# Canon: We'll make any nutty lens you want -- unless its a 50 prime [CR9]



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2017)

Tokyo [AP] -- Touting company plans to offer new diffractive optics lenses, Canon imaging exec Richard Trickle continues to put his money down on offering new glass.

"Lenses continue to drive business, and we'll design as many as can to help the photography community thrive, unless it's in a staple focal length prime lens like a 50mm f/1.4" he said in an interview Wednesday.

Trickle, continuing with excitement: "We'll refresh anything the field wants. Other than an exceptionally handy, small and fast prime lens in high demand like a new EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, of course." 

"There really is no end to what we'll do to satisfy our customers. Illuminated crop macro lenses to shoot your restaurant order from short distances for Instagram? Done. Tilt-shift 1:2 macro lenses? You're welcome. Compact DO superteles? You betcha. Resurrect nutty old nonsense? I don't want to spoil anything, but can you imagine _Softfocus II?_ I sure can."

"But I honestly can't think of a reason why we'd waste time and offer a staple professional tool like a workhorse 50 prime that has a flat plane of focus, is sharp somewhere other than dead center and has AF that can lock without hunting until next Tuesday. _Who the hell needs one of those?"_


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Sep 14, 2017)

Certainly there are prototypes of a new 50mm F1.4 being exhaustively tested by Canon.

Maybe the person responsible for deciding which lenses to launch has a trauma of this focal length? ???

Maybe they want to wait for the sales of the 85mm IS, to know if it's worth going the same way with the 50mm? 

Maybe they have a warehouse full of the old 50mm F1.4. Who knows if they made a mistake in the production, and manufactured one million units of the old 50mm, when the correct would have been a thousand units? : Maybe the same warehouse is full of 75-300mm too ... ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 14, 2017)

It's because they are working on a 50F1.0 DO BR IS lens....

or perhaps it's a 1200F5.6 DO lens.....

but a new 50F1.4? Other than Ahsanford and myself, there is no market....


----------



## hne (Sep 14, 2017)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Certainly there are prototypes of a new 50mm F1.4 being exhaustively tested by Canon.
> 
> Maybe the person responsible for deciding which lenses to launch has a trauma of this focal length? ???
> 
> ...



Oh, I can so see this happen! An order was made for...
35mm f/2: 90000
35/1.4L USM: 12000
50/1.4 USM: 500000
85/1.8 USM: 200000
85/1.2L II USM: 2000
70-200/2.8L IS USM: 8000
70-200/2.8L USM: 800000
70-200/4L USM: 10000000

That'd explain why the 35/1.4L, 50/1.4 and 70-200/2.8L are all still around after all these years. And also why the 70-200/4 will NEVER be discontinued.


----------



## Talys (Sep 14, 2017)

They've had it ready to go for a year, with a brand new 5-stop mode 3 IS for small lens, but marketing has been arguing about whether to put a purple or a pink ring around it, and whether or not to call the new rubberized MF grip charcoal or graphite.


----------



## Duckman (Sep 14, 2017)

I'm shocked they haven't released one yet!! I'm patiently waiting for a new 50 myself.... hopefully sooner than later! 
-J


----------



## mistaspeedy (Sep 14, 2017)

Meanwhile, I've only recently upgraded from the 50mm F1.8 STM to the 50mm F1.4 USM.... I'll upgrade to the new IS version about 25 years after it is released


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 14, 2017)

They did a backroom deal with Sigma. Canon agreed to not put out a decent 50, and Sigma agreed to ensure that any 24-70 or 70-200 zooms they put out would only have the image quality of their pre-Art technology. Where are the trust busters when you need 'em?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 14, 2017)

I have heard that Canon did a survey of those who might want a new 50mm lens, and only one was interested.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 14, 2017)

lol. hehe!

i have a 1 yr young ED 50/1.4 in my closet. dont think i have taken more than 50 shots with it yet. will not buy any other 50 prime any time soon. f/1.4 or 1.0 or whatever and IS or not. "art" or not. south or north of 1k ... no, thanks.

waiting for delivery of my personal copy of canon EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM.


----------



## mjg79 (Sep 14, 2017)

I am torn between admiration for Canon making the TS-E 50mm lens (and a 2.8 and Macro at that) and bewilderment that that has been given a high priority than a modern 50/1.4. That TS lens will have been very involved to design and build, inevitably will not sell that many units but speaks to canon's determination to maintain an ecosystem that nobody else can match with the highest quality glass. All great. But still, yes, the OP makes a fair and funny point - a modern 50mm 1.4 , L or non-L would seem a no brainer.

