# Canon to Finally Announce a 50mm f/1.4 Replacement Soon? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 17, 2016)

```
<p><strong>*UPDATE*</strong>

“Soon” is always a relative term and we’re now not expecting such a lens to be announced in 2016.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>We’re told that Canon will announce a replacement to the EF 50mm f/1.4 “soon”. This is an oft rumored lens for replacement and there’s no doubt there has been ongoing development for such a lens.</p>
<p>We’re told that the replacement for the EF 50mm f/1.4 will not have IS, will still be f/1.4, and have ring type USM, instead of the new macro USM we’ve seen in the new EF-S 18-135 IS.</p>
<p>Take this with a grain of salt for the time being, as it comes from an unknown source. If we can confirm or deny this information from a known source, we’ll update this post.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 17, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that the replacement for the EF 50mm f/1.4 will not have IS



I hear howls of dismay from one particular individual.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Apr 17, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > We’re told that the replacement for the EF 50mm f/1.4 will not have IS
> ...


"No-one-knows" who you're talking about


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 17, 2016)

I think "ahsanford" will have to settle with Tamron. :

Almost 50mm
Almost USM focus.
Almost F1.4
Almost super sharp
Almost super compact


----------



## pj1974 (Apr 17, 2016)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> I think "ahsanford" will have to settle with Tamron. :
> 
> Almost 50mm
> Almost USM focus.
> ...



I hear howling... even this corner of the globe (Down Under).

Ahsanford does write that the lens just needs to do "everything well" (something like at 90% of perfection)... so are the list of 'almosts' above, from a Tamron, meeting the criteria?

Only time will tell... 

I, for one, am hoping this CR1 rumour - to be garnished with liberal doses of salt - is false, and that we will actually get a 50mm with IS.

PS... in the original post, CR wrote "macro USM" - I believe that should be "nano USM" - as seen on the new 18-135mm. I am particularly impressed at the speed, smoothness and accuracy of the nano USM that I have experienced on the new lens with the 80D when I tried it in 3 different shops over recent weeks.

Paul


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 18, 2016)

50m is not the focal length I want. They should make it 58mm ;D


----------



## RobPan (Apr 18, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that the replacement for the EF 50mm f/1.4 will not have IS.



Obviously, this lens is intended to be used on a camera with IBIS, like the Sony A7rII and perhaps the Canon M4.
Kind regards.


----------



## RickWagoner (Apr 18, 2016)

would make sense to be announced the same time with the next 5d..new camera...new lens!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 18, 2016)

pj1974 said:


> I hear howling... even this corner of the globe (Down Under).



I picture him in fetal position, rocking back and forth and chanting over and over, "It's only CR1, it's only CR1..."


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 18, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



To Norm and Cliff here, I have no idea who you are referring to. 

To CR, quit playing games with my heart. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 18, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> pj1974 said:
> 
> 
> > I hear howling... even this corner of the globe (Down Under).
> ...



+1 and laughing. Guilty. 

- A


----------



## Good24 (Apr 18, 2016)

LOL too funny ... I've always shared ahsanford's enthusiasm for a 50mm version of the 35mm f/2 IS ... but realistically as a 50 L owner I probably wouldn't buy it. At this point the rumors about various 50s have been all over the place for years, I wish they'd just come out with one already! (you know, other than the 1.8 STM).


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 18, 2016)

I've actually gone on record here to state that I'd buy this even without IS provided it had USM, such is my need. First party AF with USM + a presumed non-pickle-jar form factor trumps the competitive non IS options for me. 

- A


----------



## Bennymiata (Apr 18, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> 50m is not the focal length I want. They should make it 58mm ;D



No, no,no!
I want a 55mm!


----------



## The Supplanter (Apr 18, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> To Norm and Cliff here, I have no idea who you are referring to.
> 
> To CR, *quit playing games with my heart*.
> 
> - A



Did you just quote Backstreet Boys? Or is it NSYNC? ;D


----------



## d (Apr 18, 2016)

Any chance Canon might make this their second offering to feature a BR element?

d.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 18, 2016)

d said:


> Any chance Canon might make this their second offering to feature a BR element?
> 
> d.



If it's L, yes, 100%. 

But I don't think it will be L. There's been a lot of conjecture about a new 50, but (honestly) putting personal bias aside, I think the smart money is on the non-L 50mm f/1.4 USM to be refreshed in a major way. If it's non-L, I have a really hard time seeing BR gunk being offered anytime soon. I think they'll save that for the fast L primes that need it most.

