# Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 Replacement Ready? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 6, 2015)

```
We’re told that the replacement for the 22 year old Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 is ready for production and could be announced any time within the next few months.</p>
<ul>
<li>Ring-type USM</li>
<li>DOF scale will remain</li>
<li>Closer minimum focusing distance than the current lens</li>
<li>No IS</li>
</ul>
<p>This is the first mention we’ve heard for this lens in a long time and it comes from an unknown origin, take it with the appropriate grain of salt.</p>
```


----------



## Chaitanya (Nov 6, 2015)

I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced


----------



## Camerajah (Nov 6, 2015)

Now we are talking-even if its a grain of hope I mean salt


----------



## Camerajah (Nov 6, 2015)

Just a spray of BR slob would be nice,thin and cheap


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Nov 6, 2015)

Does Canon intends to make a modest upgrade, as it did with nifty 50?
Who yearns Image Stabilizer, you can go to the Tamron 45mm VC.


----------



## Luds34 (Nov 6, 2015)

I know some will be disappointed in no IS. However, assuming modern optics and IQ seen in the likes of the new 24, 28, and 35 primes, combined with REAL focusing that will now be consistent and accurate. This should be a big hit. Hopefully it retains a similar size/weight as some of the ~50mm prime options are quite large.


----------



## DJL329 (Nov 6, 2015)

Dear Santa,

I've been an especially good boy this year.

-- Danny


----------



## Antono Refa (Nov 6, 2015)

Canon's mid range 35mm has IS, but both the 50mm f/1.8 STM and the 50mm f/1.4 USM wouldn't?


----------



## infared (Nov 6, 2015)

Too late...Canon had 50 years to give us a decent 50mm. I have my Sigma! 8)


----------



## Proscribo (Nov 6, 2015)

Antono Refa said:


> Canon's mid range 35mm has IS, but both the 50mm f/1.8 STM and the 50mm f/1.4 USM wouldn't?


IS will be in 50mm/2.0 Macro lens. 8)

No, I don't really know but doesn't it sound possible?


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 6, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that the replacement for the 22 year old Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 is ready for production and could be announced any time within the next few months.


Yes! finally! 



> Ring-type USM _=> great_
> DOF scale will remain _=> great_
> Closer minimum focusing distance than the current lens _=> great_
> No IS _=> Okay! Can live with that if the aperture stays at 1.4 and is decent sharp wide open_
> ...


Quite salty. Let's hope for it to be true.


----------



## rfdesigner (Nov 6, 2015)

if this is true... hallelujah!.. 

no IS to go wrong.. tick
ring USM.. tick
keeping it f1.4.. looks like a tick!
sharper at the borders wide open.. have to wait and see.
not a huge price jump please.


----------



## TeT (Nov 6, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Does Canon intends to make a modest upgrade, as it did with nifty 50?
> Who yearns Image Stabilizer, you can go to the Tamron 45mm VC.



I did not feel the 50 1.8 II to 50 1.8 STM was modest... I think that level of upgrade applied to the 50 1.4 would be acceptable... 

re: the Tamron... the close focus was big seller for me on that lens, interested to see if Canon 1.4 matches it..

Thoughts?


----------



## plam_1980 (Nov 6, 2015)

No IS? ashanford will be devastated... and I will enjoy my Sigma Art


----------



## TeT (Nov 6, 2015)

plam_1980 said:


> No IS? ashanford will be devastated... and I will enjoy my Sigma Art



If the Canon 1.4 rivals/beats the Tamron 45 1.8, your sigma art will lose a little of its lustre


----------



## plam_1980 (Nov 6, 2015)

TeT said:


> plam_1980 said:
> 
> 
> > No IS? ashanford will be devastated... and I will enjoy my Sigma Art
> ...



The Tamron has VC, so it will be debatable how the Canon beats it and at what price. Plus the sigma will not change its qualities, whatever images the Canon and Tamron produce, I just meant that I will no longer wait for a Canon 50/f nooneknowswhat IS (as ashanford named it), the Sigma will do just fine


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

plam_1980 said:


> No IS? ashanford will be devastated... and I will enjoy my Sigma Art



CR1. I'm not losing any sleep over this. 

That said: if there's no IS, then f/nooneknows IS USM would undoubtedly be 50mm f/1.4 USM II. No way they make a replacement that's slower without a major new feature.

Truth be told -- if I got everything I wanted _except_ for US:


Modern/fast/consistent/reliable USM
Internal focusing
Build quality of the 24/28/35 IS refreshes
Still a compact double gauss-like footprint
A proper hood/hood attachment

I'd still buy the lens on day one, sight unseen. I want a sharp, fast lens that isn't a pickle jar.

- A


----------



## Pixel (Nov 6, 2015)

How can they justify putting IS in the wide primes but not in a 50mm lens? This makes no sense.


----------



## FTb-n (Nov 6, 2015)

Pixel said:


> How can they justify putting IS in the wide primes but not in a 50mm lens? This makes no sense.


No, it doesn't make sense -- I'm assuming (hoping) that this is the salty part of the rumor.

IS isn't just for low light. IS would make this a more versatile lens by offering hand-held control over motion blur. Combine motion blur with the small DOF of 1.4, and one could capture images with more creative "pop".


----------



## rfdesigner (Nov 6, 2015)

FTb-n said:


> Pixel said:
> 
> 
> > How can they justify putting IS in the wide primes but not in a 50mm lens? This makes no sense.
> ...



at 1/50th of a second I get plenty of motion blur with my subjects thank you very much. ;D


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

As for why no IS might come to this lens, consider the attached.

