# When are we gonna get some news on canons next 50mm (hopefully with IS)



## wickidwombat (May 30, 2013)

I'm REALLY interested in seeing the next prime canon release with IS in line with the 24, 28 and 35
hopefully they follow up soon with a 50, i'm hoping its at least f1.8 with IS and sharp wide open. If its 2.8 i'll cry like a little girl


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 30, 2013)

Here you go, just in case...


----------



## insanitybeard (May 30, 2013)

;D

Well they managed f2 with the 35 IS so any upcoming 50 should be at least as fast, and hopefully faster!


----------



## Random Orbits (May 30, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> ;D
> 
> Well they managed f2 with the 35 IS so any upcoming 50 should be at least as fast, and hopefully faster!



+1. My guess is 1.4 to 1.8. Wouldn't be easier for Canon to modify their current designs rather than coming up with one specifically for 2.8? Although it is interesting that the IS version at 28mm replaced the f/2.8 and not the f/1.8. Does this suggest that there will eventually be an L at 28mm?


----------



## Pi (May 30, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> ;D
> 
> Well they managed f2 with the 35 IS so any upcoming 50 should be at least as fast, and hopefully faster!



I doubt that they can make an f/1.4 lens with IS. I hope to be proven wrong!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 30, 2013)

Pi said:


> insanitybeard said:
> 
> 
> > ;D
> ...


 
It is technically feasible, a 50mm lens is one of the easiest to design, a IS for f/1.4 would be small and lightweight, just expensive. I doubt that too many want a $1500 lens.

Canon does price out various designs and marketing then has to decide if a design is going to sell enough to be profitable. The tooling and startup cost for a new design is high, and a f/1.4 might be extremely high. Still, it would sell if they keep the price to $1000 and the IQ is high.


----------



## pdirestajr (May 30, 2013)

Watch, they are gonna replace the Macro 50mm first with H-IS. People love their macros.


----------



## Pi (May 30, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Pi said:
> 
> 
> > insanitybeard said:
> ...



I believe that it is technically feasible, in principle, but still challenging. IS is forced decentering, and they need to design a fast lens which preserves its good IQ even after some decentering. It is a much harder thing to do than a non IS fast prime, if possible at all.


----------



## JonAustin (May 30, 2013)

I'm primarily a zoom user (17-40, 24-105, 70-200 f/2.8 IS v1), and my only primes are both macros (50CM and 100 f/2.8 IS). So I think I qualify by my purchases as one of those people who "love their macros."

The 50CM is my only lens without ring USM, and I find its buzzy little AFM motor amusing and annoying by turns. I, too, have been waiting for Canon to update the 50 f/1.4 with ring USM; IS would be a bonus, but I'd spring for a 50 f/1.4 - 1.8 (IS) prime over a redesigned 50mm macro.


----------



## Random Orbits (May 30, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> It is technically feasible, a 50mm lens is one of the easiest to design, a IS for f/1.4 would be small and lightweight, just expensive. I doubt that too many want a $1500 lens.
> 
> Canon does price out various designs and marketing then has to decide if a design is going to sell enough to be profitable. The tooling and startup cost for a new design is high, and a f/1.4 might be extremely high. Still, it would sell if they keep the price to $1000 and the IQ is high.



+1. Which is one reason why I think the f/1.4 IS makes a lot more sense than the f/1.8. The f/1.8 is much less expensive than the 24, 28 and 35 mm lenses that were replaced with IS versions. The IS versions came out at about 850 USD. The 50 f/1.4 is closer in price to what the older 24, 28 and 35s were priced at, so hopefully, an IS f/1.4 would be 800-900. I'd expect the IQ of the 50mm IS to fall between the current 50s and the 24-70 II at 50mm, which is fantastic. The only problem with this line of thinking is that the 50L II would then have to be much better and released first (similar or better than the Sigma 35 wide open and comparable/better than the 24-70 II at equal apertures). If Canon can not figure that 50L II formula, then a 50 f/1.8 IS starts making more sense.


----------



## Wildfire (Jun 3, 2013)

I'm guessing the new 50mm IS will have an f/1.8 aperture.

