# Canon EF 50 f/1.4 IS in 2013 [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 12, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12243"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12243">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>More non-L primes coming


</strong>Expect to see a new EF 50 f/1.4 IS sometime in 2013. There have been variations of a replacement for the very old (1993) EF 50 f/1.4 and it sounds like a 1.4 IS variant is going to be the winner. We have also heard of an f/1.8 IS version existing. Don’t expect such a lens to be much less than the $800 that the EF 24 f/2.8 IS, EF 28 f/2.8 IS and EF 35 f/2 IS all approximately cost.</p>
<p>The EF 85 f/1.8 is also in the works with an IS version we’re told. I haven’t heard anything about the very good EF 100 f/2 getting a replacement.</p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/Canon_new_lenses.html" target="_blank">NL</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## joshmurrah (Dec 12, 2012)

f/1.4 AND IS? That's kind of a mind-boggling combo. One of these on a 5D3 would let you shoot a a portrait on a moonless night in Arizona!

I'm racking my brain thinking what this would be good for... if f/1.4 isn't fast enough, won't AF sensitivity be the problem?


----------



## Daniel Flather (Dec 12, 2012)

Where's the 12-24?


----------



## epsiloneri (Dec 12, 2012)

I'm a bit skeptical despite of the CR2 rating. The fastest Canon with IS is the EF 200/2.0L IS. I don't know if any other manufacturer has a faster lens with IS, but I suspect not. It would be a *major* leap to get IS to a f/1.4 lens.

I'm more inclined to believe an EF 50/1.4 II.


----------



## Pixelsign (Dec 12, 2012)

this will be a great lens but the price... you even get the mighty 100mm 2.8 !L! lens for less. 50mm lenses have a simple construction and shouldn't be that pricy


----------



## Jesse (Dec 12, 2012)

Yes! I would totally pay $800 for that. I was about to buy the 85 1.8, this makes my decision harder.


----------



## RS2021 (Dec 12, 2012)

Pixelsign said:


> this will be a great lens but the price... you even get the mighty 100mm 2.8 !L! lens for less. 50mm lenses have a simple construction and shouldn't be that pricy



"Shouldn't be that pricey".... Somewhere in Canon-land an Executive in a corner office just fell off his chair laughing. . 

But I am with ya on the thought, but this is what companies aim to do...make as much money as the market can bear.


----------



## 7enderbender (Dec 12, 2012)

Well, if that materializes I'll be very glad that I sold my 50 1.4 for good money still after I moved to the 50L. What is it with IS for those types of lenses? Just leave it as it is and improve the mechanics and plastic parts.


----------



## Jesse (Dec 12, 2012)

"I don't know if any other manufacturer has a faster lens with IS, but I suspect not."

Firstly, 50s are the easiest to make fast. Secondly, this is Canon, is it shocking that they are ahead with lens technology? No. Thirdly, this is 2012, technology is improving fast. Of course this is possible. 

Then again, where's my 24-70 IS?


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 12, 2012)

f1.4 IS????? WOW.....should I cancel my 50L that I ordered yesterday : : :


----------



## Daniel Flather (Dec 12, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> f1.4 IS????? WOW.....should I cancel my 50L that I ordered yesterday : : :



I see the 50L in your sig, so you'd have to cancel that as well.


----------



## Area256 (Dec 12, 2012)

epsiloneri said:


> I'm a bit skeptical despite of the CR2 rating. The fastest Canon with IS is the EF 200/2.0L IS. I don't know if any other manufacturer has a faster lens with IS, but I suspect not. It would be a *major* leap to get IS to a f/1.4 lens.
> 
> I'm more inclined to believe an EF 50/1.4 II.



The EF 35mm f/2.0 IS - a fast, small f/2.0 image stabilized prime. It sounds like they have been working up to this. Also it looks like Canon wants to differentiate it's primes with IS, just look at the last three it released. It would be a huge advance in lens tech to get it working at f/1.4, but that is kind of what Canon does.

I love the idea, although I'm more likely to get the 35mm f/2 IS.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 12, 2012)

Pixelsign said:


> this will be a great lens but the price... you even get the mighty 100mm 2.8 !L! lens for less. 50mm lenses have a simple construction and shouldn't be that pricy



Give it a year or two. It'll drop. It won't approach the ~350 that the current version goes for though.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 12, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> f1.4 IS????? WOW.....should I cancel my 50L that I ordered yesterday : : :



Maybe this will push Canon to deliver a 50L II soon. I can't see Canon killing a L lens like this and the recent lens designs are much better than before.


