# Where are the new Canon 50mm and 85mm lenses?



## switters (Dec 29, 2014)

I know Canon generally has the edge over Nikon in terms of lenses, but I do find myself coveting the Nikon 35/50/85 f1.8Gs. They're compact, lightweight, sharp, and have great IQ. 

Canon has the 35 IS, which gets great reviews, but where's the new 50mm or 85mm? I shoot with a 24-70 II and 70-200 IS a lot, and while I love the high IQ of the Sigma 35A and 50A, I prefer my primes to be lightweight alternatives to those huge zooms. 

I know others feel differently, but I prefer the extra bit of speed (even though it's small) of the Nikon versions to IS, because I mostly shoot people, and they tend to move a lot—especially kids. 

I haven't seen any rumors about these lenses for a while. Are they even in the pipeline? If not, I wonder why not?


----------



## Khalai (Dec 29, 2014)

That makes two of us (of tens of thousands I suppose) 

I've been eagerly waiting for a new 50mm in the same range as recent 24/28/35 primes. Add in a nice 85mm and there it goes the midrange prime lineup again. Canon is sorely missing a new 50mm. I don't care if it's only 50/1.8 as long as it has proper ring USM, maybe IS would not hurt and it's decently sharp on that 1.8. I'd love to see 1.4 there of course, but I'm not getting my hopes too high


----------



## zlatko (Dec 29, 2014)

I have no doubt they will come. But when is anyone's guess. I'm eagerly awaiting them too. In the meantime, I'm still using the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8.


----------



## switters (Dec 29, 2014)

zlatko said:


> I have no doubt they will come. But when is anyone's guess. I'm eagerly awaiting them too. In the meantime, I'm still using the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8.



I wish I was satisfied with those lenses. Hate to sound like a snob, but the 24-70 and 70-200 are so good that I definitely notice the difference in quality when I've tried the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8. 

I have not yet tried the 35 IS, but I hear it's excellent (maybe not quite as good as the Sigma, but a lot smaller and lighter).


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Dec 29, 2014)

I gave up waiting for Canon, and changed my Canon 50mm F1.4 for a Sigma Art.
In the future, when we finally release a Canon 50mm Image Stabilizer, I can feel envious of compact size, but the image quality wide open should not exceed my Sigma Art.

I do not doubt that we will see a 85mm Art before Canon do your homework.


----------



## switters (Dec 29, 2014)

I have the Sigma 35A and it's incredible. I've been eyeing the 50A, but man, I really want lighter, smaller primes. 

Then again, maybe I should just buy a small mirrorless system as an alternative for when size/weight matter.


----------



## wsheldon (Dec 30, 2014)

switters said:


> I have the Sigma 35A and it's incredible. I've been eyeing the 50A, but man, I really want lighter, smaller primes.
> 
> Then again, maybe I should just buy a small mirrorless system as an alternative for when size/weight matter.



I tried that route, buying a cheap micro 4/3 system used (Olympus PEN E-PL5) for ~$200, but finding high quality lenses that don't cost as much/more than EF equivalents has been a problem. The cheap kit lenses have pretty mediocre IQ, but going up-market quickly gets you to $500-$1000 each. Due to the smaller sensor, IQ starts dropping due to diffraction by f5.6 so it's ideal to start with the biggest aperture you can, but selection is poor and prices are high for what you get. I eventually found a good price on a lightly used Panasonic 20/f1.7 (~$250), but I'm stuck with so-so Olympus 14-42 and 45-150 to round out my kit and I can't find a really good wider angle I can afford. 

That said, it is a joy to carry around a 3-lens kit covering 28mm-300mm (FF equivalent) in a tiny bag that only weighs a pound or two, and still get great 16 mpix images that hold up well to ~1600 ISO, but the ergonomics suck compared to my 6D and I just don't enjoy photography as much.

A larger mirrorless with built-in viewfinder would be better, but then you're too close to the 6D in size/weight/price, so I don't see the point unless you're after some other specialized feature (like 4K video, focus peaking, etc). So going mirrorless is no panacea in my experience, tempting as it as (and practical).

Regarding the OP, I would really like to see an improved 50/1.4 or 85/1.8 (or 1.4) as well. I like the 85/1.8, and have gotten some great images with it, but the obvious purple fringing below f2.8 does really limit it's usefulness for shallow DOF work. I have bought and sold 2 copies of the 50/1.4, finding them terrible below f4 (soft and low contrast), so lots of room for improvement there as well.


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Dec 30, 2014)

I would give almost anything for a sharp, reliable 50mm lens like the 35 IS that I rented a few months ago.

I have used a Sigma classic 50mm 1.4 for the last few years and am really tired of the erratic autofocus. I rented a Sigma 50mm Art lens and had even worse problems with the autofocus.

A few weeks ago I bought a used 50mm 1.2 L. Guess what, I'm sending it to Canon tomorrow for an attempt at focus calibration. :-X


----------



## switters (Dec 30, 2014)

drmikeinpdx said:


> I would give almost anything for a sharp, reliable 50mm lens like the 35 IS that I rented a few months ago.
> 
> I have used a Sigma classic 50mm 1.4 for the last few years and am really tired of the erratic autofocus. I rented a Sigma 50mm Art lens and had even worse problems with the autofocus.
> 
> A few weeks ago I bought a used 50mm 1.2 L. Guess what, I'm sending it to Canon tomorrow for an attempt at focus calibration. :-X



Yeah, I hear you. It took me 3 copies of the Sigma 35A to get one that is *mostly* reliable. I put up with the occasional misses because it's just that good. But I'm nervous about going through the same thing with the Sigma 50A. And I want something smaller!

Sounds like you liked the 35 IS? I've been considering trying it out. If it's even 80% as good as the 35A, I might consider swapping because of the considerable size/weight difference. 

Like I said, this is why the D750 + 35/50/85 f1.8G is so appealing. But I love my 5D3, and don't want to give up my 24-70 and 70-200. They're incredible.