The 24/28/35 primes were an even lower class of animal feature/price wise than the 20/28/50/85/100 non-L primes. The first group had the noisy old motor while the second looked like a fairly modern lens with USM.

So the lineage of those 24/28/35 lenses was different. That's about all I can think of to justify no IS with a new 50. Again, it's a CR1.

I'm still sticking to my guns on what's coming, and of course, it's easy to get butt hurt over my speculations if your lens is going away or isn't being refreshed. But that's my current guess right now.

If I forgot any lenses, let me know. This was a quick thing I put together from TDP and Northlight's info.

(And no. I _didn't_ forget the 50 f/2.5. That lens is a duckbill platypus that has no place in a market segmentation exercise. )

- A


----------



## wsmith96 (Nov 6, 2015)

Pixel said:


> How can they justify putting IS in the wide primes but not in a 50mm lens? This makes no sense.



Agree. I realize that this is just a CR-1, but I would expect that the new 50 would include IS.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

Proscribo said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's mid range 35mm has IS, but both the 50mm f/1.8 STM and the 50mm f/1.4 USM wouldn't?
> ...



Side note: now that Canon can tuck 0.7x max mag macro into a 24-70 zoom, do you think Canon will _ever_ update that compact 50mm f/2.5 Macro, which is a 0.5x max mag?

The the 50 macro and 24-70 f/4L IS are apples and oranges, don't get me wrong, but now that we can tuck impressive macro functionality into a walkaround lens -- effectively giving us a casual 'walkaround macro' that doesn't take up another slot in our bags -- why pack a compact macro instead?

- A


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 6, 2015)

Maybe they're saving the IS to wrap around the upcoming stellar 50mm 1.2 L II!


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

TeT said:


> plam_1980 said:
> 
> 
> > No IS? ashanford will be devastated... and I will enjoy my Sigma Art
> ...



It's not about luster, it's about *needs*. _If this rumor is true_:


You go to Sigma for the end-all be-all best IQ (at least until Canon through BR into a new 50L)


You go to Tamron if you need IS


You go to Canon for something smaller and lighter or if you are obsessive about reliable AF. I say smaller and lighter as there is zero chance the 'premium' (middle) grade I showed in my chart before will get all 'Arted Up' to pickle jar size/weight like the Sigmas. If a big/heavy Canon 50mm prime is coming (and I'm not convinced that it is), it will be with the next 50L -- not this 50 f/1.4.

- A


----------



## CanonGuy (Nov 6, 2015)

Luds34 said:


> I know some will be disappointed in no IS. However, assuming modern optics and IQ seen in the likes of the new 24, 28, and 35 primes, combined with REAL focusing that will now be consistent and accurate. This should be a big hit. Hopefully it retains a similar size/weight as some of the ~50mm prime options are quite large.



And why do you think it will be a hit? The CR post doesn't mention any serious new feature that is going to be added to this 50. Then why did you assume it would be a hit? And why consumer will see it differently than the current version? Sure the optical performance might be better, but this post stated nothing about that which could be the base of your 'big hit' statement. 

Being fanboy is ok, but please at least be rational.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

CanonGuy said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > I know some will be disappointed in no IS. However, assuming modern optics and IQ seen in the likes of the new 24, 28, and 35 primes, combined with REAL focusing that will now be consistent and accurate. This should be a big hit. Hopefully it retains a similar size/weight as some of the ~50mm prime options are quite large.
> ...



It's not fanboyism. You are missing the key assumption that I'm sure is behind Luds' enthusiasm: _the 50mm in this story will get a new optical formula and see an IQ bump like the 24/28/35 lenses did._ I agree with that assumption. If that happens, the lens will sell itself. A 9/10 sharpness lens (like the 35 f/2 IS USM) with internal focusing, better build quality, relatively small size and fast/modern/reliable/consistent AF will sell like _hotcakes_.

If, however, Canon pulls a nifty-fifty repackaging effort like the 50 f/1.8 STM -- in which the optical formula was unchanged from its predecessor -- then you are correct, CG, that enthusiasm should be not be as high. 

Personally, I actually would buy a faster STM version of the current EF 50 f/1.4 USM -- nothing else changed -- for $300-400 sight unseen. It's still the sharpest 50 canon sells, but its #1 problem is AF and a modern STM setup would solve that. (That said, I'd be pissed as I love USM, so such a lens would be an opportunity lost.)

But give me the 50mm lens I _really_ want -- the 24/28/35 refresh IS refresh treatment -- and I'd pay twice that, I'd pay Sigma 50 Art money, no hesitation. I have zero shame in stating I value rock solid first party AF very, very highly.

- A


----------



## rowlandw (Nov 6, 2015)

No IS? Well, I already have the new nifty-fifty for that.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Nov 6, 2015)

No great surprise, IS hasn't been deployed in a Canon lens faster than f2.0, Tamron has pushed this to f1.8... I've always expected the f1.4 to be IS free, just unclear if if would be a £300 mid-range or £600-800 L product. There is still room for a £400-500 f1.8/2.0 IS 50mm lens


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

Haydn1971 said:


> No great surprise, IS hasn't been deployed in a Canon lens faster than f2.0, Tamron has pushed this to f1.8... I've always expected the f1.4 to be IS free, just unclear if if would be a £300 mid-range or £600-800 L product. There is still room for a £400-500 f1.8/2.0 IS 50mm lens



That's why I still -- despite this rumor -- see a three price point present and future 50mm market:


50 f/1.2L --> 50 f/1.2L II: A lens built around draw/bokeh, meant to be used almost exclusively for small DOF work, portraiture, etc.