- A


----------



## Zv (Apr 18, 2016)

A new version without IS and proper USM? Seems like they could've done that years ago. That would be kinda disappointing after all this time. 

But CR1 so who knows. I find it a bit odd we still haven't seen a replacement to the 50 1.4 yet. I thought we were on a roll when the 35 f/2 IS was announced. I was thinking "OK, here we go, any day now" and still nothing. 

Is an f/1.4 IS just too difficult to make? ???


----------



## veng (Apr 18, 2016)

I want IS, but I'll still buy it if it's a modest improvement and doesn't have it.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 18, 2016)

Repost, but always a conversation starter -- for _me_:

EF 50mm f/1.4 USM II = Buy. Opportunity lost with no IS, but if it's this or nothing, I'll take it.
EF 50mm f/1.4 IS USM = Buy. Pricey, but if still relatively small compared to the pickle jars, I'd be in.
EF 50mm f/1.8 IS USM = Buy.

EF 50mm f/2.0 IS USM = Buy. Could be awesomely tiny and low-profile, but I imagine they'd never put this out given that the budget STM lens is still f/1.8.

EF 50mm f/anything L USM = Not buy. Presumably too big/expensive/specialized for my needs, but we'll see. If it was not a draw/bokeh specialist of a lens and was sharper across the frame, I'd maaaaybe consider it.

EF 50mm f/2.5 1:2 compact macro USM = Not buy. I think I need f/2 or quicker, and I don't need another macro (either due to a large internal focusing housing or non-internal focusing design that leans out a great deal.)

EF 50mm of any sort with STM = kill it with a hammer. Not good enough for this class of lens.

As stated before: I imagine everyone's personal buy / not buy list is quite different.

- A


----------



## d (Apr 18, 2016)

dilbert said:


> I'm not interested in any 50mm lenses unless they've fixed all of the optical problems with the existing 50/1.4. Don't care if it IS, USM, L or water proof to 50m. If it is just as bad optically as the current one, no way.



Thought you'd only be interested in Sony options now?


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 18, 2016)

dilbert said:


> I'm not interested in any 50mm lenses unless they've fixed all of the optical problems with the existing 50/1.4. Don't care if it IS, USM, L or water proof to 50m. If it is just as bad optically as the current one, no way.



We'll get a new optical design, right? That will address _some_ IQ concerns.

But if you need a 50mm f/1.4 to rival the Sigma Art, you must already know that this won't be the lens for you. I'm expecting the non-L refresh to go with an old-as-dirt compact double gauss sort of design. It will be well built and have less copy-to-copy variation, but I'm not expecting this lens to set test charts alight.

- A


----------



## Zv (Apr 18, 2016)

Could there be room for two options? 

A 50mm f/1.4 USM II which is basically just a straight up revised version of the old one

And maybe a 55mm / 58mm f/2 IS USM that's a bit smaller and cheaper than the 1.4 (I'd be interested in this one, especially if it was EF-M) 

That way there's enough differentiation from the 50mm f/1.8 STM


----------



## pwp (Apr 18, 2016)

dilbert said:


> I'm not interested in any 50mm lenses unless they've fixed all of the optical problems with the existing 50/1.4. Don't care if it IS, USM, L or water proof to 50m. If it is just as bad optically as the current one, no way.



I'm with you on this. Had a couple of EF 50 f/1.4 lenses over the years but were inconsistent and ultimately dust collecting wide-aperture paper weights. Off to eBay with them! Still wanted a 50 so tried the Sigma 50. Absolutely fantastic when it caught focus, which it did actually do sometimes. Sometimes is not enough to trust on commissioned work so it disappeared via eBay as well. Borrowed the 50L from CPS a few times but never quite felt like dropping the $$ on one. It has it's issues too. 

For me to consider the new rumored lens it has to be cracking good wide open. I'm a three zooms guy, deliriously happy with the 24-70 f/2.8II so my only reason for considering another 50mm would be just about bulletproof by at least f/1.8, preferably wide open. IS would be appreciated, and given recent EF prime releases, I'd say there's a good chance of IS being there. Nice rumor!

-pw


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 18, 2016)

It will be only interesting for ME, if ...
... compact built
... f/1.4
... USM or option with similar responsibility and reliability
... IS is included
... max. reproduction factor is around 0.25
... IQ is good at f/1.4, very good at f/2.0 ... f/2.8 and stellar above

I am searching for a compact low light lens with high aperture AND IS to have a tripod alternative for different situations which is - stopped down - well suited for a lot of shooting situations.