----------



## infared (Dec 12, 2012)

Now that could be a lens that will fill a hole in all of the 50's...Sigma, Canon, Zeiss etc. That segment has not been touched....YET!


----------



## RS2021 (Dec 12, 2012)

Canon had the 50mm range covered well... Though the lenses are all aging a bit now, and particularly the 50 1.4,, they weren't dogs by any means... but I guess "IS" is welcome if they substantially upgrade corner performance. For its price, 50 1.4 as it stands now is still decent.


----------



## infared (Dec 12, 2012)

Pixelsign said:


> this will be a great lens but the price... you even get the mighty 100mm 2.8 !L! lens for less. 50mm lenses have a simple construction and shouldn't be that pricy



Huh? the Canon 100mm 2.8 L is $900???????
The new 50mm IS should be around $700 or $800. I guess the way Canon is pricing lately it could be more at introduction...ya never know.


----------



## Area256 (Dec 12, 2012)

Pixelsign said:


> this will be a great lens but the price... you even get the mighty 100mm 2.8 !L! lens for less. 50mm lenses have a simple construction and shouldn't be that pricy



Simple economics, if you have a unique product you can charge more for it. For example, who else has an optically stabilized 35mm f/2 lens? That's why they can change $800 for it - if you need it, you have to get it from Canon. Also I can't imagine making a f/1.4 with IS is going to be cheap, or at the very least it would have cost a lot of money R&D wise to produce.


----------



## Jesse (Dec 12, 2012)

Do the new IS lenses have Hybrid IS??


----------



## Ewinter (Dec 12, 2012)

Given the fact they've just put it into the 24-70 f4, and the depth of field being so narrow, I'd imagine so


----------



## Jesse (Dec 12, 2012)

With the new TS-Es, these 2 new lenses, all Canon will be lacking is the ultra-wide zoom. Canon>>>Nikon


----------



## Axilrod (Dec 12, 2012)

Jesse said:


> Yes! I would totally pay $800 for that. I was about to buy the 85 1.8, this makes my decision harder.



The 85mm f/1.8 is like $300 used, I wouldn't let a lens that's going to cost 3x that (and who knows when it will be released) stop you from picking it up. Get the 85, it's a stellar lens (one of the highest rated on DxO period) and you'll have no trouble selling it if you want to upgrade in the future.


----------



## Jesse (Dec 12, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> Jesse said:
> 
> 
> > Yes! I would totally pay $800 for that. I was about to buy the 85 1.8, this makes my decision harder.
> ...



Yeah I'm probably going to in a couple weeks anyway. But it's the 85L that I really want.


----------



## dswatson83 (Dec 12, 2012)

Please no. It's not that I wouldn't want IS on a lens, but what about the many customers Canon has that want a 50mm f/1.4 lens that don't want to spend $900+ for a non L lens. If Canon made a non IS & and IS version then awesome, but if I had to choose, i'd say give me IS on my zooms and no IS on my wide primes. Typically, if I am shooting landscapes or other non moving or slow moving objects to want IS, i'm not shooting at f/1.4 or shooting way wider than 50mm. Most of my 50mm f/1.4 work would be portraits. Other than detail shots at a wedding maybe, I have never wanted IS on a 50mm because my subject is always moving. I've longed for it on my 24-70 though since I use that for landscape style shots and love it on my 70-200 since at 200mm, IS is a must the way my hands shake. But on my 50mm, I want around 1/100th of a second shutter in almost all cases anyway that I use this lens for so who needs IS. I guess for video the 50mm IS would be awesome. 

IS is great for handheld video, landscapes (or other still objects), and telephoto lenses. The 50mm f/1.4 doesn't really fit any of these except video.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Dec 12, 2012)

Canon Rumors said:


> <div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12243\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12243\">Tweet</a></div>
> <strong>More non-L primes coming
> 
> 
> ...



Sounds like music to my ears. Hopefully, I will pre-order it the day it is available.


----------



## curby (Dec 12, 2012)

I've always thought these wide lenses with IS were for stabilized video, but honestly my shaky hands need all the help they can get. If the 24-70/2.8 II and the 24-70/4 IS had a /f.28 IS baby I'd be more tempted to go full frame, but for now I'm clinging to the IS on my 17-55/2.8.