50 f/1.4 USM --> 50 f/nooneknows IS USM: A fully featured lens (internal focusing, distance scale, IS, etc.) that is meant for general use.


50 f/1.8 II --> 50 f/1.8 STM: The gateway prime that gets you hooked on primes' two major selling points over zooms: sharpness and small DOF. Spartan feature set: focus by wire, no distance scale, telescoping external focusing, etc.



The fair question is this: can that middle price point (broadly the $500-$750 neighborhood) still sell well without IS, i.e. as a 50 f/1.4 USM II? 


The shortsighted person would beat this up at a 30,000 ft first glance and walk away: "Why pay 3-4 times as much as the 50mm f/1.8 STM for a fraction of a stop?"


People who actually read past the top-level spec line will see *value*: Besides the lens simply being sharper, it will have FTM (not by wire) focusing, proper USM autofocus, internal focusing to minimize dust ingress and prevent that awkward concern of pressing on the protruding barrel of cheaper lenses, better build quality, a real focus ring, etc.


So, yes, in my mind, a non-IS 50mm f/1.4 USM II would still get the sale and justify a middle price point to me. That middle price point just won't be as high without IS.

- A


----------



## douglaurent (Nov 6, 2015)

Take your time Canon. It's still soon enough to get IS in the next replacement around the year 2030-2035.


----------



## slclick (Nov 6, 2015)

Chaitanya said:


> I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced



The 135L doesn't NEED replacing, some just want it updated. Me, it's my favorite glass.


----------



## Pixel (Nov 6, 2015)

slclick said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced
> ...



I have always thought that as well....until....I put it side by side with the 70-200 2.8L II recently and there's no comparison. The 135mm 2.0L is showing it's age.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

slclick said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > I thought the 50mm macro and 135L would be first to get replaced
> ...



The 100L and 135L are all but bullet proof optically. Absurdly sharp.

Everyone pines for the next version to be a hair faster, but consider what that might look like. 

I think the opportunity for the 135L is to be _modernized_. Weathersealing and IS come to mind.

- A


----------



## brad-man (Nov 6, 2015)

It would be absurd for Canon to not release a 50mm lens with IS. That is the direction the wind is blowing. So, assuming they will produce an EF 50mm f/_x _ IS, the question becomes will they replace the 50 f/1.4 as this rumor suggests? Many (most?) will value IS over speed, but many would rather have an f/1.4 lens.

EF 50mm f/_x_ IS at around $875 release price
EF 50mm f/1.4 update at around $525 release price

Would there be a good enough market to support both of these lenses? Personally, I'd take the IS (after the price has settled down), but I also dig a 1.4 lens...


----------



## TeT (Nov 6, 2015)

Pixel said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Chaitanya said:
> ...



A properly updated 135 L should slam be noticeably better than the 70 200 L II at 135mm ...


----------



## rfdesigner (Nov 6, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Chaitanya said:
> ...



I'd vote for elminiating the longitudinal chromatic abberation (with magic blue gel stuff), and working on getting the out of focus "disks" more disk like in the corners to minimise the slight swirl look of things like leafy backgrounds


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2015)

brad-man said:


> It would be absurd for Canon to not release a 50mm lens with IS. That is the direction the wind is blowing. So, assuming they will produce an EF 50mm f/_x _ IS, the question becomes will they replace the 50 f/1.4 as this rumor suggests? Many (most?) will value IS over speed, but many would rather have an f/1.4 lens.
> 
> EF 50mm f/_x_ IS at around $875 release price
> EF 50mm f/1.4 update at around $525 release price
> ...



Great question and good estimates.

Throwing the rumor out and simply juggling IS and the max aperture (assuming it's a new optical design with USM, not a clone of the prior optical formula), if the 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM actually turns out to be...

...IS + f/1.4 --> You're honestly in the $1,000 territory. Consider: that lens will be 90% as sharp as the Art for half the size and weight with reliable first party autofocus and image stabilization. That's a _killer_ value proposition.

...IS + f/1.8 --> Provided it's clearly optical superior and has all the 24/28/35 lens features we want (i.e it's *not* the recent nifty fifty with USM and IS and everything else is the same), I'd say you're in the $600-800 range. It's worth $500 but Canon will charge us more.

...No IS + f/1.4 --> Same proviso as before, and though aperture is sexier than IS to most people, $600-800 stills seems about right.

...No IS + f/1.8 --> you could argue 'why make this lens', but for the features I mentioned before, perhaps $300-400. I just don't see them making this lens, though.

But the key key key variables that drive this are (a) is it a new optical design and (b) how sharp it is. The numbers above presume 'Yes!' and 'Very - as sharp as the 35 f/2 IS USM'. If those two aren't so, the price may not be that high.

- A


----------



## brad-man (Nov 6, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > It would be absurd for Canon to not release a 50mm lens with IS. That is the direction the wind is blowing. So, assuming they will produce an EF 50mm f/_x _ IS, the question becomes will they replace the 50 f/1.4 as this rumor suggests? Many (most?) will value IS over speed, but many would rather have an f/1.4 lens.
> ...