----------



## PepeSilvia (Apr 18, 2016)

This would make me sad. I imagine it will go like the 24-70. Holding out on a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, and first introducing a f/2.8 II and an f/4 IS, to make a quick buck. And rumors of the fabled f/2.8 IS will continue on for eternity.

Best case scenario if this is true, the 50mm f/1.4 will get redesigned with better IQ and build, shorter MFD, maybe a bump to 9 blade aperture. Then a few months later if we're lucky they'll introduce a 50mm f/2 IS (with USM) to match the 35mm, smaller than the new f/1.4. But they're gonna make us wait forever to get both faster than f/2 and IS. If it's just the f/1.4 it will probably be between $499-699. If they introduce both, I'd expect $549 for the f/2 IS and $699 for the f/1.4.


----------



## Sabaki (Apr 18, 2016)

All I ask is that image quality taken wide open is excellent. Too much to ask? 

That being said, I have been very impressed with all the lenses Canon have released in the last few years. When last have they made an absolute dud? No, I can't think of any in the last 5 years or so.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 IS USM ...hmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## Sabaki (Apr 18, 2016)

PepeSilvia said:


> This would make me sad. I imagine it will go like the 24-70. Holding out on a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS...



As a stills photographer, I have zero issues with the 24-70ii not having IS. I guess that aside from videographers, those who want an IS version of the 24-70, lives too much in theory and do not spend enough time out there taking photos.

Just my two cents but my opinion nonetheless.


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 18, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that Canon will announce a replacement to the EF 50mm f/1.4 “soon”. This is an oft rumored lens for replacement and there’s no doubt there has been ongoing development for such a lens.


Hope to be true this time.



> ...(_it_) will not have IS,


Can live with that. More than having bad f1.8 or f2.0 with IS.


> will still be f/1.4,


Great! 



> and have ring type USM


Great! 

Put me on the list as soon as the prices go down a little. 
(And of course, as soon as this rumor becomes true).


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 18, 2016)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> I think "ahsanford" will have to settle with Tamron. :
> 
> Almost 50mm
> Almost USM focus.
> ...


*Almost Canon*


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 18, 2016)

Sabaki said:


> PepeSilvia said:
> 
> 
> > This would make me sad. I imagine it will go like the 24-70. Holding out on a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS...
> ...


And as soon as your subject moves (children, people in conversation, busy streets, animals) you will have to go to shutter speeds where IS is no longer relevant as well. 

So IS is nice but not essential.


----------



## Sabaki (Apr 18, 2016)

Maximilian said:


> Sabaki said:
> 
> 
> > PepeSilvia said:
> ...



Agreed. I'm just amazed at how dismissive people are of the 24-70ii due to the fact that it doesn't have IS.

Yes, there are arguments for IS but the 24-70ii is an amazing piece of kit, with exceptional IQ performance including fantastic CA, punchy contrast, sharp from f/2.8, let's not even talk about the build quality.

Yet it's meh to some because they believe IS is critical on a lens with these shorter focal lengths. I'm puzzled


----------



## Mac Duderson (Apr 18, 2016)

I'd spend $1400 if it has the new BR goo, and has as good of bokeh and sharpness as the current 1.2L and as sharp to the edges as the new 35mm 1.4Lii. They would probably call it L then... The new 35mm blows me away and would love to see that BR even if it's at 1.4. 
That could be a sales pitch to call it L.


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 18, 2016)

Mac Duderson said:


> I'd spend $1400 if it has the new BR goo, and has as good of bokeh and sharpness as the current 1.2L and as sharp to the edges as the new 35mm 1.4Lii. They would probably call it L then...


Mac Duderson, I am quite sure that you'll get that kind of lens sooner or later. 
That will be the 50L/1.2 successor. But it will come closer to $1.700 than to your 1.400 

Honestly I was wondering which one of those two successors (50L and 50/1.4) would be first to hit the market.
If I had to place a bet I was going to put it on the 50L. Now it seems to be the other way around.


----------



## Mac Duderson (Apr 18, 2016)

Oh sorry I meant being a 1.4.
Hum ya who knows what there doing with the 50mm now. I wonder if they were ready until Siggy did their version recently. Back to the drawing board.
If they did the mother load and BR in a 1.4 then I would guess they are done with a 1.2 version. I don't think they would do that but who knows eh.