I suspect some of this is because of Sigma's success in that focal length perhaps having now saturated the market for those wanting a fast sharp modern 50 - if Canon is doing serious market research I think they might find that there just isn't a huge demand. Those who really want a 50mm L lens in many cases already have the 1.2. Those who just want a simple 1.4 can buy the lens sold today which is good if not great. Those obsessed with sharpness can buy the Sigma 50 Art. So while many here - myself included - love the idea of an updated 50/1.4 with L build quality and maybe IS, how many of us would actually be willing to pay the high price Canon would likely charge to recover the development costs?

If the number who really would buy it is low then Canon simply will not be pushing resources that way. I am sure it will come eventually, Canon clearly is determined to maintain a high quality range of glass, but I sort of understand why it would be a lower priority.

For me the strangest thing really though is why they don't make the 50mm 1.0 again. The old lens, impossible to service, soft at wide apertures, terrible bokeh, clumsy auto-focus sells for thousands second hand. If people could buy a brand new one from Canon, hopefully improved especially with modern coatings, and full warranty and ability to service it, I am sure these days there would be more demand than before. I think more and more people today are willing to pay thousands to buy what they consider to be "the best" - see how Zeiss has made a success of the Otus line. If Canon wished to avoid development costs they could simply restart production of the flawed original I think they would still sell plenty - they could price them at $3000 and undercut the second hand price which is rather strange!


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> waiting for delivery of my personal copy of canon EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM.



Phew. That means I'll only be waiting the _second_ longest. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2017)

mjg79 said:


> But still, yes, the OP makes a fair and funny point - a modern 50mm 1.4 , L or non-L would seem a no brainer.



Autofocus is the key. Canon will always win the argument on that front in my book.

But the critical call in the 50 space is eitehr staying with the older/simpler double gauss designs or going huge like the recent offerings. Compact size vs. uncompromising sharpness.

I think the non-L replacement is an easy one -- just make a 50 prime like the 24/28/35 IS refresh lenses from 5 years ago. Done. Easy. Take my money.

The L very well could go the big pickle jar route like the 50 Art, 55 Otus, etc. and throw the house at resolution. We'll see.

- A


----------



## mistaspeedy (Sep 14, 2017)

I guess they could just refresh it like the 50mm F1.8 STM. They can add new coatings, maybe optimize the placement of a lens element a tiny bit like the STM (if needed), make the autofocus more consistent and reliable and that's it.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2017)

mistaspeedy said:


> I guess they could just refresh it like the 50mm F1.8 STM. They can add new coatings, maybe optimize the placement of a lens element a tiny bit like the STM (if needed), make the autofocus more consistent and reliable and that's it.



_Take the exact same optical formula as 1993_ and just put it in a modern ring USM / internal focusing setup and $600 would leave my coffers faster than a speeding bullet.

Don't get me wrong, I want the lens to be modernized, get sharper wide open, get IS, etc. but I want the AF solved and I want the extruding telescoping barrel eliminated so much more.

- A


----------



## snoke (Sep 15, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> _Take the exact same optical formula as 1993_ and just put it in a modern ring USM / internal focusing setup and $600 would leave my coffers faster than a speeding bullet.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I want the lens to be modernized, get sharper wide open, get IS, etc. but I want the AF solved and I want the extruding telescoping barrel eliminated so much more.



Maybe what you want not achievable for price. Big price adjustment for other IS prime lens. Down. Maybe Canon learn not profitable. Who know.

If nobody buy 50/1.4 then Canon need new lens. Why Canon stop make lens if sell well?

Your #1 task: stop everyone buy old 50/1.4.


----------



## mjg79 (Sep 15, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> mjg79 said:
> 
> 
> > But still, yes, the OP makes a fair and funny point - a modern 50mm 1.4 , L or non-L would seem a no brainer.
> ...



Yeah I agree the non-L update shouldn't be a huge issue and should fit nicely with the 35 IS etc. If they do the same to the 85 that would make a nice selection of lighter smaller primes.

As for the L, who can say really? In so many focal lengths the L lens tends to be all about sharpness and perfection. I rather like that the current 50L is a character lens even though personally I don't get on with it well for some reason - I've seen beautiful photos taken with it. Nikon seemed to take a similar approach with their 58/1.4, not putting the priority on sharpness but rather the rendering.

The size comparison you show is rather sobering - if Canon does go head to head with the Sigma Art then it's likely we end up with a huge lens. Interestingly I have seen a good few Sigma users who claim they prefer the older non-Art 50/1.4 Sigma made; it isn't as sharp but the bokeh and general rendering apparently are more pleasant.