----------



## eninja (Dec 30, 2014)

drmikeinpdx said:


> I would give almost anything for a sharp, reliable 50mm lens like the 35 IS that I rented a few months ago.
> 
> I have used a Sigma classic 50mm 1.4 for the last few years and am really tired of the erratic autofocus. I rented a Sigma 50mm Art lens and had even worse problems with the autofocus.
> 
> A few weeks ago I bought a used 50mm 1.2 L. Guess what, I'm sending it to Canon tomorrow for an attempt at focus calibration. :-X



Hello, what do you mean by focus calibration? Do you mean AFMA of 50mm 1.2L with your camera body?
I also got a used 50L with warranty for about a month now. Still I can not decide, if its a lens problem or user problem. I seem to shoot at F1.2 to F2.0 at the wrong scenery (portrait with lots of cluttered nearby things around) and it doesn't have the wow effect I am expecting. I use it on both 6D and 70D. 
I bought Reikan Focal to AFMA. I couldn't nail AFMA value without this. 
I don't know how to do further test, to test my lens. and thinking it might be user setting error.
When all the things are behind the subject, the subject look sharp at F1.2. Otherwise not so good.

If I got time and send it to canon? what should I tell them? Its better to be specific.


----------



## ggweci (Dec 30, 2014)

drmikeinpdx said:


> I would give almost anything for a sharp, reliable 50mm lens like the 35 IS



Same here. I'd be ok with f1.8 or f2, but would really like a 1.4 version w/ IS. That would be a killer walk around lens for me. And, I think it could be similar in size to the 35mm IS, when looking at past lens sizing (I.e. 35 f2 vs 50 1.4), but I'm no physics expert ;D

A new 85mm would be nice too, especially with the addition of IS, but my 85 1.8 has been good to me, so that's not as pressing as a new 50.


----------



## dlee13 (Jan 4, 2015)

switters said:


> drmikeinpdx said:
> 
> 
> > I would give almost anything for a sharp, reliable 50mm lens like the 35 IS that I rented a few months ago.
> ...



The 35 IS isn't 80% as good as the Sigma, it's 98% as good as the Sigma (Sigma can do f1.4 if you need that and it has less vignette wide open!).

Prior to getting my 35 IS I would have love a new Canon 50mm f1.4, but now I prefer the 35mm focal length so I would be much more interested in an 85 IS!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 5, 2015)

The Canon 50mm primes are the most disappointing set of lenses in Canon's portfolio. I've owned and used professionally every one of them except the 50mm f1.0 L and all of them have been disappointing when compared to the results from other Canon prime lenses. The build of a 50mm f1.2 L is impressive and it's a great lens, but it's just not as sharp as it's price tag would indicate (even stopped down). Shortly after it was released it's new value plummetted and stayed quite low for a long time. Then one day Canon raised it's prices and bumped it's price point because it was erm...f1.2 and therefore worth more. The saddest thing is that it's really tricky lens to use and one which most people go for if they are dabbling with a pro prime lens itch. The 35L and 85IIL are far better performing lenses. 

I'm sure that Canon have a new set of 50's in development, but when is anyone's guess. 

As to 85mm lenses....Canon already have those covered and they are both awesome.


----------



## bereninga (Jan 7, 2015)

I def would like a Canon 50mm 1.4 IS. Not sure why Canon hasn't released one yet! Maybe they're ok w/ the Sigma 50mm out there laden w/ AF issues. I got a feel for the Sigma 50mm Art in a store, and it's way heavier than I thought it would be. It's so ridiculously heavy that I would not consider bringing it on a trip. It's not by any means a travel lens, which I'm hoping Canon's future 50mm 1.4 IS would be. ;D


----------



## Viggo (Jan 7, 2015)

Had two 35 Art with utterly useless AF. bought the 50 Art, completely useless, got a new one under warranty, it worked for 6 months, now same AF issue as the three other Art lenses. Got the report from my service shop today; "cleaned HSM unit". I'm like , yeah! That'll work...


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 7, 2015)

As long as Canon keeps selling the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 like they have been, I think we'll be in for a long wait. Those lens productions must be almost pure profit at this point and while they aren't the world's best lenses, they are good enough for a great many people. The 24, 28, and 35 lenses were rather poor in comparison and not good sellers from what I understand, so the economics to replace them made sense. Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...


----------



## ashmadux (Jan 7, 2015)

GMCPhotographics said:


> The Canon 50mm primes are the most disappointing set of lenses in Canon's portfolio. I've owned and used professionally every one of them except the 50mm f1.0 L and all of them have been disappointing when compared to the results from other Canon prime lenses. The build of a 50mm f1.2 L is impressive and it's a great lens, but it's just not as sharp as it's price tag would indicate (even stopped down). Shortly after it was released it's new value plummeted and stayed quite low for a long time. Then one day Canon raised it's prices and bumped it's price point because it was erm...f1.2 and therefore worth more. The saddest thing is that it's really tricky lens to use and one which most people go for if they are dabbling with a pro prime lens itch. The 35L and 85IIL are far better performing lenses.
> 
> I'm sure that Canon have a new set of 50's in development, but when is anyone's guess.
> 
> As to 85mm lenses....Canon already have those covered and they are both awesome.




Interesting take.

I feel like the 50 1.4 has a MUCH better rendering profile than most other non L canon primes. The 85 especially suffers from fringing wide open, and has a veeeeery flat profile. Its a great lens and af is blazing, but i sold it because it was too long for crop and all that purple fringing drove me nuts.

A 50 1.4 with IS would simply kill. I think we would all buy one. But i would want it to keep the beautiful rendering of the current version, not so much the still good 35IS.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Jan 7, 2015)

Put me in the waiting list


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Jan 7, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> As long as Canon keeps selling the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 like they have been, I think we'll be in for a long wait. Those lens productions must be almost pure profit at this point and while they aren't the world's best lenses, they are good enough for a great many people. The 24, 28, and 35 lenses were rather poor in comparison and not good sellers from what I understand, so the economics to replace them made sense. Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...