Both the older 35mm 1.4 and the current 50mmL were both average $1400 each for years. Then the new 35mmL ii is at $1800. I would LOVE it if they did a new 1.2L for $1800 also following price range of it's 35mm brother as they seem to follow each other in price.


----------



## Sabaki (Apr 18, 2016)

Throw the blue goo into all lenses from here on out Canon!


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 18, 2016)

hmmm ... slightly improved version of the current 50/1.4 ... what pricepoint do you think they are targetting? 500 ? or rather 999 ?


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 18, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> hmmm ... slightly improved version of the current 50/1.4 ... what pricepoint do you think they are targetting? 500 ? or rather 999 ?


Seeing the MRSPs Canon did with the New IS WA primes and then how they needed to correct them because of the market, I'd expect the two possibilities:
1. slightly improved d. gauss design, better coatings, better mechanics, etc. for about 500 to 600 $/€
2. different, new optical formula, e.g. like the Sigma Art, etc. for about 800 to 1.000 $/€

I suppose the 50/1.4 sucessor at 1. 
And the 50/1.2L sucessor at 2. with all the L treatment, BR and then about 1.500 to 1.800 $/€


----------



## wockawocka (Apr 18, 2016)

I'd love there to be a set of 1.8 L series IS primes so I could shoot all day at F2 without fringing.


----------



## d (Apr 18, 2016)

dilbert said:


> d said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



I agree - the best part of the Sony system is the lenses made by other manufacturers. ;D


----------



## Sabaki (Apr 18, 2016)

Maximilian said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > hmmm ... slightly improved version of the current 50/1.4 ... what pricepoint do you think they are targetting? 500 ? or rather 999 ?
> ...



Speaking of price; if the new 50mm non L comes in at $1000, I would rather save the extra cash and buy the 85mm L f1.2 instead.
No mistake that the 50mm is a desired focal length but if the pricing isn't decent, the 85mm would be my boken monster of choice


----------



## PepeSilvia (Apr 18, 2016)

Sabaki said:


> PepeSilvia said:
> 
> 
> > This would make me sad. I imagine it will go like the 24-70. Holding out on a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS...
> ...



My camera doesn't even have a video mode, but I shoot in low light a lot and it's incredibly useful. Just today, I took a bunch of handheld portraits in low light between 1/15 and 1/40 shutter speed on my 100mm IS lens, without IS there's no way I would have been able to get anything useable in that situation. When I rented the 35mm IS I took a portrait in almost nothing but moonlight that was around 1/4 second that came out great. Sure you could use a tripod or a flash, but that's just more stuff to always have to carry around just in case, while IS is always there.

And I'm not saying the 24-70 II is not a worthy replacement, but that there were rumors of it having IS before it was announced and people were asking for it, and I suspect Canon decided to hold out on a f/2.8 IS as a business decision. I'm not the target market for such a lens so my opinion on it doesn't really matter, just an observation.

At this point after seeing what they did with the 35mm f/2 IS and how compact and inexpensive it is, it's difficult to see any legitimate reason Canon couldn't include IS in the new 50mm. I think they know people want a replacement to the f/1.4 so bad that they will take what they can get, IS or not it will sell just fine.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 18, 2016)

d said:


> I agree - the best part of the Sony system is the lenses made by other manufacturers. ;D



well, thread topic is Canon 50/1.4 Mk. II ... Canon is long overdue with an improved version competitive in terms of IQ [Sigma!] and AF drive/performance. Same with the 50/1.2 L. 

Meanwhile ... an optically excellent, native 55/1.8 lens is availble from Sony (with "Zeiss" badge). It dances circles around all current Canon 50 lenses.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Apr 18, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> d said:
> 
> 
> > I agree - the best part of the Sony system is the lenses made by other manufacturers. ;D
> ...



How is the AF performance on the Zeiss lens?


----------



## zim (Apr 18, 2016)

bdunbar79 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > d said:
> ...



It's very responsive in the five knuckle hand jive test


----------



## bdunbar79 (Apr 18, 2016)

LOL!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 18, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> What surprises me of late is not Canon's choice of release, but the complete lack of enthusiasm shown here once something is released.
> 
> The stunning recent example is the ef 35mm 1.4 L II. Months (if not years) of whining, pleading, demanding a version II of the 35mm L, and now it has been out for, what, almost 8 months, and we have one thread to showcase it here on CR, and that thread has one person's posts?
> 
> ...



Start a new thread about either lens saying how it's total garbage, attach a couple of blurry images to 'prove' your point, mention Canon's lack of innovation along the way. Then sit back and watch the post count rise....