Also, is the price really that high? IS puts a $300-400 premium on the lens. Add an upgraded ring-type USM and optics on top of the existing $300-400 price and it doesn't seem exorbitant. I'd also hope for environmental sealing, but if it's not "L" it's less likely.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Dec 12, 2012)

curby said:


> Also, is the price really that high? IS puts a $300-400 premium on the lens. Add an upgraded ring-type USM and optics on top of the existing $300-400 price and it doesn't seem exorbitant. I'd also hope for environmental sealing, but if it's not "L" it's less likely.



+1


----------



## preppyak (Dec 12, 2012)

curby said:


> Also, is the price really that high? IS puts a $300-400 premium on the lens. Add an upgraded ring-type USM and optics on top of the existing $300-400 price and it doesn't seem exorbitant. I'd also hope for environmental sealing, but if it's not "L" it's less likely.


I think retail on the original 50mm f/1.4 was like $500ish, so, assuming this is priced around the same as the 24/28/35 IS lenses, its really only a $300 increase (right in line inflation wise). And that's for what would presumably be an increase in USM, IS, and optics.



dswatson83 said:


> Please no. It's not that I wouldn't want IS on a lens, but what about the many customers Canon has that want a 50mm f/1.4 lens that don't want to spend $900+ for a non L lens.


Why are you assuming $900+? $799 and $849 have been the new prices on the lenses so far, and I imagine by about this time next year, the street price would be sub-$800 easily. Heck, the $200 40mm lens is already going at 25% off regularly. Seems Canon is being more aggressive with their early adopters premium.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Dec 12, 2012)

infared said:


> Pixelsign said:
> 
> 
> > this will be a great lens but the price... you even get the mighty 100mm 2.8 !L! lens for less. 50mm lenses have a simple construction and shouldn't be that pricy
> ...



Looking at the other new primes, under $800 is a pipe dream.. If it stays at 1.4 and has IS, i'd suspect it will be just shy of $900. If its a 1.8 or a 2.0, then it may be under $800. But not if its as fast as 1.4


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Dec 12, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> Jesse said:
> 
> 
> > Yes! I would totally pay $800 for that. I was about to buy the 85 1.8, this makes my decision harder.
> ...



Gotta agree here +100. The 85 1.8 rocks. Get it now, just do it, don't think - go to the retailer of your choice and snag it!!!! Who knows when the update will even be available, and yeah, it's going to double at least in cost. So go get the 1.8 now, you will be pleased!!!!!!


----------



## KyleSTL (Dec 12, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> f1.4 IS????? WOW.....should I cancel my 50L that I ordered yesterday : : :


I'd say there is a decent chance that an updated 50 1.4 could outperform the 50L at f/1.4. This is based off reviews of the 24 IS, 28 IS and 40mm f/2.8 STM. Those lenses are really performing well (especially considering their price) compared to the other lenses in Canon's lineup ahead of them (24mm f/1.4L, 28mm f/1.8, 35mm f/1.4L) and the lenses they replace ( 24mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.8 ). I'd expect the 35mm f/2 IS to perform just as well when they start shipping.

24mm f/1.4L vs. 24mm f/2.8 IS ( both at f/2.8 ):
TDP ISO 12233 Link
24mm f/1.4L vs. 28mm f/2.8 IS ( both at f/2.8 ):
TDP ISO 12233 Link
28mm f/1.8 USM vs. 28mm f/2.8 IS ( both at f/2.8 ):
TDP ISO 12233 Link
35mm f/2 vs. 28mm f/2.8 IS ( both at f/2.8 ):
TDP ISO 12233 Link
35mm f/1.4L vs. 28mm f/2.8 IS ( both at f/2.8 ):
TDP ISO 12233 Link
35mm f/1.4L vs. 40mm f/2.8 STM ( both at f/2.8 ):
TDP ISO 12233 Link

Heck, the current f/1.4 isn't far behind the 50L as is:
Wide Open | f/1.4 | f/2 | f/2.8 | f/4 | f/5.6

I'd go so far as to say that the f/1.4 beats the L in apertures f/2.8 and smaller, based on those comparisons. Wide open and f/2 seem like draws to me, and at f/1.4 the L is narrowly ahead. I'd say when the new 50mm f/1.4 comes out, Canon will have a hard time selling the L. I would expect the L to be replaced shortly thereafter (with the obvious Canon price increase).