This is pretty much what I think as well. The 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are great as they are so the improvement will be harder to sell at a higher price point. Canon knows that the ROI for a prime lens factors heavily into pro shooters' decisions and many already own the existing 50 and 85. Canon must find or somehow create a demand for the replacement versions and that was a lot easier with lackluster 24, 28 and 35 version 1 lenses. And while they're at it, Canon doesn't want to create an EF lens that is so good that the L versions become less of an upgrade at their even higher price point!

I assume zooms probably sell much better at a higher price point so they get all the love first.


----------



## sdsr (Jan 7, 2015)

switters said:


> I have the Sigma 35A and it's incredible. I've been eyeing the 50A, but man, I really want lighter, smaller primes.
> 
> Then again, maybe I should just buy a small mirrorless system as an alternative for when size/weight matter.



A problem with small, mirrorless systems is that if you want AF and high image quality you can pay quite a lot for the - often considerable - size/weight advantage. The FF Sony a7 series provides the best image quality, but their two primes, which seem weightless and tiny compared to the Sigma 50A, cost (barring sales etc.) $800 (35mm 2.8) and $1000 (55 1.8); superb lenses, especially the 55mm, but for that price you might expect something faster. M43 offers a wide range of small, good-to-excellent light primes, but as wsheldon points out the native options aren't cheap (all but three cost >$500) and, aside from a couple of cheap but not-really-fast-enough-for-m43 Sigmas, the third party alternatives are more expensive still (and typically don't provide AF). Plus, the best EVF on any m43 body resides in the OM-D E-M1, which is almost as big as a small dslr and costs not that much less than an a7II and more than an a7. So....

On the other hand, if you don't need AF, you can find amazing bargains and often superb performance with old MF lenses (you could buy ten or more excellent 50-55mm 1.8-1.4 lenses for the price of one Sigma A); and mf is far easier with mirrorless cameras (thanks to in-viewfinder focus peaking and magnification) and ergonomically much more pleasant with lenses designed for mf. But thanks to the crop factor this route isn't much use on m43....

As for the original question, yes, such upgrades would be nice, though I tend to think the flaws of the current EF 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8 are exaggerated. There's obviously some variance in quality control re the 50mm (AF was pretty bad on my first copy), but my main complaint with that lens is that it's unpleasant and tricky to use for mf (because the focus ring is sloppy). As for the 85mm, yes, purple fringing can be annoying, but in many situations I don't see it at all even at 1.8 (it's worse on the 85mm L). Is the much-praised Nikon G significantly better in that regard (if at all)? But if Canon made a new 85mm 1.8 with IS and no (or much less) purple fringing I would probably buy one.


----------



## zlatko (Jan 7, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...



But Sigma doesn't hear the voices asking for smaller & lighter gear.


----------



## jd7 (Jan 7, 2015)

RustyTheGeek said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > As long as Canon keeps selling the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 like they have been, I think we'll be in for a long wait. Those lens productions must be almost pure profit at this point and while they aren't the world's best lenses, they are good enough for a great many people. The 24, 28, and 35 lenses were rather poor in comparison and not good sellers from what I understand, so the economics to replace them made sense. Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...
> ...



Surely there would be a large demand, at least for an updated 50 1.4? I'd really like a fast 50 but there just isn't one which appeals to me at the moment. The build quality of the Canon 50 1.4 seems to be ordinary at best (from what I've read), it's soft wide open, and I've seen a number of photos (on flickr, etc) which had harsh bokeh which didn't appeal to me. I'm hesitant about the Sigma 50 Art - I don't want to spend that much money on a lens which may have focus problems, plus it's bigger and heavier than I'd prefer. I'm actually thinking of picking up a Sigma 50 1.4 EX (ie Sigma's older 50 1.4), as a "best compromise" (for my purposes) of sharpness/bokeh/build quality/cost, despite the potential focus problems and the softness wide open, but have been holding off in the hope Canon might release something compelling.


----------



## zlatko (Jan 7, 2015)

jd7 said:


> RustyTheGeek said:
> 
> 
> > mackguyver said:
> ...



Absolutely. Demand would be huge -- it *will* be huge. My guess is that Canon will get around to it. They've been putting out new lenses and updates of old lenses pretty steadily, so they just haven't gotten around to this one. I think it's far too easy to theorize (wrongly) about what "Canon wants" as if we can read their minds just based on what lenses exist and what lenses don't exist.

Canon could certainly make an awesome and GIGANTIC 50/1.4 that's as big as 24-70/2.8 zoom, but that's not what everyone wants. I'm hoping for an update along the lines of the 35/2 IS which is fabulous and small.


----------



## zlatko (Jan 7, 2015)

jd7 said:


> RustyTheGeek said:
> 
> 
> > mackguyver said:
> ...



Absolutely. Demand would be huge -- it *will* be huge. My guess is that Canon will get around to it. They've been putting out new lenses and updates of old lenses pretty steadily, so they just haven't gotten around to this one. I think it's far too easy to theorize (wrongly) about what "Canon wants" as if we can read their minds just based on what lenses exist and what lenses don't exist.

Canon could certainly make an awesome and GIGANTIC 50/1.4 that's as big as 24-70/2.8 zoom, but that's not what everyone wants. I'm hoping for an update along the lines of the 35/2 IS which is fabulous and small. I love the size and the bokeh of the current 50/1.4 but just wish it were better in the 1.4 to 2.0 aperture range, and wish the AF motor were better.


----------



## ScottyP (Jan 7, 2015)

It is a good question, particularly the 50.

I will say the 85 f/1.8 is surprisingly good. I was thinking of selling mine recently because I wasn't using it. Then I found myself inside an indoor water park in Sandusky Ohio and my 70-200 2.8 was sucking wind. Too dim and I didn't want to shoot at ISO 6400. I also didn't want to fog my nice white up too badly. 
I shot all afternoon with the 85 f/1.8 wide open, and it was very sharp, and it focused very quickly and very accurately on the screaming mad kiddos running around. About the only thing you hear bad about it is CA, but none was noticeable in that water park. No tree branches against a bright grey sky anywhere in there I guess.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 8, 2015)

jd7 said:


> I'm actually thinking of picking up a Sigma 50 1.4 EX (ie Sigma's older 50 1.4), as a "best compromise" (for my purposes) of sharpness/bokeh/build quality/cost, despite the potential focus problems and the softness wide open, but have been holding off in the hope Canon might release something compelling.