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 18, 2016)

zim said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...





bdunbar79 said:


> LOL!


Am I missing something? Is my sens of humor not working on this?

AFAIK is the Sony ZEISS AF 1,8/55 ZA FE-Mount equipped with the Sony linear AF system. 
And the Sony AF system is not known for being crappy, isn't it? 

Do you know something different?


----------



## d (Apr 18, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Meanwhile ... an optically excellent, native 55/1.8 lens is availble from Sony (with "Zeiss" badge). It dances circles around all current Canon 50 lenses.



...and so it should for that price! But yes, a decent Canon 50mm is long overdue. It's not a focal length I use much myself, so I'm quite happy to just have the 50mm STM in my kit.

d.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 18, 2016)

Those concerned about STM as an option: after spending a week with the new 18-135 IS USM on the 80D I'd be surprised if Canon puts STM in anything but the most budget of options after this. Nano USM seems better in every metric: quieter, faster, and focus pulls seem just as smooth. Manual override is still focus by wire but is much better executed with less lag. I'm now considering STM more of a gateway technology that has allowed the development of Nano USM.

I'd buy a quality Canon prime with Nano USM. I'm not a big fan of STM, but I think I could easily become a fan of Nano USM.


----------



## grainier (Apr 18, 2016)

I just realized that I am so tired of waiting I don't even care anymore.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 18, 2016)

Zv said:


> Is an f/1.4 IS just too difficult to make? ???



That was kind of my thinking, difficult or expensive. I always figured f/1.4 AND IS was a longshot.

Either way, proper USM, and assuming internally focusing that is a big step up. Also if it can nail focus consistently then that is worth the upgrade alone.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 18, 2016)

Bennymiata said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > 50m is not the focal length I want. They should make it 58mm ;D
> ...


45mm would be closer to human vision!


----------



## JonAustin (Apr 18, 2016)

PepeSilvia said:


> Sabaki said:
> 
> 
> > As a stills photographer, I have zero issues with the 24-70ii not having IS. I guess that aside from videographers, those who want an IS version of the 24-70, lives too much in theory and do not spend enough time out there taking photos.
> ...



+1

I have to roll my eyes every time I read a post in which such self-evident observations as "you know, IS doesn't freeze subject motion" are stated. We get it already. But just because IS may only be useful in, say, 25% of all photographic situations (and I'm just "spitballing" that percentage), it doesn't mean there aren't a lot of photographers that do much, if not all, of their work in those situations where IS _is_ useful, or even vital.

So I wish all the reminders of the obvious would just give it a rest, already, or at least quit casting perjoratives. Some of us want IS in every lens we own, if for no other reason than we want to have the ability to switch it on and use it when we need it, and we are willing to pay for it. Some of us haven't purchased the 24-70/2.8 II because it lacks IS, and some of us bought it anyway, all the while still wishing it had IS. The same will apply the 50/1.4's replacement, should it be released without IS.

<\endrant>

P.S. I concur with *ahsanford's* "conversation starter." But in response to other focal length requests, I wouldn't mind a ~ 65mm ...


----------



## grainier (Apr 18, 2016)

jeffa4444 said:


> 45mm would be closer to human vision!



That could get you labeled a humanist.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 18, 2016)

JonAustin said:


> +1
> 
> I have to roll my eyes every time I read a post in which such self-evident observations as "you know, IS doesn't freeze subject motion" are stated. We get it already. But just because IS may only be useful in, say, 25% of all photographic situations (and I'm just "spitballing" that percentage), it doesn't mean there aren't a lot of photographers that do much, if not all, of their work in those situations where IS _is_ useful, or even vital.



+2

Even with IS on a lens, I am always taking advantage of things to rest myself or the camera against to improve stability... If I have no IS, then I will make do. If I have IS, I will use it when appropriate and make do. For me, it's not a deal breaker, but it is certainly high up on the "nice to have" list.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 18, 2016)

dilbert said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Dilbert, please don't tell me that you're in your 60s. I pictured you young, maybe even in your teens. This would drastically destroy my own vision/world of canonrumors.


----------



## zim (Apr 18, 2016)

Maximilian said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > It's very responsive in the five knuckle hand jive test
> ...



Sorry Maximilian that was probably rather regional, nothing to do with lens performance couldn't resist the dancing references


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 18, 2016)

hehe.