----------



## robbymack (Dec 12, 2012)

if this is a f1.4 with IS I suspect price to be much closer to the 50L than the newer IS primes. Then Canon will line up a 50L replacement at or above 85L ii pricing. Heck maybe they just add the red ring to it and price it that way from the beginning


----------



## pwp (Dec 12, 2012)

This promises to be a winner for Canon, but very much at the expense of hugely reduced sales for the 50 f/1.2L. 

-PW


----------



## preppyak (Dec 12, 2012)

pwp said:


> This promises to be a winner for Canon, but very much at the expense of hugely reduced sales for the 50 f/1.2L.
> 
> -PW


Eh, I'd say the 50mm f/1.4 was already doing that anyway. Pro's who need that specific look went for the L (and still will), but pretty much everyone else was going for the f/1.4 (or the Sigma, etc) because you could have 3 of them for the price of the L, and because they performed about the same from f/1.8 on


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 12, 2012)

Random Orbits said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > f1.4 IS????? WOW.....should I cancel my 50L that I ordered yesterday : : :
> ...



Current 50L is not that old....i doubt we'll see 50L II anytime soon. However, if the rumor 50 is sharp at f1.4, I might not need current 50L.....but then again this is CR2 and when will this lens be on the market is another topic to discuss


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 12, 2012)

KyleSTL said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > f1.4 IS????? WOW.....should I cancel my 50L that I ordered yesterday : : :
> ...



I hope you right.....I'm willing to spend up to $2100 for 50L II if there is no focus shift.


----------



## Viggo (Dec 12, 2012)

I love that Canon puts IS in all their glass now, well, not all (read: 24-70 mk2) but I have always said I could really use IS in all my lenses. And I can 100% gurantee a new 50 f1,4 will be sharper with better corners than the current 50 L.

And that is great news, I love the 50 L more than any other lens, and I have had a few ;D BUT, I do not love it for the sharpness and being serioouusly soft closer than 1 meter so I could surley use and update, and yes it isn't very old, but a lot has happened, and it should have been better in 2006 also. 

But to have 800$ 50 f1,4 lacking only weather sealing over the 2100$ 50 L is going to kill it off anyway. So a new 50 L II within two years isn't THAT crazy...


----------



## Haydn1971 (Dec 12, 2012)

Very sceptical on current form - I'm thinking more like a 50mm f1.8 IS is more likely, sharp at f1.8, priced at about £600 retail, with an 85mm f2.0 IS at a similar price in the new style lens package seen on the 24/28/35mm lenses and a trio "cheapo" 35mm, 50mm & 85mm f2.8 non IS for £200 retail each in a build package not too dissimilar to a 18-55mm kit lens.


----------



## KyleSTL (Dec 12, 2012)

Haydn1971 said:


> ... and a trio "cheapo" 35mm, 50mm & 85mm f2.8 non IS for £200 retail each in a build package not too dissimilar to a 18-55mm kit lens.


That's the first prediction of that happening that I have heard. I think that is unlikely, but who knows, only time will tell. There are a number of other lenses (at much higher pricepoints and margins) that Canon is more likely to produce [or replace], as well as cameras in need of replacement (most glaringly, the 2009-like spec'd EOS T3/1100D).


----------



## florianbieler.de (Dec 12, 2012)

If by any means the image quality is comparable to their new 35mm IS, I know a guy who will definitely get that asap.


----------



## LOALTD (Dec 12, 2012)

I don’t usually use this word but: what a bunch of haters!

I have been DREAMING about this lens since I got my first DSLR. 50mm is my favorite focal length; I shoot primarily landscape and adventure (mountaineering) photography. I’m not sure why everyone thinks you need a wide-angle to shoot things in the great outdoors, I shoot with a 50 f/1.4 about 90% of the time, everyone has their own style.

Some of my most iconic images are shot in pre-dawn light; we often start climbing hours before the sun comes up. At high altitude before sunrise, the light is gorgeous, changing quickly, and there is not much of it. There is no time to setup a tripod. I end up having to shoot at f/1.4 with 12k-25.6k ISO’s to get a non-blurred image, and by that point I consider the images pretty much unusable for professional applications. Having FOUR STOPS of IS would be HUGE for me, and allow me to get my ISO’s back down to manageable levels. This would also allow me to shoot basic star shots…hand-held!

This lens is truly a dream-come-true, and I will pre-order it as soon as it becomes available. Something I have NEVER done with a lens before.

I have been disgustingly disappointed with Canon bodies lately (as have most of you here) but I am very pleased with the way they’ve been handling lenses: fast primes with IS and small/light sizes. This is PERFECT for me, especially as I start to branch out more into videography.