That's what I did last summer. At one time I had the nifty fifty and my buddy had the Canon 50 f/1.4. Neither one seemed to focus very accurately/consistently so we both abandoned the lenses. So when I saw the old Sigma for $350 brand new on Amazon and thought for the price, why not. Since I'm on crop and I bought it for my "portrait" lens I can accept it's limitations. Namely it does focus a little slower (there is a good chunk of glass there) and the focus can just plain miss from time to time, and a bit soft wide open (fine for portrait uses). But for the most part, and after AFMA the lens, it does really well on static subjects. Trying to use it in AI Servo is a lot more hit and miss. I will say though, when the lens hits, it does produce some great shots, has lovely bokeh!


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 8, 2015)

zlatko said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...
> ...


Not as loudly, but they are listening:
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/view-all-lenses?technologies=139

Also, I have owned and/or used various Canon 50s and both 85s. The only two issues I have with them is price and their almost total focus on portrait use. They are both FAR more expensive than their f/1.4 and f/1.8 cousins, and they aren't great at much other than portraits. The 50L is somewhat soft compared to the L zooms and f/1.4 but takes beautiful full body and 3/4 length portraits. The 85L focuses so slowly it's very poor choice for anything but portraits, but the results are remarkable. 

For me, the 50L & 85L are my first choices for portraits and last choices for anytime I need those focal lengths for anything else.


----------



## Sabaki (Jan 8, 2015)

Im on the other side of the fence. Waaaaaay on the other side

I want both a 50L and 85L that has comparable IQ to the Otus lenses and I don't mind a weighty lens at all.


----------



## zlatko (Jan 8, 2015)

Luds34 said:


> jd7 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm actually thinking of picking up a Sigma 50 1.4 EX (ie Sigma's older 50 1.4), as a "best compromise" (for my purposes) of sharpness/bokeh/build quality/cost, despite the potential focus problems and the softness wide open, but have been holding off in the hope Canon might release something compelling.
> ...



Sounds like you abandoned one lens with inconsistent/inaccurate AF for another lens with inconsistent/inaccurate AF. What's the advantage?


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jan 8, 2015)

I think Canon will bring a 50 1.8 IS (for 400$, so the old one isn't deprecated) and a 50 1.4L or 50 1.2LII which can measure with the Sigma Art.
85 1.8 is an other line (these with the golden ring, as 50 1.4 and 28 1.8), they have to replace a lower version, which is missed for 85mm - so maybe there is an 85 2.0 IS as the 3rd way.
All current IS lenses have a small silver ring. Silver, Gold, Red... But there aren't every type of lens for every focal range. A gold 35 between 35 IS and 35 L won't never exist...


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 8, 2015)

zlatko said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > jd7 said:
> ...



The Sigma misses *sometimes*. It is inconsistent compared to say using my 85 f/1.8 (which seems to hit every single time). Overall it is very usable. Some of the challenges are just shooting with a narrow DOF as well. The Canon 50 f/1.8 II I had was junk. It was good to nail focus about 50% of the time it seemed.

From non-pentagon bokeh and shallower depth of field to better build quality and faster focus... the Sigma is pretty much better in every way vs the nifty fifty (I won't comment on IQ, color, contrast since it's been so long since I've had the Canon). The only advantage (IMHO) for the Canon lens is that it is smaller/lighter.


----------



## zlatko (Jan 9, 2015)

OK, makes sense. Thanks


----------



## burb72 (Jan 10, 2015)

50mm is the standard lens, it has been forever. And all the canon 50s stink, except the 50 1.2 and it cost too much. I am surprised they didnt pick a wide, middle and long to update. the 85/100 are pretty good, but the 85/100/135 would benefit the most from an upgrade to is. The most complained about canons are the 50s and it seems they would put their energy towards those, then maybe pick a wide angle. anyway i have a mark 1 50 1.8 and a 100 f2, and am just waiting for the upgrades. The mark 1 is actually alright, i dont notice the focus issues that everyone complains about and the 100 f2 is a very good lens. i go back and forth daily on the 135 f2 if i should upgrade or not, waiting for that 135is/os or 100/85 is/os art and that 50 1.8 is. I dont think it would be 1.4 50mm but if it is they will be flying off the shelves. build it and please take my money.


----------



## The Bad Duck (Jan 15, 2015)

Please let them come soon! At least the 50.

I love my 85 /1.8 and hate my 50 /1.4, and yet the 50mm focal length seems to fit my shooting style really good. I use it a lot even though I don´t like it... Hate that the AF misses so often.

Of course I am thinking of a sigma 50 ART, but it is heavy and reports of so-so AF makes me hesitate - accurate AF is my biggest issue with the canon 50 /1.4 since I can live with shooting at f/2. So bring me an equivalent of the 35/2 IS, preferably 50 /1.4 - 1.8 IS USM, and I will be very happy!

If instead canon gives us a 50 /2.8 IS as in the 24 and 28 lenses, I will go for the Art.


----------



## bholliman (Jan 15, 2015)

I would buy a new Canon 50 f/1.8 IS in a heartbeat! I've owned a 50/1.4 and sold it. I've rented a Sigma 50/1.4 Art that was terrific. I loved the IQ and AF was decent on the copy I rented. I probably will not buy a Sigma Art due to size and weight and concerns I would get a copy with AF problems.. I really want primes that are small and light.