Still üpretty funny - or patrhetic - that Canon Defense League eagerly is waiting for a modestly improved EF 50/1.4 without even IS ... while Sony has 5-axis IBIS and a brilliant 55/1.8 ... for 2 years by now. ;D


----------



## d (Apr 19, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> hehe.
> 
> Still üpretty funny - or patrhetic - that Canon Defense League eagerly is waiting for a modestly improved EF 50/1.4 without even IS ... while Sony has 5-axis IBIS and a brilliant 55/1.8 ... for 2 years by now. ;D



And we of the CDL are very much grateful for the robust discussion and valuable insights shared with us here on Canon Rumors by all members of the Sony Optics Debating Squad...


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 19, 2016)

If there is anything that Canon shooters don't 'have to hang their heads about, it is lenses. Canon's EF mount unquestionably has the richest stable of lenses in the history of photography...we just like to complain.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 19, 2016)

There are two lenses in the Canon fleet, that if an update were announced, I would immediately pre-order..

This is one of those lenses. 50mm is (at least for me) a very popular focal length and F1.4 allows great low light use and narrow depth of field, and all at a reasonable price.

IS on the lens? not that important to me.... if it has it, great.... if it doesn't, I can deal with it.

The big thing for me is AF. Once you go to fast lenses, AF gets harder to do. The odds are better for a Canon lens to AF fast and accurately than a third-party lens.


----------



## Luds34 (Apr 19, 2016)

dilbert said:


> I wish I was still that young. Those cameras just don't get any lighter as you grow older.



Well hopefully you're still young at heart! Cheers!


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 19, 2016)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> If there is anything that Canon shooters don't 'have to hang their heads about, it is lenses. Canon's EF mount unquestionably has the richest stable of lenses in the history of photography...we just like to complain.



pointing out facts and stating customer expecations for new or improved lenses does not qualify as "complaining" or "whining". even when some Canon Defense League members [not you Dustin!] consider it as such. 

fact is, the Canon50/1.4 is the weakest (IQ) and "relatively worst" (AF drive construction) of all 50/1.4's currently on the market. nikon better, sigma art much better. 

my opinion (no whining!) is: canon should have launched a greatly improved mark II already several years ago. and if they launch one tomorrow, it better be really good, since they got some catching up to do.

my canon customer wallet's opinion is: got 50/1.4, got 50/1.8 STM, prefer the 1.8, since it also plays well on EOS-M. will sell hardly used 50/1.4. will only consider 50/1.4 Mark II, if it is optically as good as Sigma art or Tamron (45) and has highest quality Canon AF USM drive and dors not cost more than sigma does. 

my wallets expectation may be a bit high ... but hey, it's my wallet and my money talking. If Canon wants it, they'll have to convince me and my wallet first. ;D


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 19, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> ...
> fact is, the Canon50/1.4 is the weakest (IQ) and "relatively worst" (AF drive construction) of all 50/1.4's currently on the market. nikon better, sigma art much better.
> 
> my opinion (no whining!) is: canon should have launched a greatly improved mark II already several years ago.
> ...


+1
I do not have a 50 mm lens yet but I want one, and I want an affordable one with f1.4, best at the same size (and price) as the current one. And OEM is preferred.
But I am not willing to spend my money in that 30 years (lens design) to 20 years (mechanical construction) old tool Canon is not willing or able to replace soon. And I also don't want to get the 50/1.8 STM as a makeshift.
So if Canon wants to get my money, they should deliver soon. Otherwise the Tamron or Sigma options become more and more tempting, despite the aperture (T) or the size (S).
And if I have spent my money I will not spend it twice as I don't expect any good resale value from those two.

And even if this sounds to someone like whining, it is just a rational conclusion.

So if someone from Canon would listen (I don't expect that) I'd say (almost like ahsanford):
Make the build and optics comparable to the new WA primes, give me (personally) a decent f1.4 IQ, make it IS if possible, but f1.4 is preferred over that. But deliver SOON!



Canon Rumors said:


> **UPDATE**
> 
> “Soon” is always a relative term and we’re now not expecting such a lens to be announced in 2016.</p>


And "SOON!" does not mean Canons definition of "soon". So 2016 would be more than just "really welcome". :


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 19, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > If there is anything that Canon shooters don't 'have to hang their heads about, it is lenses. Canon's EF mount unquestionably has the richest stable of lenses in the history of photography...we just like to complain.
> ...



I don't disagree with you on this lens. I've owned and sold several copies of the 50mm f/1.4. I just never loved the lens. I went without an AF 50mm for some time, and (for now) I have purchased the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC instead. I like the Tamron a lot, but if Canon produces a better lens I would happily swap to the Canon.