The IS versions of the 24, 28, and 35 had the same apertures as the non-USM versions of the Canon 24, 28, and 35 primes. If Canon continues to follow the pattern, then they will give the new 50 IS the same aperture as the current non-USM 50mm lens (in this case, f/1.8!)


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 3, 2013)

Prefer tack sharp @ f1.4 to 5.6 - without focus shift. Don't care with IS or not IS. Don't care much about weather sealed. 

Willing to pay up to $700.


----------



## LOALTD (Jun 4, 2013)

The 50mm f/1.4 is, by far, my most-used lens. I’m with you 100%.

I’m a little concerned that it might be slower in order to accommodate IS, but the 35mm f/2.0 IS gives me hope! 4-stop IS on an f/1.4 aperture would be a dream come true for me!

For those saying “why do you need IS on a non-tele with that big of an aperture?!”, well, some of us need to run and gun in low-light where a tripod would be extremely prohibitive. (for me, alpine starts while mountaineering. “Hey rope team, do you mind if I get out my tripod and and get some shots with mirror lockup? I know that it’s 2am and dark, windy, and cold but ISO 6400 makes baby Jebus cry…”)

Keep the dream alive!


----------



## insanitybeard (Jun 4, 2013)

LOALTD said:


> The 50mm f/1.4 is, by far, my most-used lens. I’m with you 100%.
> 
> I’m a little concerned that it might be slower in order to accommodate IS, but the 35mm f/2.0 IS gives me hop! 4-stop IS on an f/1.4 aperture would be a dream come true for me!
> 
> ...



I'm with you there, IS is great for low light landscapes to keep the ISO down and ensure optimium aperture for DOF and also for handheld video where it is impractical to use a tripod- mountaineering is one of those applications!


----------



## RMC33 (Jun 5, 2013)

An updated 1.4 with a better focusing motor, bit better sealing and *no IS* would be great. A second model with a STM and IS for video/people who want IS would be great. IS has its place and yes it can be shut off, but I feel the market is large enough for two versions, say a 50 f/2 STM IS and 50 1.4 (updated).


----------



## FlashFM (Jun 7, 2013)

> A new 50mm will be coming in 2013, as the 35 f/2 gets replaced with a new IS version.


Source: http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/11/two-lenses-to-be-announced-shortly/

Patiently waiting, any hope for a 50mm f/1.2L update? Buying something now dating back to 2006 is making me uneasy.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2013)

FlashFM said:


> > A new 50mm will be coming in 2013, as the 35 f/2 gets replaced with a new IS version.
> 
> 
> Source: http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/11/two-lenses-to-be-announced-shortly/
> Patiently waiting, any hope for a 50mm f/1.2L update? Buying something now dating back to 2006 is making me uneasy.



2006 is comparatively new. The other 50mm lenses that are 'current' are the 50/1.4 from 1993, the 50/1.8 from 1990, and the 50/2.5 Compact Macro from 1987. There are many lenses in the current lineup, including many L-series lenses, that were released 15 years ago or more.


----------



## FlashFM (Jun 7, 2013)

Should I take the plunge on the L now then, or would you wait?


----------



## Pi (Jun 8, 2013)

FlashFM said:


> Should I take the plunge on the L now then, or would you wait?



There will always be market for the L. Have faith in Canon, they will not kill the L sales. Wait for a good deal and get it, this is what I am doing as well.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 8, 2013)

The L sucks.


----------



## Zv (Jun 8, 2013)

Will Canon replace one of the 50's this year? The 1.8 II and 1.4 are still selling like hot cakes. I wish they'd just do a minor upgrade to the 1.4 and release it as a version II. No IS but just USM and rounded aperture blades. Same optical formula is fine, just bang it out already! That wouldn't hurt the L sales would it?


----------



## DJL329 (Jun 8, 2013)

RMC33 said:


> An updated 1.4 with a better focusing motor, bit better sealing and *no IS* would be great.



+1000

I don't shoot video, don't need IS on a fast 50mm and certainly don't want want it made larger and more expensive to accommodate it. Just want that #&@$ 'micro' USM replaced with 'ring' USM.


----------



## Rocky (Jun 8, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> LOALTD said:
> 
> 
> > The 50mm f/1.4 is, by far, my most-used lens. I’m with you 100%.
> ...