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 15, 2015)

Khalai said:


> That makes two of us (of tens of thousands I suppose)


+1.000 or at least one more, that's me



> I've been eagerly waiting for a new 50mm in the same range as recent 24/28/35 primes. Add in a nice 85mm and there it goes the midrange prime lineup again. Canon is sorely missing a new 50mm. I don't care if it's only 50/1.8 as long as it has proper ring USM, maybe IS would not hurt and it's decently sharp on that 1.8. I'd love to see 1.4 there of course, but I'm not getting my hopes too high


100% my thought.
Small, midrange primes with an aperture below 2.0 best in its class IQ wide open, and Canon will have me buying 3 to 4 new lenses. As long as the lineup is not completed, I'll keep waiting (although beeing tempted).


----------



## Northstar (Jan 15, 2015)

I'd pay $1000 for an updated 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 from canon if the lens had excellent IQ wide open and fast accurate AF.

And I think a lot of other photographers would too.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 15, 2015)

Northstar said:


> I'd pay $1000 for an updated 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 from canon if the lens had excellent IQ wide open and fast accurate AF.
> 
> And I think a lot of other photographers would too.



Zeiss, Nikon, and Sigma realized photographers would be willing to pay U.S.$1,000 for a fast 50mm lens, and released products with appropriate IQ and price tag.

The 50mm f/1.8 is a film era kit lens, the digital era's crop camera's equivalent of the 85mm f/1.8 + cheap entry into the world of fast primes, and as such it wouldn't be upgraded into that price bracket.

If I had to guess what Canon would do, then

1) The 50mm f/1.8 will only be upgraded as cheap as they can get to compete with the Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8, which could be no upgrade at well.

2) The 50mm f/1.4 might get the 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm treatment, e.g. IS & USM. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit slower, say f/1.8-2.0, in order not to compete to hard with...

2) A new 50mm f/1.4L USM in the U.S.$1,000 bracket to compete with the new lenses. None of the competitors have IS, so I doubt Canon would even want to out do them and create too good a competitor for the f/1.2 on the way.


----------



## DomTomLondon (Jan 15, 2015)

I'm also waiting impatiently for a Canon 50 1.4 replacement. I've had the 50 1.4 for 8 few years, but after my gear was stolen in 2014, I decided not to buy a new one. Instead I went for the 35 f2 IS and love it. Now if Canon could make a 50mm in the same form factor with IS. Come on Canon do you not want our money?...


----------



## Twostones (Jan 15, 2015)

For those of you that have never owned a 50mm1.4, it really is a good lens. The focus is easily stuck if the front extension is bumped but it still is a good lens. I would not hesitate to buy another if mine was lost. Sure I would love a 50mm with IS but until that day I am still enjoying my 1.4 version. I imagine we will see the new 50 in the near future. The delay could be due to the new fast IS primes are currently being made where the new 50 will be made. Changeover in tooling and calibration will probably be done when enough of the other focal lengths are stockpiled. The new fast primes, 24mm 28mm and 35mm, with IS are very good and very popular so it may be a while before the 50 with IS appears. I will buy one when they are available. I use my 50mm f1.4 on both full frame and cropped sensor and 35mm film. I like to shoot wide open when shooting film and the 50 is good enough for that. Having two 50's sounds good to me.


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Jan 15, 2015)

I notice that the Canon 24mm 28mm and 35mm, with IS are not showing up in the refurbished store. 

Either people love them or they don't have quality control problems, or hopefully both!

Add me to the list of Canonistas waiting for a 50 in this line.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jan 15, 2015)

As Ive stated elsewhere on the forum Canon S/H prices for the original metal mount 50mm f1.8 lens far outstrip new prices for the MKII and there is a big gap in price between the f1.4 and f1.8 MKII lens. Canon should make an IS metal mount 50mm f1.8 with superior optics to the good f1.8 II and push the f1.4 replacement up as an L lens after all the 1.2L sells in low numbers, is heavy and not very good.


----------



## Tanispyre (Jan 20, 2015)

There are a number of things that make the IS version of the 50 mm more complicated than the wide angle versions. The double Gaussian lens design used buy most of the 50 mm lenses cannot be easily converted to an IS design. It would probably require a retro focus lens design at which point you are now looking at the Otus and sigma art designs and we are no long looking at a $500 lens.


----------



## l_d_allan (Jan 20, 2015)

ggweci said:


> drmikeinpdx said:
> 
> 
> > I would give almost anything for a sharp, reliable 50mm lens like the 35 IS
> ...



I am also a Huge Fan of my 35 IS.

Actually, I think a 50mm f1.8 IS would at most be about the size of the 35 IS, perhaps a bit smaller and less weight. (but I'm also not an optical engineer).

This may be heresy, but if you "only" make letter size 8.5x11" prints, the amount of cropping to turn a 35mm into a 50mm won't be noticed. Even with pixel peeping, my impression is that you would have to be relatively experienced and know what to look for to see much, if any, difference.

Further, my understanding is that there is NO scene that can be captured with a 50mm that a 35mm can't capture (with relatively minor cropping and NO zooming with your feet). The opposite isn't true. A scene where a 35mm FOV is perfect would take some compromises with a 50mm, if even possible (like can't back up).

So? Get the 35mm ... yesterday ... rather than waiting another 12 to 18+ months for a rumored 50mm f1.8 IS to come down from an introductory high price for pro's and well heeled early adapters, to under $500. Obviously, a f1.4 would be a somewhat more $$$.

And with minimal pano skills, my 35mm IS on 6d can become a "poor man's medium format camera with a very wide angle lens" (not uwa) with 10000+ x 3700 resolution in portrait mode. I'd think such a capture would be darn close to as sharp as a Pentax 45z with a native, prime very wide angle. Or not?

Note: pano-head and tripod recommended for interiors, and for scenes with prominent, large foreground is important. I've been using my pano-head less and less with some attention to detail to reduce stitching errors.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Jan 20, 2015)

switters said:


> I know Canon generally has the edge over Nikon in terms of lenses, but I do find myself coveting the Nikon 35/50/85 f1.8Gs. They're compact, lightweight, sharp, and have great IQ.
> 
> Canon has the 35 IS, which gets great reviews, but where's the new 50mm or 85mm? I shoot with a 24-70 II and 70-200 IS a lot, and while I love the high IQ of the Sigma 35A and 50A, I prefer my primes to be lightweight alternatives to those huge zooms.
> 
> ...