P.S. I do have the 50mm STM now, too, but I use that more for video work (70D/80D) and on the M3. The Tamron beats the pants of the 50 STM in overall IQ.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Apr 19, 2016)

I'm still sticking with my four 50mm lens strategy

50mm f1.8 STM nifty fifty
50mm f1.8/2.0 IS like a 35 f2.0 IS
50mm f1.4L jam jar with blue gunk Otus chaser
50mm f1.2L stays as it is arty option


----------



## d (Apr 19, 2016)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> P.S. I do have the 50mm STM now, too, but I use that more for video work (70D/80D) and on the M3. The Tamron beats the pants of the 50 STM in overall IQ.



And so it should - it's over 5x the price where I live!



Haydn1971 said:


> I'm still sticking with my four 50mm lens strategy
> 
> 50mm f1.8 STM nifty fifty
> 50mm f1.8/2.0 IS like a 35 f2.0 IS
> ...



Yeah I'm with you on this, it seems like a "sensible" line-up for Canon.

d.


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Ahh. The pain of arthritis. My mother, rest her soul, use to get very cranky when it hit hard. Explains a lot about some of the posts here.. :


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 20, 2016)

d said:


> Haydn1971 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm still sticking with my four 50mm lens strategy
> ...



I'm torn on this. I think three lenses is all they need (just one L in your list), and the L is the one everyone will bicker over. 

If we use the 35L as a crystal ball as to what will come, I could imagine the next 50L addressing the screaming needs of the resolution camp very well. The 35L II is a formidably sharp lens, so it takes the 35 Art and adds weather sealing, reliable first party AF and the magic BR gunk to form a compelling value proposition. A 50mm f/1.4L in the same vein as the 35L II would sell very well, even at a similar price.

But some folks are truly hung up on f/1.2 being a Canon exclusive, having a 'magical' draw/feel, etc. and they will insist on that lens sticking around. Were they to redesign it, I'm not sure such a unique lens can simultaneously satisfy the draw/bokeh/magic camp _*and *_the resolution camp without being enormous and having a greater than $2k price.

We shall see what comes.

- A


----------



## j-nord (Apr 20, 2016)

Do we think this 1.4 replacement will compete with the sigma art for sharpness? What price point? 500? 600?


----------



## d (Apr 20, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I'm torn on this. I think three lenses is all they need (just one L in your list), and the L is the one everyone will bicker over.
> 
> If we use the 35L as a crystal ball as to what will come, I could imagine the next 50L addressing the screaming needs of the resolution camp very well. The 35L II is a formidably sharp lens, so it takes the 35 Art and adds weather sealing, reliable first party AF and the magic BR gunk to form a compelling value proposition. A 50mm f/1.4L in the same vein as the 35L II would sell very well, even at a similar price.
> 
> ...



I agree that three is all they need, but I think four could make more money for the big C.

I can imagine people being torn between the classic, magical, 50mm 1.2L, and a new 50mm 1.4L BR with the latest build and optical developments. There'd be many who couldn't decide and would end up with both, then there'd be the back-n-forths who buy one, sell it for the other, then regret the switch etc etc.

Just imagine the extra dimension it would add to forum discussions about 50mm lenses if it outperformed the Sigma, cost half again more than the 50L, and -for added audaciousness - was actually 55mm, just to show the Sony Optics Debating Squad what a *real* 55mm lens should be like! Heck, they could jack the price another $1000, remove autofocus, and market it as an Otus alternative!

So many possibilities...

d.


----------



## JonAustin (Apr 20, 2016)

d said:


> ... Heck, they could jack the price another $1000, remove autofocus, and market it as an Otus alternative! ...



Canon would never release an EF lens without AF.

(Would they?)


----------



## d (Apr 20, 2016)

JonAustin said:


> d said:
> 
> 
> > ... Heck, they could jack the price another $1000, remove autofocus, and market it as an Otus alternative! ...
> ...



All the tilt-shifts are manual focus...


----------



## andrei1989 (Apr 20, 2016)

d said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > d said:
> ...



doesn't EF stand for Electronic Focusing?
tilt shift are TS, without EF


----------



## d (Apr 20, 2016)

Ha, so they are! I need to take my 24mm TS-E II out more!

The comment about the Otus was in jest - I don't expect any manual focus 50/55mm lenses from Canon.

Cheers,
d.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 20, 2016)

JonAustin said:


> Canon would never release an EF lens without AF.