I am with you too. I cannot see any reason for people to be "against" IS on standard and wide angle lenses. Just imagine when you are a tourist inside any of the palaces or the great churches. Do you want your wide angle lens to have IS or not ?


----------



## Roadtrip (Jun 9, 2013)

DJL329 said:


> RMC33 said:
> 
> 
> > An updated 1.4 with a better focusing motor, bit better sealing and *no IS* would be great.
> ...



+100,000......and I thought I was the only one that felt that way!


----------



## infared (Jun 9, 2013)

Based on the quality of the Canon 50mm lenses (especially the f/1.8 & f/1.4) it tells me that Canon is not too interested or concerned about a great quality, fine-tuned normal lens for their full-frame cameras. I think perhaps your hope is displaced here as it appears that Sigma and Zeiss are on the brink of satisfying our needs long before Canon will,(but, you never know!). Although...I cannot understand why we do not have a stunning, well-priced normal lens for our camera bodies....this continually perplexes me and obviously it perplexes others as well and has for quite some time.


----------



## RMC33 (Jun 10, 2013)

DJL329 said:


> RMC33 said:
> 
> 
> > An updated 1.4 with a better focusing motor, bit better sealing and *no IS* would be great.
> ...



Give me Ring USM or give me death!


----------



## RMC33 (Jun 10, 2013)

Rocky said:


> insanitybeard said:
> 
> 
> > LOALTD said:
> ...



No, because it will stay at home as I don't plan on dragging around a ~$800 dollar lens on holiday that weighs 200-400g more because of a system that I don't need. I have not needed IS to shoot with my current 50 1.4 ever, 24-70 Mk1/2 or any lens that "needs" IS. Like I said, A 50 STM f/2 with IS for the video and "I want IS" crowd would be great and I may even buy that next to a 50 f/1.4 II but IS on everything is just expensive and heavy~


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 10, 2013)

I'm quite content with my 50L. If they can make one better, perhaps canon could make me un-content with it.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 10, 2013)

We've riffed on this a few times before. Regardless of what you all want, here is what you are going to get in the next 50mm prime - a 100% similar version of the recent IS primes in a 50mm package:


Non-L
IS
Sharpness should surpass the 50L (remember, the F/1.4 lens is currently sharper than the 50L already at a few apertures)
Modern USM, Very quick AF
Internal focusing
Lightweight
Vastly improved build quality over the lens it is replacing (in this case, the F/1.4). I own the 50 F/1.4 and the new 28 F/2.8 IS and it is night and day for BQ. Someone nearly hit me when I said the new 28 was an L lens minus the gasket, but I stand by that statement. These new non-L primes are nearly as well built as my 100L macro, but not tank-like like my 70-200 F/2.8 IS II. 

The above list is a hammerlock going-to-happen list. Why am I so confident? They are refreshing all non-L primes right now in this exact fashion. They've done the 24, 28, and 35, so the 50 and likely 85 are next. These are twenty year old lenses that need refreshes.

The only debatables are max aperture and filter size. My vote of what we'll get (not what I want, per se) is F/2 and 67mm. As the 24 & 28 IS refreshses got 58mm and then the 35mm F/2 IS got stepped up to 67mm, similarly stepping up the 50mm F/2 IS to a 67mm filter makes sense. Just a hunch on aperture, though. 

- A


----------



## Rocky (Jun 10, 2013)

RMC33 said:


> No, because it will stay at home as I don't plan on dragging around a ~$800 dollar lens on holiday that weighs 200-400g more because of a system that I don't need. I have not needed IS to shoot with my current 50 1.4 ever, 24-70 Mk1/2 or any lens that "needs" IS. Like I said, A 50 STM f/2 with IS for the video and "I want IS" crowd would be great and I may even buy that next to a 50 f/1.4 II but IS on everything is just expensive and heavy~



EF 28mm f2.8 weights 185 gm, EF 28mm f2.8 USM IS weights 260 gm. This difference is only 75 gm. I do not know where did you get the 200-400 gm information. If you do not want to bring a $800 lens on a trip then would you bring a $1800 camera body on a trip???