A (sort of) 50mm lens I've always admired and wanted but the prices are crazy is the Nikon Noct 58/1.2. Am I right in thinking it was a Gaussian lens design but they did something special with the elements? I was astonished a while back to read a fairly detailed test that found it out-resolved the 58/1.4G Nikon. Apparently Nikon can't make a modern Noct because of the narrow F-mount not allowing room for the Autofocus contacts - I would love to see Canon give us another characterful 50L but maybe a bit sharper and less nervous bokeh than the current 1.2, the Noct gives a really special mixture of sharpness wide open, gentle rendering of details, very soft bokeh - really it's the only Nikon lens I've ever felt jealous of and if Canon could give us an autofocus L version of it I would be reaching for the credit card! It proves it's possible to make a 58mm lens that is in many respects similar to the 85L without it being enormous.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 15, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> mistaspeedy said:
> 
> 
> > I guess they could just refresh it like the 50mm F1.8 STM. They can add new coatings, maybe optimize the placement of a lens element a tiny bit like the STM (if needed), make the autofocus more consistent and reliable and that's it.
> ...



Canon has been remarkably good at predicting the commercial success of its products; it seems a safe bet that if Canon hasn't released it, there isn't really enough demand to warrant the R&D and production.

I really don't mean this to be snarky, but maybe there just aren't a lot of folks like you who want this. What is so special about this focal length?


----------



## NancyP (Sep 15, 2017)

Actually, I would rather like to see a 65 mm f/1.4 (traditional size) or f/2.8 (compact). I have been pleasantly surprised by how much use I get out of the Shorty Forty. It would be nice to have a prime smack in the middle between 40 and 85.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 15, 2017)

@lens size: Sigma and Zeiss Otus are made in variants for different mounts - this may well contribute to their huge size. 

i would expect a new Canon 50/1.4 IS lens even as retrofocus design to be not as huge, since it would be only matched to Canon EF mount, which offers optimal parameters for a compact design. FFD and generously wide opening (throat width) are a huge advantage. Canon got that one really right in 1987. Nikon F-mount of 1957 is a dog for modern high performance, fast lens designs.


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 15, 2017)

mjg79 said:


> ... Yeah I agree the non-L update shouldn't be a huge issue and should fit nicely with the 35 IS etc. If they do the same to the 85 that would make a nice selection of lighter smaller primes. ...


Exactly my thoughts, exactly my market segment.



Orangutan said:


> Canon has been remarkably good at predicting the commercial success of its products; it seems a safe bet that if Canon hasn't released it, there isn't really enough demand to warrant the R&D and production.
> 
> I really don't mean this to be snarky, but maybe there just aren't a lot of folks like you who want this. What is so special about this focal length?


Terrifying logical as well as frightening, but hopefully not true. :'(
I really hope Canon R&D were just too busy making other lenses than those "standard" primes.
Otherwise I'll have to take a closer look at the Tamron offerings here :-\


----------



## LDS (Sep 15, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> _Take the exact same optical formula as 1993_ and just put it in a modern ring USM / internal focusing setup and $600 would leave my coffers faster than a speeding bullet.



Maybe Canon can't do IF without a new optical formula. And it looks the lens designers are quite busy churning out the nutty lenses we want...


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2017)

LDS said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > _Take the exact same optical formula as 1993_ and just put it in a modern ring USM / internal focusing setup and $600 would leave my coffers faster than a speeding bullet.
> ...



I don't appreciate this aspect of lens design. Aren't the moving external bits around the glass decoupled from the optical formula? Can't Canon simply array the same elements into a larger outer housing so that all the sliding takes place inside of the outer housing?

- A


----------



## jeffa4444 (Sep 15, 2017)

mjg79 said:


> I am torn between admiration for Canon making the TS-E 50mm lens (and a 2.8 and Macro at that) and bewilderment that that has been given a high priority than a modern 50/1.4. That TS lens will have been very involved to design and build, inevitably will not sell that many units but speaks to canon's determination to maintain an ecosystem that nobody else can match with the highest quality glass. All great. But still, yes, the OP makes a fair and funny point - a modern 50mm 1.4 , L or non-L would seem a no brainer.
> 
> I suspect some of this is because of Sigma's success in that focal length perhaps having now saturated the market for those wanting a fast sharp modern 50 - if Canon is doing serious market research I think they might find that there just isn't a huge demand. Those who really want a 50mm L lens in many cases already have the 1.2. Those who just want a simple 1.4 can buy the lens sold today which is good if not great. Those obsessed with sharpness can buy the Sigma 50 Art. So while many here - myself included - love the idea of an updated 50/1.4 with L build quality and maybe IS, how many of us would actually be willing to pay the high price Canon would likely charge to recover the development costs?
> 
> ...


