so sure.
> 
> ...



I actually wouldn't mind STM for normal primes - I'm not using them for sports, just shots of mostly-stationary targets (and the non-pancake STM is pretty quick!). 

If you're right, it also makes Sigma's strategy of hitting Canon where they're not (a great mid-range 50) look even better, and makes me wonder again why they bothered with the 24-105A (a market that was already served by a cheaper (in the practical sense (nested parentheticals FTW)) lens that's also weather-sealed and almost as good) instead of something else that isn't offered - the rumored 24-70/2, or a stabilized 24-70/2.8 (to be hopefully better than Tamron's), or an 85A (which I believe is coming anyway). Just seems weird to spend resources on a lens without a whole lot of pent-up demand.


----------



## jedy (Jun 3, 2015)

I have been looking to replace the Canon 50mm 1.8 II for some time but have not been able to decide on a suitable alternative. They've either been a little bit pricey or not different enough optically (like the Canon 50mm 1.4 imo) to justify the increased price. I've also been looking at other focal lengths so 50mm has also not been a priority. Whilst this new 50mm 1.8 doesn't seem to be too different optically according to the MFT, the 7 blade aperture is a deal breaker as the 5 blade aperture and crappy bokeh of the 50mm 1.8 II always bugged me. The autofocus on the 1.8 II is slow and hunts in low light so looking forward to the STM motor. Having a metal bayonet mount is another plus! 

The main downside is Canon decided to give this lens a 49mm filter diameter. I own a Sigma 52mm polariser which wasn't cheap so will need to purchase a step up ring for it. It's a good job I replaced, and kept, thank goodness, the crappy lens cap on the 1.8 II which means I should be able to use the better one with the 52mm polariser, hopefully.


----------



## Meerkat (Jun 4, 2015)

Now I want an 85mm f1.8 STM.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 4, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...


Most on this forum are less likely to purchase the Yonguo 50mm f1.8 lens which whilst cheap looks and feels it also. Ive just bought the Canon 50mm f1.8 STM its only arrived today so will put it through its paces over the coming weekend but at its price point its hardly expensive and moves on from the "nifty fifty". For me its only ever going to be an occational lens I live mainly on the EF 24-105 f4L or on the EF 16-35mm f4L.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jun 4, 2015)

Meerkat said:


> Now I want an 85mm f1.8 STM.


Now I'm salivating for a 20mm F2.8 STM, and want a 85mm STM too. :


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jun 4, 2015)

I will probably get a 50mm F1.8 STM within the next 2 weeks (when it becomes available in Croatia).

I recently upgraded from a Canon Powershot SX130IS to an ancient Canon EOS 20D (with 50mm F1.8 II lens), and the difference in quality is massive.
Unfortunately, my 'nifty fifty' literally fell apart whilst focusing (the focus motor pushed the front part of the lens out). I took it apart totally and put it back together. After that it hasn't been the same and even though it still (sort of) works, it is 'about to fall apart'.

From what I have read... the STM version seems to address all the issues I have with the lens (before it fell apart)
My original nifty fifty:
- has unreliable autofocus
- terrible build quality
- not sharp in much of the frame wide open
- even at F2.8 and F4.0 corner sharpness is not good
- loud autofocus
- poor focus in low light (nullifies the large aperture advantage)

I have tried my friend's 18-55mm IS II kit lens, and I did not have any problems with it - so the above problems were specific to the nifty fifty and not a result of my 20D.

Once I get it in my hands I'll post my experiences.

.....

Does anyone see any difference in sharpness when looking through the viewfinder?


----------



## dcm (Jun 5, 2015)

dcm said:


> Just received mine. Plan to use it mostly wide open for low light, sometimes for background blur. Initial tests with the M3 are promising. MF with focus peaking works well for DOF control, but the MF-by-wire can be a little clumsy. Doubt I will use it much with the 6D.



Here's a few photos at close range with f/1.8 to check out the bokeh on the M3. LR with no adjustments. MF on the last two.