As was mentioned earlier, the fastest lens with IS that Canon has produced thus far is f/2, so I would not expect the new lens to be any faster. Perhaps the correcting IS lens element has size/mass limitations due to the speed it must travel that limits the max width of the aperture. If f/1.4 were possible, I have no doubt that the price would be $1000+ territory.


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 7, 2015)

brad-man said:


> It would be absurd for Canon to not release a 50mm lens with IS. That is the direction the wind is blowing. So, assuming they will produce an EF 50mm f/_x _ IS, the question becomes will they replace the 50 f/1.4 as this rumor suggests? Many (most?) will value IS over speed, but many would rather have an f/1.4 lens.
> 
> EF 50mm f/_x_ IS at around $875 release price
> EF 50mm f/1.4 update at around $525 release price
> ...



''Absurd''? Hyperbole.

Any way the wind blows? Not Canon.


----------



## NancyP (Nov 7, 2015)

When I want "lightweight, very good IQ wide open, stellar IQ f/4 - f/8", I go for the pancake 40. PITA to focus manually. Absolutely fabulous for landscape. I have to say that my interest in a 50mm lens for distance hiking and landscape has gone to zero. Shorty Forty is darn good. 

F/1.2 to f/1.8 subject isolation? There I get into "50 vs 85" territory. I don't do portraiture and have less need for 50 and 85mm f/1.2 to 1.8 than many people. My 125mm f/2.5 macro lens gives me nice enough isolation for many subjects, but is manual focus.


----------



## Good24 (Nov 7, 2015)

brad-man said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > brad-man said:
> ...



Maybe the part of the rumor that is true is that a 50 1.4 is in the works. But it's not a replacement for the current 1.4. Rather it's a 1.4 L with blue glass and replaces the current 1.2 L. And then separately we will see a 50 f/1.8 or f/2 with IS that replaces the current 1.4.


----------



## CanoKnight (Nov 7, 2015)

Ok Canon.. it better have IS or you will push me toward the artful sigma. You don't want that now, do you .


----------



## sdsr (Nov 7, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> The 100L and 135L are all but bullet proof optically. Absurdly sharp.



Not sure what you mean by "bullet proof," but while it may still be the best AF 135mm lens, the recent (and much cheaper) Rokinon 135mm f2 is clearly sharper, has far better control of chromatic aberrations (there's really no need to stop it down at all except to get greater depth of focus) and bokeh that's at least as good.

As for any Canon 50mm 1.4 successor (I agree with what you would like such a lens to be), and tying this in with your other comments re any forthcoming Canon FF mirrorless body, it would be nice if the latter had IBIS and thereby made IS concerns irrelevant (at least to those who buy such a body). It's nice using Canon's non-IS lenses on a Sony a7rII....


----------



## infared (Nov 7, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Chaitanya said:
> ...




Not according to Dustin Abbott...um that would be the Canon 135mm f/2 on the left.
Hint: the 100% image on the right is "absurdly" sharp. No? 

http://dustinabbott.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/25-Head-to-Head.jpg


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 7, 2015)

infared said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...


I learnt this fact when I was conflicted about whether I should take (to a low light copncert) my 6D + Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC or my 60D with the 135L. I ended up taking my 60D with the 70-200 VC.


----------



## vscd (Nov 7, 2015)

> I think the opportunity for the 135L is to be modernized. Weathersealing and IS come to mind.



Sometimes i have the feeling, people think that adding IS is just an option or decision to make. It's more difficult than that. You change the optical path and formula, and because you insert a new group into the path you even change the focallenght, or at least you need most probably larger elements to compensate it. That's like on leaf shutter lenses, where you loose light because of the space the shutter uses between the elements... 

It's not impossible to make an 50mm f1.4 IS and I hope Canon does the favour to us, but this will rise the price at least for 400-500$. I honestly even doubt that the 50mm focallenght is that important anymore. 

Edit: weathersealing is REALLY important for me.


----------



## martti (Nov 7, 2015)

Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
The market is wrong...or maybe there is something else to taking photographs than the sharpness of the lens?

I nearly bought one at 850 euros but then I came to my senses. What should I do with it, I am not an _artist?_


----------



## ntt2007 (Nov 7, 2015)

Early this year, a rumor said canon will update their 50 1.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 135L. Look like things are going on right track. Please release the new 50 1.4 quickly and make new 85 1.8.


----------



## Antono Refa (Nov 7, 2015)

brad-man said:


> As was mentioned earlier, the fastest lens with IS that Canon has produced thus far is f/2, so I would not expect the new lens to be any faster. Perhaps the correcting IS lens element has size/mass limitations due to the speed it must travel that limits the max width of the aperture. If f/1.4 were possible, I have no doubt that the price would be $1000+ territory.



That's what people said before Canon released the 35mm f/2 IS, when the fastest lenses with IS were f/2.8


----------



## mb66energy (Nov 7, 2015)

A compact EF 1.4 50 IS would be interesting for me. Without IS? no ...
I would like to gain low light capability with _*1.4 AND IS*_!

Maybe waiting for Tamrons 1.8 65mm IS (just my guess that they would do that) with
a max 1:3 reproduction ratio and stellar quality ...


----------



## mrsfotografie (Nov 7, 2015)

infared said:


> Too late...Canon had 50 years to give us a decent 50mm. I have my Sigma! 8)



They _had_ a decent 50mm, and they produced it for only three years before they introduced the EF50mm f/1.8 II... :

Of course the little EF50mm f/1.8 Mk I no longer competes for image quality with most of the modern third party 50's but if you throw in the size, weight, reasonable build quality and more than adequate optics, it remains my favorite Canon 50mm.