They have a EF24mm f1.4L II, they have a EF35mm f1.4L II and now a EF85mm f1.4L. Its simply illogical to believe they will not produce a EF50mm f1.4L, EF28mm f1.4L and even a EF100mm f1.4L. These lenses collectively will give them a really good standard set for video if nothing else after all Sigma have created PL versions of their Art lenses and not everyone wants PL mounts. 
To me its more of a question of "why" haven't they done it, constant aperture lenses make sense in shallow depth of field and keeping the lighting relatively the same perfect for video. Yes Canon have the CN lenses but they are expensive and some are based on older stills lenses that are not particularly good by today standards.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 15, 2017)

Very funny approach to this round of moaning! Even my non-photographer wife had a good laugh. 

Where the heck is the new 50mm???


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> They have a EF24mm f1.4L II, they have a EF35mm f1.4L II and now a EF85mm f1.4L. Its simply illogical to believe they will not produce a EF50mm f1.4L, EF28mm f1.4L and even a EF100mm f1.4L.



That's optimistic. 28 f/1.4 and 100 f/1.4 are niche instruments between existing FL primes that few folks are screaming for. The standard battery of 24 / 35 / 50 / 85 / 135, however, are staple instruments.

I just don't understand why we've got A (L lens) and B+ (non-L lens) quality instruments at 24mm, 35mm, etc. and 50mm and 85mm (relatively) go begging. 

That said, the similarly venerable 85 f/1.8 USM is a _far_ better instrument than the 50 f/1.4 USM: 


Ring USM, not micro USM -- faster, night and day different w.r.t. hunting for lock


Internal focusing -- no more damaged lens by bumping a protruding front element, no extended barrel for stuff to get inside in the lens, etc.


More useable wide open -- sharper corners, less 'cloudy' low contrast output than the 50

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Canon has been remarkably good at predicting the commercial success of its products; it seems a safe bet that if Canon hasn't released it, there isn't really enough demand to warrant the R&D and production.
> 
> I really don't mean this to be snarky, but maybe there just aren't a lot of folks like you who want this. What is so special about this focal length?



Far be it from me to say that Canon doesn't know what it is doing. I almost always see the wisdom in their moves, or trust to the fact that their data/marketing/insight is much more robust than (we) the unwashed masses of the internet.

But as to why such insistence for a better non-L 50 prime, it's a combination of the utility of the focal length and my disappointment of the 50L sitting above it:


Short of a 35mm prime, it's arguably the most versatile prime focal length in that it could passably jump to a dozen different photography needs. It doesn't distort faces and it's not too long, so other than macro/product, sports/wildlife, there's little you can't try with it.


Canon's L offering at 50mm is not for me, and not for price -- I'd get one if it addressed my needs, and it doesn't. I don't use a 50 prime to make dreamy portraits or live in the f/1.2 - f/1.8 range. The 50L lacks the flat plane of focus I desire, is cotton balls non-sharp away from the center (even stopped down!) and I've found it very hard to consistently nail focus wider than f/2 when aiming off-center. It's a sexy tool for a specific use-case _that I don't use_. Pass.


It's the unique focal length where double gauss designs defy physics -- 50s uniquely can be very fast and still stay small/discreet and relatively inexpensive. Longer f/1.4 lenses are bigger. _Wider_ f/1.4 lenses are bigger. 50mm sits in this 'you can keep it small' little valley. I love that weird quirk of the lens universe.


It's often the first prime you use, so many photographers' training wheels period with primes revolve around this lens.


And surely I'm not the only one with that perspective. I'm not going to go all AvTvM and declare millions of people are like me, but this lens (or perhaps a better 50 prime in general) is surely the #1 recurrent ask here at CR now that the 35L II and 100-400L II have been released.

- A


----------



## LDS (Sep 15, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> I don't appreciate this aspect of lens design. Aren't the moving external bits around the glass decoupled from the optical formula? Can't Canon simply array the same elements into a larger outer housing so that all the sliding takes place inside of the outer housing?