Near subject, distant dark background



dvmtthws-1267.jpg by dvmtthws, on Flickr

Near subject, distant light background



dvmtthws-1296.jpg by dvmtthws, on Flickr

near subject and background



dvmtthws-1285.jpg by dvmtthws, on Flickr


----------



## Roo (Jun 5, 2015)

Bang for buck wise I can't fault this lens


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jun 5, 2015)

Canon 5DS + 50mm F1.8 STM:
http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/canon_eos_5ds_photos/
^more precisely: 'A gallery of sample images taken with the Canon EOS 5DS DSLR camera and the EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM and EF 50mm f/1.8 STM lenses.'

What better way to test this lens than with the new megapixel monster


----------



## gordonbb (Jun 6, 2015)

Had this lens on hold at a local camera store for a week now and after life conspiring to prevent me from picking it up finally got it.






Wide open, handheld in the wind, ISO 400 1/80s on an M. Minimally "Seasoned to Taste" in LightRoom

Hey, we can debate until the cows come home, but after using some gift cards I had lying around this cost me under $20. And so far I'm having nearly as much fun as using the 85 f/1.2L on the 6D. I've lent my 40 f/2.8 for the summer to a friend that just got an T5i with a kit lens which will help me bond with this puppy.

It feels more like a "nifty fifty" than a "plastic fantastic". A little taller than the 40mm but a much more useable size for the focus ring.


----------



## Meerkat (Jun 6, 2015)

Still having fun... 

Pretty darn sharp at 5.6. I love STM. I have used fancier lenses but these little suckers know how to focus.


----------



## dboris (Jun 12, 2015)

I tried on 2 stm version. Same conclusion. 1.8 on APS-C.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 12, 2015)

dboris said:


> I tried on 2 stm version. Same conclusion. 1.8 on APS-C.


I would take it back my copy has virtually no purple fringing even before any processing in LR.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 12, 2015)

Taken on 6D 200ISO f9.5 1/250sec


----------



## dboris (Jun 13, 2015)

Lol.
I have actually 2 stm version.
One with a little piece of dust inside.
So I will take it back to amazon.

And on both model, I can conclude that the MKII is superior in term of CA.
Also, I have made another test where the MKII was a bit sharper.
But on the last test, they were both exactly the same at F1.8 and F4... Except for the CA.


----------



## bobestremera (Jun 13, 2015)

I just picked one up to replace the original Nifty for my 60D that was starting to sound like a lawnmower when focusing. The new one is much quieter, focuses quickly, is very sharp and has a nicer bokeh for portraits. Great value and IQ for the price.
I just hope the next STM is a 35mm f2 for a similarly good price. These new little STM's are great bargains with excellent sharpness.


----------



## Zv (Jun 14, 2015)

Here are some samples. I took these at a local art fair a few weeks ago. Only adjustment I did was +21 vibrance and some defringing. I like the results, will definitely be keeping this lens!

Shot these at f/2.0, f/2.8 and f/4.0 all ISO 100 handheld on the EOS M w/ adaptor.


----------



## Solar Eagle (Jun 18, 2015)

Go the check the review from THE LEGEND HIMSELF, Ken Rockwell. Or at least look at the macro comparison between f10 and f2.2. Pretty stark difference when focused that close. 

http://kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/50mm-f18-stm.htm


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jun 24, 2015)

I just bought this lens, and the minimum focus distance seems to be closer than stated... this is probably some safety margin Canon states to make sure everything works as planned.
They state 35cm in the specs, whilst I found 25cm in practice.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 11, 2015)

mistaspeedy said:


> I just bought this lens, and the minimum focus distance seems to be closer than stated... this is probably some safety margin Canon states to make sure everything works as planned.
> They state 35cm in the specs, whilst I found 25cm in practice.


Quick question, I don't have hands on with the lens, but were you measuring 25cm from the front of the lens or from the image sensor?