----------



## crashpc (Nov 7, 2015)

Antono Refa said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > As was mentioned earlier, the fastest lens with IS that Canon has produced thus far is f/2, so I would not expect the new lens to be any faster. Perhaps the correcting IS lens element has size/mass limitations due to the speed it must travel that limits the max width of the aperture. If f/1.4 were possible, I have no doubt that the price would be $1000+ territory.
> ...



Also, this should not be f number related.
There is 200mm f/2 lens, which is stabilized. Yes, it costs a lot, but it is not really a manufacturing problem. If they made it f/1.6 IS instead of f/1.4, I wouldn´t complain at all.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 7, 2015)

Antono Refa said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > As was mentioned earlier, the fastest lens with IS that Canon has produced thus far is f/2, so I would not expect the new lens to be any faster. Perhaps the correcting IS lens element has size/mass limitations due to the speed it must travel that limits the max width of the aperture. If f/1.4 were possible, I have no doubt that the price would be $1000+ territory.
> ...



Agreed, and the Tamron f1.4's with VC clearly demonstrate there is no technical reason.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Nov 7, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > brad-man said:
> ...


Tamron F1.8 VC.


----------



## vscd (Nov 7, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Agreed, and the Tamron *F1.4*'s with VC clearly demonstrate there is no technical reason.
> ...



No facts please! ;D


----------



## JMZawodny (Nov 7, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Chaitanya said:
> ...



The current 135L could be improved dramatically and I expect a new/modern/higher IQ version is in the works.


----------



## brad-man (Nov 7, 2015)

Antono Refa said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > As was mentioned earlier, the fastest lens with IS that Canon has produced thus far is f/2, so* I would not expect the new lens to be any faster*. Perhaps the correcting IS lens element has size/mass limitations due to the speed it must travel that limits the max width of the aperture. *If f/1.4 were possible, I have no doubt that the price would be $1000+ territory.*
> ...



I don't know what _people_ said, but all I said was that I don't expect a 50mm with IS to be faster than f/2, and if there were, it would be pricey. I still think that.


----------



## infared (Nov 7, 2015)

martti said:


> Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
> The market is wrong...or maybe there is something else to taking photographs than the sharpness of the lens?
> 
> I nearly bought one at 850 euros but then I came to my senses. What should I do with it, I am not an _artist?_



That lens definitely has an incredible LOOK...and is great for portraiture....but ...
..after all of these years Canon has truly neglected the "normal perspective" for FF. They are not the only manufacturer guilty of this. Here again...I think Sigma will push the R&D team on a decent 50mm, just like I believe they did for the 35mm.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Nov 7, 2015)

infared said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
> ...


Sigma will? Sigma 50 Art already exists, and has the best image quality among all 50mm autofocus this planet.
Meanwhile, Canon 50L has the best image quality "from another world". The world of somhos and ghosts. 

EDIT:
Excuse the irony. I re-read, and understood that you referred to Sigma push Canon to produce a 50mm high image quality.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 7, 2015)

vscd said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Apologies for the mistype. However the point was _"lenses faster than f2.8"_ then the 35 f2 IS was mooted, and even if I got the stop wrong by a touch I think we can all agree f1.8 is faster still than f2.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 7, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > martti said:
> ...



I think anybody that believes Sigma _"push"_ Canon to do anything is in serious denial. Canon don't give a damn how good or bad any Sigma lens is, they just don't. Canon will make the lenses they feel best support their business model, some will be average for general use, some will be true pro lenses that are worked to death, some will be showcase 'because we can and you can't' punches to the nose of all other camera companies. 

The optics department at Canon isn't pushed by anybody.
50 f1.0.
TS-E 17 f4.
8-15 f4 fisheye zoom.
MP-E 65 f2.8.
200-400 f4 with built in 1.4TC.
11-24 f4.
50 f1.2.
85 f1.2.
200 f1.8.
etc etc.............


----------



## infared (Nov 7, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > infared said:
> ...



LOL. Fanbois much? :


----------



## chromophore (Nov 7, 2015)

infared said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > I think anybody that believes Sigma _"push"_ Canon to do anything is in serious denial. Canon don't give a damn how good or bad any Sigma lens is, they just don't. Canon will make the lenses they feel best support their business model, some will be average for general use, some will be true pro lenses that are worked to death, some will be showcase 'because we can and you can't' punches to the nose of all other camera companies.
> ...



Actually, I contend that the claim that Canon isn't pushed by competitors is better supported by the areas in which Canon does *not* innovate in spite of clear superiority from other brands.

Examples include Sony's EXMOR technology to reduce the read noise in their CMOS sensors. Canon has not developed technology to match this.

The Sigma 50/1.4 Art is another example. Canon lacks a 50/1.4 lens that offers this level of imaging performance.

But the truth is, Canon--like any company--does watch what their competitors do. That is just the nature of business. However, the extent to which the consumer is able to see a company respond to the actions of its competitors is something that depends on factors in addition to what actions a company does in fact make in response to competitors. In other words, we on the consumer side of Canon's business cannot see what they might or might not be doing internally in response to its competitors. There's just no way to know.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 7, 2015)

infared said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...



Really? Is that the best you have?

Try the 16-35 f4 IS, the 24-70 f2.8 MkII the 70-200 f2.8 IS MkII, any prime including and over 200mm in white, the 100-400 MkII etc etc.