Count me in. I personally owns the 35mm f2 IS and I am very satisfied with the images that come from this lens. I would be happy to have the consumer-grade trinity (35/50/85) of lenses that offer a good IQ and having IS would be a bonus. 
Also waiting to see the Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art. I owned the current one but I think a refreshment of this lens should come soon so, I am waiting.


----------



## switters (Jan 22, 2015)

OP here. I have an update, for whatever it's worth. Went ahead and purchased the 50A from B&H. Not surprisingly, it has AF issues. It was front-focusing right out of the box, and I used Reikan Focal to adjust it at 4 different shooting distances and then configured using the Sigma dock. Adjustments were + 15, +15, +17, +18. It's better now, but it is still inconsistent and erratic in ways that can't be fixed with calibration. (Note: I do use non-center AF points on my 5DIII quite a bit, so perhaps this is part of the problem. I've found that Sigma lenses don't always play well with non-center points.)

But even if the AF was perfect, I would still consider returning it, and here's why: the thing is big and heavy. It feels much heavier than the 35A, which I don't mind so much. But given that my two main lenses are the 24-70 II and 70-200 IS, I really want the 50mm to be lightweight and more compact.

I've owned both the 50L and the 50/1.4. I must have had a great copy of the 50/1.4, because I just went back and looked through my LR catalog and found that I had almost as many great keepers from the 1.4 as from the L. And my copy of the 50/1.4 was fairly sharp even wide open. I now find myself wishing I hadn't sold it.

I'm going to return the 50A and either get another 50/1.4, or just stick with the 35A and wait to see what Canon comes out with. I'm not in a huge hurry and can live without a 50mm prime, since the 24-70 II is such a phenomenal lens.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 22, 2015)

I liked the feel of the 50A, but had AF issues. Waiting for the long overdue firmware update to try again.


----------



## bereninga (Jan 22, 2015)

switters said:


> OP here. I have an update, for whatever it's worth. Went ahead and purchased the 50A from B&H. Not surprisingly, it has AF issues. It was front-focusing right out of the box, and I used Reikan Focal to adjust it at 4 different shooting distances and then configured using the Sigma dock. Adjustments were + 15, +15, +17, +18. It's better now, but it is still inconsistent and erratic in ways that can't be fixed with calibration. (Note: I do use non-center AF points on my 5DIII quite a bit, so perhaps this is part of the problem. I've found that Sigma lenses don't always play well with non-center points.)
> 
> But even if the AF was perfect, I would still consider returning it, and here's why: the thing is big and heavy. It feels much heavier than the 35A, which I don't mind so much. But given that my two main lenses are the 24-70 II and 70-200 IS, I really want the 50mm to be lightweight and more compact.
> 
> ...



I've been contemplating the 50A for a while now and am also a Canon 50 1.4 owner. I think I can finally put the GAS to rest about this and will keep the Canon version.


----------



## switters (Jan 22, 2015)

bereninga said:


> I've been contemplating the 50A for a while now and am also a Canon 50 1.4 owner. I think I can finally put the GAS to rest about this and will keep the Canon version.



Yeah. It took me 3 copies of the 35A to finally get a good one. But even if I was willing to go through that again with the 50A (I'm not; I'd rather spend my limited time taking pictures.) I don't think I would because of the size/weight. 

Why is this lens so big and heavy, by the way? Pentax and other lens manufacturers have shown it's possible to make compact lenses with very good IQ. I don't know anything about lens design, so forgive my ignorance.


----------



## bereninga (Jan 22, 2015)

switters said:


> Yeah. It took me 3 copies of the 35A to finally get a good one. But even if I was willing to go through that again with the 50A (I'm not; I'd rather spend my limited time taking pictures.) I don't think I would because of the size/weight.
> 
> Why is this lens so big and heavy, by the way? Pentax and other lens manufacturers have shown it's possible to make compact lenses with very good IQ. I don't know anything about lens design, so forgive my ignorance.



Sigma did not use a double-Gauss lens design, which is typical of 50mm lenses. They instead used a design like the Otus. I'm no expert on the topic, but I got the info from here:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/04/yet-another-sigma-50mm-art-post

There's a lot of work/time/money that you have to sacrifice for the IQ of the Art. You have to AFMA, pay for and figure out the USB dock, and test out constantly just to find out if you have a good copy, which you may not and then you have to go thru the process again w/ another one. It's sort of like a very expensive lottery.

In the end, you'll be wasting time figuring this all out instead of just enjoying taking pictures. Perhaps for a professional, the Sigma is worth the trouble. But for a hobbyist, IMO, it's not.

I guess going back to the topic, I'll wait for Canon to update the 50mm.


----------



## steliosk (Jan 22, 2015)

Canon probably won't release any new L primes before releasing a higher megapixel camera

just a hunch...


----------



## sagittariansrock (Jan 24, 2015)

RustyTheGeek said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > As long as Canon keeps selling the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 like they have been, I think we'll be in for a long wait. Those lens productions must be almost pure profit at this point and while they aren't the world's best lenses, they are good enough for a great many people. The 24, 28, and 35 lenses were rather poor in comparison and not good sellers from what I understand, so the economics to replace them made sense. Sigma certainly hears the voices of discontent, however...
> ...