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Jul 15, 2015)

I LOVE MINE


9W9A2452-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr


9W9A2454-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr


9W9A2494-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr


9W9A2500-1 by Bigz Ant, on Flickr


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jul 18, 2015)

StudentOfLight said:


> Quick question, I don't have hands on with the lens, but were you measuring 25cm from the front of the lens or from the image sensor?


Hi there... I measured roughly from the front glass element to the subject:





Crappy smartphone image, but you can see the distance involved.
This is the resulting image:


----------



## crashpc (Jul 18, 2015)

mistaspeedy
Yes. You can get closer, because minimal focusing distance is described by distance between the object you focus on and the image sensor. But camera body and lens have some lenght, so you see shorter distance by measuring only object-to glass.


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jul 18, 2015)

I didn't know that, thanks!


----------



## Zv (Jul 19, 2015)

mistaspeedy said:


> I didn't know that, thanks!



Yup, that's what this symbol is for on the camera. It represents where the image sensor is.


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Jul 21, 2015)

Zv said:


> mistaspeedy said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't know that, thanks!
> ...



actually ya wrong


----------



## Zv (Jul 21, 2015)

BigAntTVProductions said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > mistaspeedy said:
> ...



It's the focal plane mark (is what I should have said). How is that wrong? It's where you measure from.


----------



## amazon (Nov 15, 2015)

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Lens: http://goo.gl/EgTgrH
      ;D ;D ;D 8) 8) 8)


----------



## Busted Knuckles (Nov 15, 2015)

umm yep - right.

There are two distance measurements - 
Minimum Focusing - measured from the image plane - that little circle with a line through it... 
Minimum WORKING distance, measured from the front element.

Perhaps there is a 3rd for those who walk and Macro (me) distance from the lens hood.

It give my wife levity when we go to the local botanical garden and start chasing insects w/ my 70-200 and an extension tube!! Everyone should try this sometime, it is a blast.


----------



## MichaelFasani (Nov 16, 2015)

The really annoying thing about this lens is that it still makes some noise. My kit 18-135 is almost silent and yes this lens is quiet but I do not see why it can not be as quiet as the kit lens. :-(


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Dec 23, 2015)

I just did an entire studio photoshoot with this lens on my 5D3. I'd post pix, but they are NSFW. 

The lens does make a little noise, but my hearing is poor and I stopped noticing after the first few shots. YMMV

I normally use the 50mm 1.2 L lens for full body and half body portraits at around F/1.4 to F/2, but recently I've decided I don't like the extreme sharpness difference between the model's eyes and the ummm... other body parts. 

So I decided to try the 50mm F/1.8. I shot mostly around F/4 to F/8. Sharpness with the studio strobes was excellent. No flare either.

I really appreciated the lighter weight!

The main disadvantage is that the 1.8 looks small and cheap compared to the 1.2. If you do group photoshoots with other photographers, it might be worth it to have the 1.2. It also might be nice to have the 1.2 if you really love that dreamy blur, similar to what people exclaim about with the 85mm 1.2 L lens.

If you aren't working around other photographers, I'd say save your money and go with the 1.8!

BTW, I just posted some nice pix from the Arizona shootout on my blog.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 23, 2015)

Just bought one as an adequatly humble xmas present for myself. Will use it mainly with EF-M adapter on my EOS M, since Canon does not seem to bring a short EF-M portrait tele any time soon. 

Will sell my mint copy of 50/1.4. the 1.8 STM is smaller, lighter and gives somewhat better AF performance on the M. Still hoüing for a worthy EOS M "Pro" in 2016.


----------



## scyrene (Dec 23, 2015)

Busted Knuckles said:


> umm yep - right.
> 
> There are two distance measurements -
> Minimum Focusing - measured from the image plane - that little circle with a line through it...
> ...



Does that setup work well? I've considered it as an alternative to a 180mm macro lens, and would appreciate any insight you might have...


----------

