# How many years before we see a 50L II



## Fatfaso (Jul 24, 2014)

It's a tough world out there for lovers of the 50mm focal length. There is a new Sigma 50 Art, but it has outer-edge focus problems, is somehow too contrasty for some, and for videographers, there are focus breathing issues. On top of that, it's supposedly a bit heavy for a prime. 

On the other hand, the well known Canon 50L isn't as sharp as some would hope wide open and also has focus breathing problems. On top if that, it's slow to focus, despite having USM. 

So the question is... When will Canon respond to the Sigma 50 Art with an update to the 50L?

I would be thrilled if the updated lens was quick to focus, tack sharp wide open, and rendered colors the same way it does on the current 50L. 

Of course it's all speculation at this point, but it doesn't hurt to pose the question. 

Thoughts?


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Jul 24, 2014)

I could certainly use a replacement for my Sigma 50 Classic, which is known for it's Timeless Rendering. Unfortunately none of the other alternatives looks very attractive. It is indeed a dark time for lovers of 50mm primes.

I am actually waiting for Canon to bring out a stabilized 50 of modest aperture to expand their line that includes the well-reviewed 35mm F/2 IS.


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 24, 2014)

drmikeinpdx said:


> It is indeed a dark time golden age for lovers of 50mm primes.



Fixed your typo.


----------



## ryebread (Jul 24, 2014)

many years.
there is nothing wrong with the 50L.

it's a people lens. it's plenty sharp.
it's f/1.2 - so if you're not nailing focus, you need to work on your technique.


----------



## mackguyver (Jul 24, 2014)

ryebread said:


> many years.
> there is nothing wrong with the 50L.
> 
> it's a people lens. it's plenty sharp.
> it's f/1.2 - so if you're not nailing focus, you need to work on your technique.


+1 and you might want to visit the many "where is the 35L II" threads for some perspective on long waits...


----------



## ryebread (Jul 24, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> +1 and you might want to visit the many "where is the 35L II" threads for some perspective on long waits...



haha so true
nothing wrong with that lens either.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 24, 2014)

Canon seems to be focusing on video lenses. They generally do not need wide apertures, but do need silent AF motors and IS. I suspect that the only reason for a upgrade would be bragging rights, certainly sales volumes will not pay for the 10's of millions of dollars to design, tool, build, stock, and advertise a replacement. DSLR and lens sales are sharply down, so that means that Canon will only invest where they see a big profit, ... or for bragging rights.


----------



## jdramirez (Jul 24, 2014)

This is probably a better question for the retailers. Had the sigma impacted the Canon's sales? If not... then my answer would be not for a long time.


----------



## IsaacImage (Jul 24, 2014)

Fatfaso said:


> It's a tough world out there for lovers of the 50mm focal length. There is a new Sigma 50 Art, but it has outer-edge focus problems, is somehow too contrasty for some, and for videographers, there are focus breathing issues. On top of that, it's supposedly a bit heavy for a prime.
> 
> On the other hand, the well known Canon 50L isn't as sharp as some would hope wide open and also has focus breathing problems. On top if that, it's slow to focus, despite having USM.
> 
> ...



Hopefully right after 14-24 release


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 24, 2014)

3-5 years. The Otus was the first with a non-gaussian design. Is there any indication that Canon has been working on a similar design 1-2 years ago? If there were working on another modified guassian design, then it will not do well against the Otus or Sigma A, and they might as well start from square one. And if it's new product development, then will take years...


----------



## Axilrod (Jul 24, 2014)

ryebread said:


> many years.
> there is nothing wrong with the 50L.
> 
> it's a people lens. it's plenty sharp.
> it's f/1.2 - so if you're not nailing focus, you need to work on your technique.



Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not...


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 24, 2014)

Axilrod said:


> ryebread said:
> 
> 
> > many years.
> ...



Exactly. It's not the f/1.2 aperture that causes the focus problems on this particular lens. It's actually the field of curvature and is especially prominent at close distances from about f/2.8 to f/4.5. The lens will back-focus and there is pretty much nothing you can do about it. I thought it was pretty underwhelming for $1699.


----------



## jdramirez (Jul 24, 2014)

Axilrod said:


> ryebread said:
> 
> 
> > many years.
> ...



I didn't see any sarcasm there...


----------



## jdramirez (Jul 24, 2014)

bdunbar79 said:


> Axilrod said:
> 
> 
> > ryebread said:
> ...



You could manually focus... but I think the presumption is that those who struggle with f1.2 are using bad technique, like focus and recompose... which will all but guarantee the subject is out of focus.


----------



## Standard (Jul 24, 2014)

> You could manually focus... but I think the presumption is that those who struggle with f1.2 are using bad technique, like focus and recompose... which will all but guarantee the subject is out of focus.



I focus and recompose all the time…Even with the 5DM3. No issues here with the 50L nailing focus at f/1.2. But then again there are different ways to "focus and recompose."


----------



## mackguyver (Jul 24, 2014)

jdramirez said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Axilrod said:
> ...


Manual focus (even with the super precision matte screen) is almost impossible with the 50L at f/1.2 just like f/1.4 with the 24L, but things get a little easier with the 85L and 135L because of the focal length. 

The 50L is the ultimate love/hate lens for Canon shooters, I think, and to me, it's part of why it's so satisfying to use. If you nail a photo with it at f/1.2 it feels like an achievement instead of a gee I pressed the shutter moment. On the other hand, many people have tried the lens and hate it. I see it as a very specialized tool for unique looking portraits, but similar results can be achieved with other lenses.


----------



## ScottyP (Jul 24, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring.


----------



## mackguyver (Jul 24, 2014)

ScottyP said:


> The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring.