Last I looked you couldn't take an image, baring pinhole garbage, without a lens, that the lenses in front of Canon sensors regularly return 'better' IQ than others 'better' sensors behind more mediocre lenses makes me think any criticism of the Canon lens stable is pure vitriol.

Canon might well have areas of concern in their business, the lens department being _"pushed by Sigma"_ is not one of them.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 7, 2015)

Agree with privatebydesign -- Canon's doing fine with their lenses.

Keep in mind that that the only lens they've 'responded' to Sigma with -- the 35L II -- outperformed it. In other instances where Sigma did well, they picked on older L lens designs and (predictably) outperformed them.

But just because Canon doesn't want to make an f/2 zoom for EF or hasn't ever built a 50mm lens entirely around sharpness instead of bokeh/draw/'magic' does not mean they don't know what they're doing. There is so much more to lenses than sharpness per dollar.

That said, I love this fictitious lens arm race with Sigma. We win as consumers whether it's true or not. I just wish Sigma spent as much time on AF consistency as they did on sharpness.

- A


----------



## ishdakuteb (Nov 7, 2015)

35mm f/2 has IS, but new coming 50mm f/1.4 will not have IS? I hope this is not the truth...


----------



## slclick (Nov 7, 2015)

JMZawodny said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...




"...dramatically" I think you don't know what that word means.


----------



## infared (Nov 8, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...


The topic here is 50mm. You are "off topic". ( I own many of the lenses that you list above...it's not relevant).
I have the Sigma 50mm Art...which is the BEST AF 50mm for a Canon camera (and VERY reasonably priced as well)..you should try one! 8) [glow=red,2,300[/glow]


----------



## Northstar (Nov 8, 2015)

it’s about time!! alternating..


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 8, 2015)

infared said:


> The topic here is 50mm. You are "off topic". ( I own many of the lenses that you list above...it's not relevant).
> I have the Sigma 50mm Art...which is the BEST AF 50mm for a Canon camera (and VERY reasonably priced as well)..you should try one! 8) [glow=red,2,300[/glow]



The Sigma Art is not the end-all be-all best 50-ish mm lens for a Canon. It's great for IQ, but it's also great for back pain (it's massive) and headaches from an inconsistent AF system. 

The 50L is not the end-all be-all best 50-ish mm lens for a Canon. It generates a wonderful feel that is uniquely suited for small DOF work. But it is famously not that sharp outside of the center.

The 55mm Otus is not the end-all be-all best 50-ish lens for a Canon. Optically, it's the best lens, but for some, _the lack of AF_ (not the price) is the dealbreaker. It's also another pickle jar of a lens.

_There is *no* categorically best 50-ish mm lens for a Canon_ as all of our needs are different. 

The best 50-ish mm lens for me happens to be a 9/10 at sharpness, AF consistency and small size/weight (hence my obsession with this EF 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM). I care less about the best bokeh or having the one true 10/10 optical instrument that weighs as much as the Bismarck.

So please quit this 'my lens is the best' nonsense. It's only the best lens for you and your priorities.

- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 8, 2015)

infared said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > infared said:
> ...



Who made you the arbiter of "on topic"? Besides my comment was entirely on topic regarding the post I was replying to.

_"I think Sigma will push the R&D team on a decent 50mm, just like I believe they did for the 35mm."_

I'll say it again without context if that makes you happy, anybody that believes that comment is delusional. 

The Canon lens department is leagues ahead of any other camera lens manufacturer, they have shown they can make pretty much any lens design they choose to and any compromises to IQ are either deliberate, as in the 50 f1.2 L (for enhanced portrait images), or due to price point, as in the 50 f1.4. That none of the five 50mm options Canon already offer fit your needs is irrelevant in the context of the Canon lens department capabilities, and they are certainly not 'pushed by Sigma' to do anything.


----------



## Diltiazem (Nov 8, 2015)

I am surprised that it took 5 pages before someone mentioned DR. Have we forgotten our priorities?!!! 8)

Sorry, couldn't resist. ;D

On a serious note, I don't think new 50/1.4 would have IS. It would be a STM just like new nifty fifty. Wide open it would have slightly better sharpness at the center and significantly better sharpness at the margins just like new 50/1.8 STM. It will also have better AF and better bokeh. IQ would be slightly lower than Sigma Art, but good enough/excellent for most purposes. It will cost and weigh much less than Sigma and will sell a lot more. 

Nifty fifty is the best selling lens anyone has ever made. Canon will add another best seller in that FL just by moderate optical improvement and by keeping the weight and price down.


----------



## rfdesigner (Nov 8, 2015)

Diltiazem said:


> I am surprised that it took 5 pages before someone mentioned DR. Have we forgotten our priorities?!!! 8)
> 
> Sorry, couldn't resist. ;D
> 
> ...



If they put STM on it I'll look elsewhere.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 8, 2015)

dilbert said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
> ...


How much depth of field do you have with the 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM when you are shooting at 35mm f/4 focused at its minimum focus distance? Isn't it true if starting from infinity that the closer focus towards minimum focus distance the shallower your depth of field becomes?


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 8, 2015)

dilbert said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
> ...



Dilbert, you are funny. I don't know _any_ professional photographers who at this moment have the 50/1.2 and any who _dont_ have a 2.8 standard zoom of some ilk.


----------



## Bernd FMC (Nov 8, 2015)

Not only professional Photographers are able to handle shallow DOF @ 50/85mm for Example 8) .