> (Would they?)



been there. Done that. Never again! ;D


----------



## rfdesigner (Apr 20, 2016)

I just wish this were a CR3

As my poll I put up recently concluded CR readers preferred the 50f1.4ringUSM... the question of IS is basically down to cost. If it comes for free then I think everyone would take it, if it pushes the lens over $1000 then sales take a serious dent. If the lens was only f2.0 a lot of sales probably also go out the window.

I've recently returned to using 50mm as my preferred FL after getting a 6D, but with somewhat mobile subjects I want the AF to be reasonably fast & very accurate for DoF.. I do have a little time to focus, just not for ever (my auto ISO is set to minimum speed of 1/125 as I really do need it that fast, IS won't help me a whole lot at that speed @ 50mm)

I also spend rather a lot of time with the camera to my eye just in manual focus for framing (the 50STM is a real pain for this).. so focus by wire is out the window.


----------



## Antono Refa (Apr 21, 2016)

I still think there are two overlapping lens spots here:

1. 50mm f/1.4 with IS at ~$600, in the same group as the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC and Canon 35mm f/2 IS

2. 50mm f/1.4 with uber-sharpness at ~$1,600, in the same group as the Nikon 58mm f/1.4G, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art, and Zeiss 55mm f/1.4 Otus.

With a possible small variance in the max aperture and/or focal length. Those are separated not only by price, but by target audience as well. Which is why I think the 50mm f/1.2 is out of this game - it has similar focal length, max aperture, and price as the lenses in the 2nd group. The f/1.2 is for portraiture, where bokeh, colors, etc, are favored over corner to corner sharpness.

if this rumor is true, my guess is Canon is finally joining the competition in the 2nd spot (uber fifties).


----------



## Ed V (May 14, 2016)

I am a new member. I am a street photography. My preferred lens for street work remains the 50mm. For the record, I have the 50 1.2 and an older version 50 1.8. I also have the 40 pancake. 

I have been intrigued by the 50 1.4 as a lens better than the 50 1.8 and smaller/lighter than the 50 1.2. I see places like B&H now have it selling at $329 which seems a good deal. 

Here's my question. Is the rumored upgrade worth the wait or should I just jump on a 50 1.4 for $329? Part of me says wait while the other part says jump on it now.

Ed


----------



## wsmith96 (May 14, 2016)

Ed V said:


> I am a new member. I am a street photography. My preferred lens for street work remains the 50mm. For the record, I have the 50 1.2 and an older version 50 1.8. I also have the 40 pancake.
> 
> I have been intrigued by the 50 1.4 as a lens better than the 50 1.8 and smaller/lighter than the 50 1.2. I see places like B&H now have it selling at $329 which seems a good deal.
> 
> ...



I'd wait, or if there is $$ burning a hole in your wallet, check out the 50 STM and use it to get by for now.


----------



## AvTvM (May 14, 2016)

i have 50/1.4, 50/1.8 STM and 40/2.8 STM. For street I only use 40 or 50/1.8 STM, because they are smaller. Being STM lenses, both also work nicely with adapter on my EOS-M. Which is the least conspicuos option - many people object to being captured with cameras that you hold to your eye but don't mind images taken "handy style" with smallish camera using LCD. 

I will sell the 50/1.4 and not buy a new one. f/1.4 vs. 1.8 does nothing for me.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 14, 2016)

Ed V said:


> I am a new member. I am a street photography. My preferred lens for street work remains the 50mm. For the record, I have the 50 1.2 and an older version 50 1.8. I also have the 40 pancake.
> 
> I have been intrigued by the 50 1.4 as a lens better than the 50 1.8 and smaller/lighter than the 50 1.2. I see places like B&H now have it selling at $329 which seems a good deal.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ed V (May 14, 2016)

Thanks for explaining the rating system as well for the feedback on the lenses. I had always shot with Canon until about 4 years ago when I sold off all my Canon gear and went with Leica primarily because of the compactness. After four years of totally manual photography, I decided just this past January to return the favor and sell off all my Leica gear and return to Canon. 

That said, I am comfortable shooting my street work with the 50 1.2 or even sometimes the 35 1.4 II. But they do start to get heavy as I work through a 6 - 8 hour day. That was the reason why I was/am thinking about the 50 1.4. The 50 1.8 that I have is old - first maybe second generation. I have also thought about the 50 1.8 STM as another option. I'll have to give it all some more thought. And I do have the 40 pancake as an option as well. 

Again thanks.

Ed


----------