GUILTY as charged ;D


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 24, 2014)

I sucked :-\

  ;D


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jul 26, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> ScottyP said:
> 
> 
> > The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring.
> ...



Yeah, sure, but when it hits, it's so worth it.


----------



## Viggo (Jul 26, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> ryebread said:
> 
> 
> > many years.
> ...



Thank you..


----------



## Menace (Jul 26, 2014)

Daniel Flather said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > ScottyP said:
> ...



Love mine - very happy with it.


----------



## Ruined (Jul 26, 2014)

Fatfaso said:


> It's a tough world out there for lovers of the 50mm focal length. There is a new Sigma 50 Art, but it has outer-edge focus problems, is somehow too contrasty for some, and for videographers, there are focus breathing issues. On top of that, it's supposedly a bit heavy for a prime.
> 
> On the other hand, the well known Canon 50L isn't as sharp as some would hope wide open and also has focus breathing problems. On top if that, it's slow to focus, despite having USM.
> 
> ...



The Canon is also f/1.2 allowing 50% more light and greater DOF isolation than the sigma. The sharpness difference is neglible in practice and the Canon has more realistic colors.

So to answer your question probably not for a long, long time: most pros who use the 50L (not just blog jockeys) adore it. Next 50mm will be the 50mm f/1.8 IS.


----------



## GammyKnee (Jul 26, 2014)

ScottyP said:


> The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring.



Beautifully put. 

But this is why the 50L is such a divisive lens; some people by nature have an optimistic outlook and concentrate on the times that the AF hits, others dwell on the failures. Glass half full / half empty.



Ruined said:


> Next 50mm will be the 50mm f/1.8 IS.


 
I agree, I think that will be the next 50mm we see from Canon.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 26, 2014)

GammyKnee said:


> ScottyP said:
> 
> 
> > The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring.
> ...



I dearly hope the First Sub-F/2 IS lens is not a 50mm. More specifically a Longer short tele in mind...


----------



## drjlo (Jul 26, 2014)

bdunbar79 said:


> It's actually the field of curvature and is especially prominent at close distances from about f/2.8 to f/4.5. The lens will back-focus and there is pretty much nothing you can do about it.



What, people use the 50L at narrower than f/1.8 or so ??


----------



## dgatwood (Jul 27, 2014)

dilbert said:


> Fatfaso said:
> 
> 
> > So the question is... When will Canon respond to the Sigma 50 Art with an update to the 50L?
> ...




Maybe, but probably not, unless they decide to add IS to one of them as part of an "IS everywhere" campaign. Both are over two decades old, which tells me Canon probably doesn't care much about updating them. They're more than good enough for low-end lenses.

Look at the lenses that Canon has updated in the past ten years and the age of the predecessor:

24–70 L II: 10 years
16–35 L II: 6 years
70–200 L II: 9 years
70–300 (L as an alternative to non-L): 5 years
300mm IS II: 11 years
400mm IS II: 12 years
500mm IS II: 12 years
600mm IS I: 12 years
24mm IS: 24 years
35mm IS: 22 years


Only those last two replaced lenses that were more than a decade old, and both of those were IS upgrades to previously non-IS lenses.


----------



## candc (Jul 28, 2014)

I have only had mine for a few days but so far I think its great. I love the look it gives wide open. Its plenty sharp and the AF accuracy has been dead nuts on. In short: its a lot better than I was expecting with all the interweb negativity out there.


----------



## Menace (Jul 28, 2014)

candc said:


> I have only had mine for a few days but so far I think its great. I love the look it gives wide open. Its plenty sharp and the AF accuracy has been dead nuts on. In short: its a lot better than I was expecting with all the interweb negativity out there.



Glad to hear it - do share some photos


----------



## candc (Jul 28, 2014)

Menace said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > I have only had mine for a few days but so far I think its great. I love the look it gives wide open. Its plenty sharp and the AF accuracy has been dead nuts on. In short: its a lot better than I was expecting with all the interweb negativity out there.
> ...



I posted a few in the lens gallery yesterday.


----------



## candyman (Jul 28, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> .................
> Look at the lenses that Canon has updated in the past ten years and the age of the predecessor:
> 
> 24–70 L II: 10 years
> ...


 
I am not sure the 16-35 II has been updated .....Is the 16-35 f/4 IS really the update?....


----------



## Menace (Jul 28, 2014)

candc said:


> Menace said:
> 
> 
> > candc said:
> ...



Cool - looks like you had a nice day out


----------



## wockawocka (Jul 28, 2014)

There are issues with the 50L. I've had two.

In each case unless shooting wide open there is focus drift which is noticeable between 1.4 and 2.0.

When I got the Sigma there was a higher number of in focus shots than not, the images are sharper and I see none of the 'ugly bokeh' that I've been told about. The lens performs better in the outer points in AI servo mode than the 1.2L does as well.

It's worth the upgrade and I'm someone that likes to stay brand loyal. But the new 50 from Sigma is stunning.

It handles flare better than the L, it has almost zero CA and fringing wide open. For people to say the 1.2 is better either hasn't used the Sigma, had a bad copy or well, whatever.

When Canon releases a new version of the 50L I'll be jumping back to that, because when it does appear it should be better still (revised coatings, lessons learned from the old design and closed loop AF).

Until then, the Sigma 50 Art is the lens to get.


----------



## Alrik89 (Jul 28, 2014)

candyman said:


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



The 16-35mm II is the update of version I. 
Whats wrong with you?


----------



## candyman (Jul 28, 2014)

Alrik89 said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > dgatwood said:
> ...


 
O yeah, mondaymorning dip 
you're right


----------