Incidentally, I don't agree that Canon doesn't foresee a market with newer versions of the non-L 50 and 85.
Regarding the 50, there is certainly a large number of videographers who will like a 50 IS, and if Canon can bring out even a 50/1.8 IS sharp wide open and prices it at $ 600/700 then they clearly leave room for the 50L (a full stop faster for the bokeh people and dedicated portrait users), while they still allow the cheaper 50/1.4 and much cheaper 50/1.8 to sell. 
Regarding the 85, there is a large amount of people who can use a faster focusing medium telephoto, and will prefer better color and contrast that what the 85/1.8 provides. Now, an 85/1.4 priced at just about 1K will affect both 85/1.8 and 85/1.2L sales (although breaking up the segment might increase net sales as a lot of 85/1.8 users will upgrade to the 85/1.4 and at that point it becomes a numbers game). What I think more likely is Canon upgrading the 85 to a 85/1.8 II and pricing it at ~ $ 800. That will let them make more profit on the f/1.8 bracket and not affect the 85/1.2L too much.
We will see I suppose.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Jan 24, 2015)

ashmadux said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > The Canon 50mm primes are the most disappointing set of lenses in Canon's portfolio. I've owned and used professionally every one of them except the 50mm f1.0 L and all of them have been disappointing when compared to the results from other Canon prime lenses. The build of a 50mm f1.2 L is impressive and it's a great lens, but it's just not as sharp as it's price tag would indicate (even stopped down). Shortly after it was released it's new value plummeted and stayed quite low for a long time. Then one day Canon raised it's prices and bumped it's price point because it was erm...f1.2 and therefore worth more. The saddest thing is that it's really tricky lens to use and one which most people go for if they are dabbling with a pro prime lens itch. The 35L and 85IIL are far better performing lenses.
> ...



I am curious- would you mind expanding on that? I have tried to love the 50/1.4, but failed on three separate occasions. It just seemed to lack contrast and color and it wasn't very sharp below f/2.8 or so. Due to the lack of contrast and sharpness, the out of focus effect looked extremely bland.
It seems to me like a lens that might work with sufficient post-production, unlike the 35L or the 135L which just pop without much help from Lightroom.


----------



## bereninga (Feb 2, 2015)

"On the glass side, the widely-anticipated EF 11-24mm f/4L USM specs and photos have been leaked, but *we also hear about two new non-L lenses at the same time or shortly after: the 50mm will finally get its refresh, as will the aging 70-300mm*."

http://www.canonpricewatch.com/blog/2015/02/announcements-coming-this-week-5ds-ef-11-24mm-f4l-and-more/


----------



## switters (Feb 3, 2015)

bereninga said:


> "On the glass side, the widely-anticipated EF 11-24mm f/4L USM specs and photos have been leaked, but *we also hear about two new non-L lenses at the same time or shortly after: the 50mm will finally get its refresh, as will the aging 70-300mm*."
> 
> http://www.canonpricewatch.com/blog/2015/02/announcements-coming-this-week-5ds-ef-11-24mm-f4l-and-more/



This is very exciting if it's accurate!


----------



## pdirestajr (Feb 3, 2015)

switters said:


> bereninga said:
> 
> 
> > I've been contemplating the 50A for a while now and am also a Canon 50 1.4 owner. I think I can finally put the GAS to rest about this and will keep the Canon version.
> ...



If you are referring to Pentax's limited lenses, you have to look a little deeper at them to understand the trade offs. Ie: they have no built in AF motors (body driven- loud and clunky), and some of their apertures aren't as big.


----------



## ggweci (Feb 3, 2015)

switters said:


> bereninga said:
> 
> 
> > "On the glass side, the widely-anticipated EF 11-24mm f/4L USM specs and photos have been leaked, but *we also hear about two new non-L lenses at the same time or shortly after: the 50mm will finally get its refresh, as will the aging 70-300mm*."
> ...



+1

Sure hope it's true. New 50mm is top of my list.


----------



## JPCanonUser (Feb 3, 2015)

There was a lot of activity a few years back on the rumor boards that Canon was about to release a new 50mm lens. It never happened. In my mind, Canon caught news of the new Sigma 50mm, and after seeing the quality of that lens, had to go back to the drawing board for their 50mm (or at least improve image quality in the face of a pretty amazing lens from Sigma). 

Either that or they had to divert resources in the face of, at the time, immense pressure to release a mirroless camera.


----------



## zlatko (Feb 3, 2015)

bereninga said:


> "On the glass side, the widely-anticipated EF 11-24mm f/4L USM specs and photos have been leaked, but *we also hear about two new non-L lenses at the same time or shortly after: the 50mm will finally get its refresh, as will the aging 70-300mm*."
> 
> http://www.canonpricewatch.com/blog/2015/02/announcements-coming-this-week-5ds-ef-11-24mm-f4l-and-more/


Woohoo!! That is exciting. I hope it's a new 50/1.4. But any new 50 is exciting.


----------



## JPCanonUser (Feb 3, 2015)

sagittariansrock said:


> I am curious- would you mind expanding on that? I have tried to love the 50/1.4, but failed on three separate occasions. It just seemed to lack contrast and color and it wasn't very sharp below f/2.8 or so. Due to the lack of contrast and sharpness, the out of focus effect looked extremely bland.
> It seems to me like a lens that might work with sufficient post-production, unlike the 35L or the 135L which just pop without much help from Lightroom.



I owned the 50 1.4 and had the very same experience. It wasnt a bad lens, by any stretch, but it was not a lens that was easy to love. Like many, I owned the 1.8 version early on and really didnt like the lens at all.


----------



## zlatko (Feb 3, 2015)

JPCanonUser said:


> There was a lot of activity a few years back on the rumor boards that Canon was about to release a new 50mm lens. It never happened. In my mind, Canon caught news of the new Sigma 50mm, and after seeing the quality of that lens, had to go back to the drawing board for their 50mm (or at least improve image quality in the face of a pretty amazing lens from Sigma).


Well then, it should be pretty awesome. But I hope they make a great new small 50, similar to the 35/2 IS — which is fabulous. I personally don't wish for a 50 as big as a zoom.


----------



## ggweci (Feb 3, 2015)

zlatko said:


> JPCanonUser said:
> 
> 
> > There was a lot of activity a few years back on the rumor boards that Canon was about to release a new 50mm lens. It never happened. In my mind, Canon caught news of the new Sigma 50mm, and after seeing the quality of that lens, had to go back to the drawing board for their 50mm (or at least improve image quality in the face of a pretty amazing lens from Sigma).
> ...