No, IF is more complex than that, usually it means internal groups move while others don't, and/or some elements may change relative position.

in most compact double Gauss designs AFAIK the whole optical part moves. Simply housing it in an external barrel would just make it bulkier. As long as the front element doesn't rotate, I don't care if small lenses are not IF.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2017)

LDS said:


> No, IF is more complex than that, usually it means internal groups move while others don't, and/or some elements may change relative position.
> 
> in most compact double Gauss designs AFAIK the whole optical part moves. Simply housing it in an external barrel would just make it bulkier. As long as the front element doesn't rotate, I don't care if small lenses are not IF.



Right right, thanks. Now we're getting down into the weeds of "Is a 16-35 f/4L IS, 16-35 f/2.8L III, 50L, etc. an internal zooming / focusing lens?" 


The technical answer to that question is no because there isn't a closed off vessel/cylinder that encloses all the moving bits. (Go to TDP and play with the zooming/focusing mouseovers and those lenses' front elements do shuttle front to back in use.)


The practical answer to that question is yes: though the front element moves front to back in those lenses, _neither lens allows that front element to ever clear the outer barrel_. So neither lens will ever have something sticking out in advance of the barrel that can get knocked, pushed, etc.

So let's get in the weeds for a second on what I'd personally like to see in the new 50: internal focusing should be either an unqualified textbook yes (front element is static) or the qualified yes of the lenses I listed above. 

What is critical for me is no protruding front elements that can be bumped/damaged or external sliding tubes that can let junk into the lens -- I could care less if there is the 50L / 16-35 phenomenon of a sliding internal barrel that is externally shielded as I front-filter all my lenses and that ingress pathway is blocked off. 

Also, a rare and nutty need, but shaped bokeh stencils you drape over a larger aperture lens generally go to hell with sliding bits -- they work much better without any telescoping. I've tried to use these on my 50 f/1.4 and it's a hot mess to manage. Admittedly, this is a niche need, but if the non-L IS refreshes can offer this, why not at 50mm?

But yes, to LDS's point, I'd actually take the bulk of the added external barrel in this case. It's value is worth a modest size delta. (It's not like the 50 f/1.4 will become a Sigma 50 Art if they did that.)

- A


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Sep 15, 2017)

Samyang managed to make a modern 50mm F1.4 weighing only 535 grams. You just need to put an AF in it. It seems to me a middle ground between the old Canon and the gigantic Sigma Art.


----------



## Jopa (Sep 15, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Tokyo [AP] -- Touting company plans to offer new diffractive optics lenses, Canon imaging exec Richard Trickle continues to put his money down on offering new glass.
> 
> "Lenses continue to drive business, and we'll design as many as can to help the photography community thrive, unless it's in a staple focal length prime lens like a 50mm f/1.4" he said in an interview Wednesday.
> 
> ...



That was fun to read  Exactly what I feel after reading the supertelephoto DO rumor. It seems like no one actually cares about 50mm gap because all Canon users are beefy birders and carrying in their pockets a 600/4 or so.


----------



## SkynetTX (Sep 15, 2017)

Ok, Canon. I'd like to have a nutty 250mm f5.6 IS USM Macro lens with 1:1 reprodutcion ratio and about 75 cm Minimum Object Distance since sometimes I'm phisically unable to get closer to the subjects. Thank you!


----------



## stevelee (Sep 16, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> lol. hehe!
> 
> i have a 1 yr young ED 50/1.4 in my closet. dont think i have taken more than 50 shots with it yet. will not buy any other 50 prime any time soon. f/1.4 or 1.0 or whatever and IS or not. "art" or not. south or north of 1k ... no, thanks.
> 
> waiting for delivery of my personal copy of canon EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM.



The 50mm f/1.4 is more useful on a crop-sensor camera. It functions a lot like an 85mm on FF (80mm equivalent, after all), and that's how I use mine. If/when I buy a FF camera, I will probably use it as rarely as you do. Probably the 100mm macro I already have will take that place for a while, a long with its other uses.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 16, 2017)

stevelee said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > lol. hehe!
> ...



True, most of my use of the 50 1.8 STM has been on my M6 (via adapter) rather than on my 5D. Since there's no current EF-M equivalent, it's really the only compact way I know of to get a portrait-friendly FOV with that camera. 

I have used the 50 (1.2 version) on the 5D as well, but lately I've been favoring more the 35mm FOV for wide shots - plus, I find the 35 1.4 II to be a FAR better lens than the 50 1.2 (sorry 50L fans). An improved 50mm lens from Canon is quite high on my wishlist (although if the new 85 1.4 is decent enough, the 35/85 1.4 combo may be more favored by me).


----------