The 50 f1.2 L is an specialized Lens - my Opinion.

An 50mm @ 1.4 should be an real Standard lens, an Workaround of the old 1.4 USM .

Sharper, better Bokeh - not that much expensive, IS ? possible - not real necessary for me.

An updated 50mm would be nice for me - f1.2 L too - we will see what will happen.

Greetings 

Bernd


----------



## infared (Nov 8, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> _"I think Sigma will push the R&D team on a decent 50mm, just like I believe they did for the 35mm."_
> 
> I'll say it again without context if that makes you happy, anybody that believes that comment is delusional.
> 
> The Canon lens department is leagues ahead of any other camera lens manufacturer, they have shown they can make pretty much any lens design they choose to and any compromises to IQ are either deliberate, as in the 50 f1.2 L (for enhanced portrait images), or due to price point, as in the 50 f1.4. That none of the five 50mm options Canon already offer fit your needs is irrelevant in the context of the Canon lens department capabilities, and they are certainly not 'pushed by Sigma' to do anything.


Defendants exhibit one:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=941&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Defendants exhibit two:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=403&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=941&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Can we please look at the facts?
We are talking about sloppy..sloppy...sloppy disregard for the "normal view" prime for FF cameras from the biggest manufacturer of said cameras. It's embarrassing and lazy.(same with the 35mm). Yes...Canon makes a LOT of 50mm lenses...but none of them are very good.
Sigma has called this to Canon's attention..with improved products and, more importantly SALES in a shrinking market.


----------



## martti (Nov 8, 2015)

dilbert said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever people with their charts may say, it is nearly impossible to find a second hand 50mm f/1.2 at a reasonable price anywhere. With all the Otuses and Sigmas around one might think that people would just get rid of their quirky unsharp lenses ASAP without a moment's hesitation. But it is not the case.
> ...



Somebody wants these lenses pretty badly, otherwise their price would go down. I am pretty sure that some of them have landed in the hands of amateurs. They might not have been properly informed of the shortcomings of the wide aperture. Of course, in extreme cases, this _lense_ can be stopped down to reduce the risks of missed focus. 
I am pretty sure that it is mentioned on the operation manual.
Where do you want me to send the potato?


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 8, 2015)

dilbert said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Many of them were sold new at over $1,500, now they can be had for $1,200 new, people trying to sell L lenses were used to the retail price going up so their depreciation cost was very low. 

People who own a lens they paid $1,600 and more for are reluctant to accept their 'perfect copy' is worth less than $1,000. I'd rather pay $1,200 for a new one with 12 months warranty than $1,000 for a perfect secondhand one.


----------



## martti (Nov 8, 2015)

The point I was trying to make is that the people who have the 50mm f/1.2 do not see the Sigma or the Otus so much better that they would need to change. Also, the two third-party lenses are obviously not aimed at the same buyers as the Canon L. Now, if the owners of the Canon lens would be unhappy because their _lense_ is not _sharpe_ enough, that it is not fulfilling their demands, there would be a big supply of these lenses on the market pushing the prices down. Obviously, this is not the case.

Privatebydesign has a valuable point there. People paid a lot for something and they'd rather stick with their product than let go of it at a price that might actually close the deal. This might very well be the case. People buy shares and stick to them way past the point where they should have been sold. And those are the ones who finance the profits of the professional dealers but that is beside the point.

It might be that this lense is for two groups of users:
–Professionals who know what and how and who really do not care a bit about what DxO says as long as they get their pictures as they themselves and their clients like them
–Well off amateurs who can well afford expensive gadgets lying around the house with no other purpose but the pleasure they gave while unboxing them.

Which may well be a simplification but in my mind it would explain why I cannot get this lense at about 600 dollars that I would be happy to pay for it. That's what I paid for my 24mm f/1.4 which is impossible to sell anywhere near that price now that the v. II is on the market. What the hell, I do not have to sell it at half the price...yes, definitely you have a point there, Privatebydesign.

_(sorry, baking a pizza here on the side sort of caused my line of thinking to shatter)_


----------



## chromophore (Nov 8, 2015)

dilbert said:


> According to my DoF calculator, using the minimum focus distance of .28m, 1.34cm.
> 
> Using the same calculator, at the minimum focus distance for the 50/1.2L (.45m), the depth of field is 0cm.
> 
> ...



That is nonsense. "0 cm" depth of field is impossible. The calculator that you use is not accurate. Equally nonsensical is the idea of "infinitely more DOF" on the basis on your claim that the 50/1.2 has no DOF.

Consider that even with an MP-E 65/2.8 at 5x magnification shot wide open, there is still some non-negligible DOF, otherwise it would not be possible to obtain any usable image, and I absolutely *GUARANTEE* that at 5x, the MP-E will have WAY less DOF than the 50/1.2L at MFD. Dozens of LordV's incredible insect macro shots with the MP-E are my proof. Hell, even my own macro shots with my 100/2.8L, with extension tubes to get above 1:1, are proof that "0 cm" DOF is nonsense.

Oh, and how about the 85/1.2L? That lens has the same f-number but a longer focal length. Its DOF at the same subject-camera distance will be *even less* than the 50/1.2L. But somehow, myself and a whole bunch of other photographers have no problem getting great shots with it.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 9, 2015)

infared said:


> Defendants exhibit one:
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=941&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
> 
> Defendants exhibit two:
> ...



I think you mean, "Can we please look at the facts sharpness?"