Same here. And I have to think that's in order, based on the 24/28/35 IS USM's that have been released over the last few years.

50mm 1.4 IS USM the size of the 35 version please


----------



## bholliman (Feb 3, 2015)

If so I won't even wait for the reviews, I'll pre-order one on day 1. I'd prefer a 50/1.4 IS, but would be happy with a f/1.8.


----------



## zim (Feb 3, 2015)

bholliman said:


> If so I won't even wait for the reviews, I'll pre-order one on day 1. I'd prefer a 50/1.4 IS, but would be happy with a f/1.8.



+1000000000000000000000 !


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 3, 2015)

At Photozone de. none of the current Canon 50mm lenses get a ringing endorsement, they do say for its price the 50mm f1.8II is OK but they are not class leading optics. 
Theoretically the 50mm should be one of the easiest lenses to design so its surprising Canon dont do better so given the improvements in optical design and manufacturing improvement they should be able to give us great 50mm lenses the 24 / 28 / 35mm IS show the way as does the 40mm f2.8STM lens.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 5, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> At Photozone de. none of the current Canon 50mm lenses get a ringing endorsement, they do say for its price the 50mm f1.8II is OK but they are not class leading optics.
> Theoretically the 50mm should be one of the easiest lenses to design so its surprising Canon dont do better so given the improvements in optical design and manufacturing improvement they should be able to give us great 50mm lenses the 24 / 28 / 35mm IS show the way as does the 40mm f2.8STM lens.



The 50's have been made to be small light and with the double gauss design. People buy them for cheap, fast, small and light. That means they are less corrected and more about bokeh.

Sigma and Zeiss started a new, fantastic, trend with using retrofocal design that indeed improves the IQ of a fast 50 be a great deal. It's not that Canon can't do that. I will be first in line for a Canon 50 f1.4 L with the same lens design as the Zeiss and Sigma.


----------



## switters (Feb 6, 2015)

Unless I missed something, I didn't see any mention of a new 50mm in the announcements that will be made tomorrow. :<


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 6, 2015)

switters said:


> Unless I missed something, I didn't see any mention of a new 50mm in the announcements that will be made tomorrow. :<


Didn't CR say that the lens was mentioned but an announcement would come some time later but not at the same time as the 5Ds and 11-24. 
So it seems still everything in plan.


----------



## switters (Feb 6, 2015)

Maximilian said:


> switters said:
> 
> 
> > Unless I missed something, I didn't see any mention of a new 50mm in the announcements that will be made tomorrow. :<
> ...



Ah, I missed that. Thanks.


----------



## Ruined (Feb 7, 2015)

I actually think the 85mm f/1.2L II is in more need of replacement than the 50mm f/1.2L.

I adore the output of the 85mm f/1.2L II but it has some major shortcomings that make it a difficult choice for general use unlike the 50mm f/1.2L.

Reasoning:
1. 85mm f/1.2L II really needs focusing speed improvement. I understand that there is a lot of glass to move, but perhaps they should do what they did with the 50L and make the mkiii a 85mm f/1.4 if that would solve this problem. It is a bummer to use this lens at a wedding and fail miserably with even center point AI servo because it can't keep up. The 50mm f/1.2L is not a speed champ either but it is more manageable in terms of focusing speed than the 85L.

2. 85mm f/1.2L II would be nice if it had weather sealing w/ filter like the 50mm f/1.2L. With the current design I think weather sealing is simply not possible due to the way the glass is moved around.

3. 85mm f/1.2L II has been known to break more frequently than other lenses due to the fragile-ish motor that drives the front element. Again, maybe downscaling this lens to a 1.4 could solve this as well.

In summary, I'd like to see Canon do what they did with the 50mm f/1.0L > 50mm f/1.2L. The 85L is surprisingly similar to the 50mm f/1.0L, so making this sort of revamp would not be a big change. I don't think it is world ending that you can only get f/1.4 instead of f/1.2, and fixing all of the above issues will make the 85L f/1.4 III much more usable in general.

An another note, yes I know the 50mm f/1.2L has much more focus shift at MFD than the 85mm f/1.2L II. But the 50mm f/1.2L also has a much shorter MFD, if you backup to the 85L II MFD the focus shift isn't much different. Also note that the 50mm f/1.2L is sharper and has less visual anomalies than the 50mm f/1.0. Perhaps the purple/green fringing can be reduced if the 85mm III is made an f/1.4.

In summary, Canon should use the blueprint of the 50mm 1.2L to construct the 85mm f/1.4L  - as the 50 1.0 and 85 1.2 are so similar.


----------



## switters (Feb 7, 2015)

Maximilian said:


> switters said:
> 
> 
> > Unless I missed something, I didn't see any mention of a new 50mm in the announcements that will be made tomorrow. :<
> ...



Yesterday's post on CR said it will be a 50/1.8 and not a 50/1.4? That is disappointing if true.


----------



## lintoni (Feb 7, 2015)

switters said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > switters said:
> ...


Yep. So I've just pulled the trigger on a 50 Art... let's see if I can live with its AF!


----------



## Viggo (Feb 7, 2015)

lintoni said:


> switters said:
> 
> 
> > Maximilian said:
> ...



Congrats on the new lens! Best of luck with the AF, buy the docking


----------



## lintoni (Feb 7, 2015)

Viggo said:


> lintoni said:
> 
> 
> > switters said:
> ...


Thanks for the congrats and for wishing me luck!  Yeah, the Dock is on order too...


----------



## lintoni (Feb 9, 2015)

Oh well, maybe I've had a lucky escape. I'd seen an offer on Amazon marketplace for the Art at less than £550, so thought I'd take the chance. Received an e-mail today - sorry, we sold last one on Fri and the system hadn't updated. I don't think I'm going to pay £670 for one... :-\


----------



## dlee13 (Feb 15, 2015)

switters said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > switters said:
> ...



I was disappointed by this too. The 50 1.4 and 85mm 1.8 deserve more urgent attention that the nifty fifty!


----------