----------



## Sella174 (Jun 10, 2013)

infared said:


> ... I cannot understand why we do not have a stunning, well-priced normal lens for our camera bodies....this continually perplexes me and obviously it perplexes others as well and has for quite some time.



Two reasons: 

(1) Zoom lenses sell cameras. Who, especially the target audience of the "entry-level" cameras, will today buy a DSLR kitted with a prime lens?

(2) The non-L primes that are being "updated" are just being done because they are "traditional" lenses and Canon obviously feels that they should still manufacture them. Therefore they get "updated" and made current/modern with IS. The prices of these lenses suggest that Canon felt right from the start that sales will be very slow.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 10, 2013)

RMC33 said:


> An updated 1.4 with a better focusing motor, bit better sealing and *no IS* would be great. A second model with a STM and IS for video/people who want IS would be great. IS has its place and yes it can be shut off, but I feel the market is large enough for two versions, say a 50 f/2 STM IS and 50 1.4 (updated).



Agreed...


----------



## infared (Jun 10, 2013)

Sella174 said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > ... I cannot understand why we do not have a stunning, well-priced normal lens for our camera bodies....this continually perplexes me and obviously it perplexes others as well and has for quite some time.
> ...



Valid points....perhaps a Sigma Artline 50mm f/1.4 is the best hope for a reasonably priced, better quality AF normal lens. I know the Zeiss is going to cost a fortune but set a new standard, which it most likely will.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 10, 2013)

I just fail to see why this new 50mm will be a problem. We will then have:

$125 or so --> 50 F/1.8: nifty fifty
$350 or so --> 50 F/1.4 (sort of) USM: a great lens for the dollar (like the 85 F/1.8
$800 or so --> new 50 F/? IS USM
$1300? (I have forgotten) --> the 50L F/1.2: the high art / portraiture lens, the je ne sais quoi lens, the bokeh magic lens, etc.

That third option is perfectly placed. Many people who feel the L is overpriced or underfeatured will jump at the new offering. I certainly will.

- A


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 10, 2013)

ahsanford said:


> I just fail to see why this new 50mm will be a problem. We will then have:
> 
> $125 or so --> 50 F/1.8: nifty fifty
> $350 or so --> 50 F/1.4 (sort of) USM: a great lens for the dollar (like the 85 F/1.8
> ...



The problem is --- many feel that the 1.4 is the one that needs to be updated...as a 1.4!!!! The market for primes seems to have a clear line in the sand ---the camp that wants a slower lens with IS and a camp that wants a fast lens and doesn't care for IS. The next divide is price - the only way to please both camps is to make a 1.4 with IS but I seriously doubt such a thing would be made available under 1K - or IQ will be garbage from 1.4-2.8. 

I just want an optically improved 1.4...or, lets get it on with a 50mmL 1.2v2!


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 11, 2013)

I'd pay 900 for a50mm that is sharp wide open... but it is to much to ask for at the moment...


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 11, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I just fail to see why this new 50mm will be a problem. We will then have:
> ...



I think some of us (and this is not an indictment) are getting hung up in F/1.4 vs. F/2. It's just one stop. The _other_ improvements -- general overall sharpness, internal focusing, IS, much much faster focusing, better build -- would have me buy this lens at F/2 _or_ F/1.4. 

I know I am in the minority here, but I'd gladly give up one stop for all those improvements.

As for 50Lv2, agree. It doesn't even stack up to the current F/1.4 in the corners. For 3-4x the price, it should everything the cheaper one does _and more_.

- A


----------



## Pi (Jun 11, 2013)

ahsanford said:


> As for 50Lv2, agree. It doesn't even stack up to the current F/1.4 in the corners. For 3-4x the price, it should everything the cheaper one does _and more_.



No, it should be different, and it is. F/1.2 poses different design requirements.


----------



## pj1974 (Jun 11, 2013)

ahsanford said:


> I think some of us (and this is not an indictment) are getting hung up in F/1.4 vs. F/2. It's just one stop. The _other_ improvements -- general overall sharpness, internal focusing, IS, much much faster focusing, better build -- would have me buy this lens at F/2 _or_ F/1.4.
> 
> I know I am in the minority here, but I'd gladly give up one stop for all those improvements.
> 
> As for 50Lv2, agree. It doesn't even stack up to the current F/1.4 in the corners. For 3-4x the price, it should everything the cheaper one does _and more_.