No one is refuting that the 50 Art is a sharper lens. This is simply true, not a matter of opinion. But you continue to drive past the bigger picture regarding the Sigma 50 Art:


It weighs _three times_ that of the 50 f/1.4
It is as discreet as an elephant gun.
The AF is famously inconsistent -- not front or back focused, but inconsistent. That leads to missed moments. That's a bad thing.

The Art is not a better lens. *The Art is a better lens for you* and those who prioritize sharpness over other variables. 

But the notion that Canon needs to defeat it / outperform it / win the high school class presidency over it in an election to demonstrate its virility is patently absurd.

- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 9, 2015)

infared said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > _"I think Sigma will push the R&D team on a decent 50mm, just like I believe they did for the 35mm."_
> ...


As ahsanford says, you are conflating sharpness wide open with pretty much everything else.

I often shoot my 50 f1.4 at f5.6 or f8 with strobes. Look at what I get http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=6&LensComp=674&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3 yes, sharper than my 100L Macro at f5.6, for $349!

If I want shallow dof I can use my f1.4 at f1.4, I don't get the same sharpness in the corners as your Art, but I don't care, the sharpness my particular copy of the EF 50 f1.4 delivers wide open to f2 is plenty good enough for what I want, which is the main reason I never bought the EF 50 f1.2.

I am happy to agree that some shooters want different metrics (sharper corners wide open), but saying 'Canon are forced to fill that gap' in their lineup, or that 'Sigma are forcing them to do anything', or that the five Canon EF 50mm lenses you can buy new at B&H today are all _"sloppy.... embarrassing... lazy...."_ is farcical.


----------



## AE-1Burnham (Nov 9, 2015)

"Will the L or non-L follow the trend of retrofocus (Otus 55 and Sig 50A) design?" is my question? 

The previous many decades of 50mm lens design has said double-gaus provides enough "fill-in-the-blank" -- well does it today? Retrofocus design allows for many corrections, internal focusing, and size (esp. length and also typically in weight).

Are the following lens DOA when you unbox them: Noctilux / 1.2L / 58G (NOTE: all double-guass) ? Imagine them built as retrofocus and your arms/back will hurt from the thought and your wallet might commit suicide. 

Happy shooting y'alls!


----------



## Hector1970 (Nov 9, 2015)

I currently have the 50 1.2L which is a great lens but for many years I had the Canon 50mm 1.4.
I really liked it. It was very sharp stopped down but it made a great image at 1.4.
It had a rather unusual look at 1.4.
It vignetted in beautiful way and out of focus bokeh was nice and smooth.
This made for a lovely image.

I haven't had the pleasure of using the Sigma Art 1.4
I'd be interested in trying it.
I find the 50 1.2L quite sharp. It's tricky dealing with 1.2 but when you get it right you get a special picture.

I know people want technically the best equipment they can find / afford. It becomes obsessive.
Some people might be better off perfecting their technique first until they reach the limit of their gear.
If you were a relatively new to photography and you want photos with shallow depth of field and good bokeh I'd highly recommend the current Canon 50mm 1.4. It will be a bargain as soon as a new lens comes out.
You'll get great images with it and it will grow you as a photographer.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 9, 2015)

AE-1Burnham said:


> "Will the L or non-L follow the trend of retrofocus (Otus 55 and Sig 50A) design?" is my question?



You say retrofocus design, I say 'heavy pickle jar'. 

The non-L will stick to its roots -- double gaussian goodness. The middle 50 f/1.4 USM is as known for its compact size, and I don't see Canon abandoning that.

On the next 50L, however, Canon has an expensive decision to make. Either squeeze a little more sharpness out of that 50 f/1.2L design as is, possibly drop in that BR technology, etc., or pursue a major redesign to try to climb Sharpness Mountain. By any measure, the only way to accomplish the latter is to get huge.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 9, 2015)

Hector1970 said:


> If you were a relatively new to photography and you want photos with shallow depth of field and good bokeh I'd highly recommend the current Canon 50mm 1.4. It will be a bargain as soon as a new lens comes out.
> You'll get great images with it and it will grow you as a photographer.



+1. If I know someone is relatively serious about committing the time to learning photography, I recommend the Canon 50 f/1.4 USM as a first prime instead of the nifty fifty.

- A


----------



## crashpc (Nov 9, 2015)

I got my 50mm f/1.4 in nice condition for about $180, and I agree. Very good lens if handled with some skill (took me some time, indeed). I believe they´ll stick with current design, making it a little bit better as they did with STM, adding IS. Even f/1.6 would be okay.


----------



## infared (Nov 11, 2015)

These break so often that there is a repair video readily available for your use.
...and why did Canon wait 22 years???? :-X

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTu00wgJgRE


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 11, 2015)

infared said:


> These break so often that there is a repair video readily available for your use.
> ...and why did Canon wait 22 years???? :-X
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTu00wgJgRE



I've had mine for over ten years and it works fine, meanwhile I have broken three different L lenses. I always have the hood on it especially when it is loose in my bag.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 11, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > These break so often that there is a repair video readily available for your use.
> ...



You just gave me one more reason to get excited about a future 50 f/nooneknows IS USM -- a proper hood. I can't stand the current 50 f/1.4 USM hood.

My 50 f/1.4 is still going strong at five years. Soft as a pillow at f/1.4, I tend not to use it wider than f/1.8. But stopped down to f/2.8 or narrower it's sharp as the dickens.

- A


----------