In part I do agree with you - personally my needs and style of photography means that I'm not so hung up on the maximum aperture issue (ie between f/1.4 - f/2). However I wouldn't want anything slower than f/2 - though I do understand there are people who need f/1.4 (rather than f/2). 

Particularly if there the lens comes with IS - f/2 would work great for certain applications. And having a robust focus (STM as a minimum, or true ring USM as my preference) - ie fast, accurate, consistent. 

More importantly, I want the next Canon 50mm lens - to have great IQ (sharp, contrasty, smooth bokeh, low CAs, little vignetting) when it's wide open. 

Then if anything the lens' IQ should 'improve from there' in the range f/wide-open till f/5.6. I doubt I'll use such a lens at smaller apertures than f/5.6.

The new EF Canon 35mm f/2 IS USM looks attractive... just I use the 50mm focus length more than I use 35mm. I'd be prepared to spend up to $1000 AUD for a lens that fits the bill. I'm looking forward to what might be around the corner.... 8) 

Paul


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jun 11, 2013)

ahsanford said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



I think the camps are pretty evenly divided (because there are a lot of video folks that want the IS). But for those of us hunting for amazing bokeh, f2 is not f1.4! 

In my shoes, I want bokeh. If the new 50 is f2 with IS and costs $900, well that just gives me the extra nudge to upgrade my 24-70 to the v2 because that lens is from what I have heard nothing short of amazing!!!! With that lens now out, the only reason to go for a prime in that range is --- bokeh. 2.8 vs 2.0 doesn't let in enough light to make that a wedding lens. 1.4 vs 2.8 though, now that is a difference maker. I can handheld my 50mm down to 1/40th of a second no problem - so with IS I could go down to 1/10th ---but, that won't be of much use at a wedding reception because people are moving. 

So yeah, in a nutshell, if it's f2 with IS, that just gives me another reason to save the pennies for the 24-70. But if its f1.4 no IS but improved IQ, corners, AF...then I'd snag one! 

Either way, I do think that each variation is different enough to warrant both. But again I really feel that we're talking about apples and oranges here. f2 with IS will appeal to some --- 1.4 no IS will appeal to other...but like I said - if all they release is f2 with IS, I will just go with the 24-70 because the IQ will most likely be better and there is a lot more versatility to the zoom (and no compromise in IQ). And mounted on a 5d3, I have no problems just boosting the ISO to keep my SS at a reasonable level!


----------



## switters (Jun 15, 2013)

After my experience with the Sigma Art 35, and their new dock, I'll wait until they release their Art 50 lens. If it's as good as their 35, I'll be all over it.


----------



## rs (Jun 15, 2013)

Cheaper IS implementations can be very cheap - just look at the £85 18-55 IS lens. I see no reason why another all-plastic replacement for the 50/1.8 line couldn't be released with IS for a similar introduction price - whether its f1.8 or f2.

I have a feeling the higher end f1.4 and f1.2 lens replacements are less likely to get IS, but it'd be nice to be proved wrong - those that don't want the feature can always leave it turned off, as long as they afford it.


----------



## RMC33 (Jun 16, 2013)

Rocky said:


> RMC33 said:
> 
> 
> > No, because it will stay at home as I don't plan on dragging around a ~$800 dollar lens on holiday that weighs 200-400g more because of a system that I don't need. I have not needed IS to shoot with my current 50 1.4 ever, 24-70 Mk1/2 or any lens that "needs" IS. Like I said, A 50 STM f/2 with IS for the video and "I want IS" crowd would be great and I may even buy that next to a 50 f/1.4 II but IS on everything is just expensive and heavy~
> ...



What $1800 dollar camera body? I would bring an SL1 or some such on holiday. There is more glass in the 50 vs the 28. I would hazard a guess at 100-125g increase at tops for a 50 with IS not 200-400 like I stated, which is still too much. A ring type USM would also be welcome, rather then a micro motor.


----------