Now if only they’d make a 24mm f/1.4 with IS…


----------



## BL (Dec 13, 2012)

Jesse said:


> Do the new IS lenses have Hybrid IS??



i'm not quite sure if Hybrid IS would be useful in anything other than a macro lens. and even then, as an owner of the 100L, it's questionable how much a difference HIS really makes at 1:2 - 1:1 magnifications.


----------



## Zv (Dec 13, 2012)

A non IS version that's cheap, hmmmm oh wait that already exists! Did you forget about the 50 1.8 plastic fantastic? So why would Canon make another cheap fifty? Makes perfect sense to me that they would add IS, in fact we should all just accept that Canon will put IS in all future non L primes.


For bargain hunters theres always the 40mm pancake!


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 13, 2012)

infared said:


> Huh? the Canon 100mm 2.8 L is $900??????? The new 50mm IS should be around $700 or $800.



The 100L is regularly included in rebate programs ... any no way the 50/1.4IS will be only $800 no matter how "simple" it is to construct, imho it'll be at least $1000 for the versatility alone and because it's a great companion to the IS-less 24-70 lens(es). I hope Canon delivers and it's not 12/31/2013


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 13, 2012)

As was stated before (but I shall echo)...


This lens should have been expected by all of us. All the non-L primes seem to be getting modern updates with better build quality, internal focusing, USM and IS. I say almost in that F/1.4 _and_ IS seems unlikely. Given that IS is a lock for a refresh (based on the others we've seen) I agree with those suggesting that it might be an F/1.8 IS or F/2 IS.
Such a refresh will have IQ that rivals current equivalently stopped down L glass of that length.
Four stops of IS _for me_ is fricken wonderful. I rarely shoot moving things in low light, so four stops of IS is simply a huge win for what I do. I can net shots in even darker environments, or in environments I shoot in today, I can stop this thing down into its sweet spot and have the IS net sharper winners despite the longer shutter.
In this focal length, as much as improved IQ is first on people's minds, _improved AF_ is what I'm looking for. I have the venerable Canon 50 F/1.4, and though it (like the Canon 85mm F/1.8 ) is a stellar sharpness-per-dollar sort of lens, the focusing speed is simply two steps behind my L glass. If the 28 IS I recently purchased is any harbinger of things to come with this new 50, it should be a massive improvement over my old 50 F/1.4 
Am I the only who believes these mid-grade IS lenses are only setting a baseline for expectations for new L lenses? One would assume that once these mid-grades IS lenses are all released, bigger/nastier/heavier weather-sealed versions of each of them will be next. Such new L primes would be $2-3K, one would think.

- A


----------



## Zlatko (Dec 13, 2012)

dswatson83 said:


> Typically, if I am shooting landscapes or other non moving or slow moving objects to want IS, i'm not shooting at f/1.4 or shooting way wider than 50mm.
> ....
> IS is great for handheld video, landscapes (or other still objects), and telephoto lenses. The 50mm f/1.4 doesn't really fit any of these except video.


Everyone has their own needs & preferences. I think a 50/1.4 is great for video, landscapes, portraits, weddings, etc., and on a crop camera it is a short telephoto. And IS can help when using any f-stop and a slowish shutter speed. So if the light is low and you want a little more depth of field but don't have time for a tripod, IS can help make the shot. IS on small lenses is wonderful.


----------



## Zlatko (Dec 13, 2012)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Looking at the other new primes, under $800 is a pipe dream.. If it stays at 1.4 and has IS, i'd suspect it will be just shy of $900. If its a 1.8 or a 2.0, then it may be under $800. But not if its as fast as 1.4


Keep in mind that the 28/2.8 IS was introduced at $800 and is $629 at the moment. That's a big price drop in a short time.


----------



## Zlatko (Dec 13, 2012)

LOALTD said:


> I don’t usually use this word but: what a bunch of haters!
> 
> I have been DREAMING about this lens since I got my first DSLR. 50mm is my favorite focal length; I shoot primarily landscape and adventure (mountaineering) photography. I’m not sure why everyone thinks you need a wide-angle to shoot things in the great outdoors, I shoot with a 50 f/1.4 about 90% of the time, everyone has their own style.


I agree, it is a dream lens! But with or without IS, a new 50/1.4 is long overdue and will be very welcome. That is an essential lens for many photographers, and the current one has much room for improvement, especially wide open and especially in the AF motor.


----------



## DJL329 (Dec 13, 2012)

joshmurrah said:


> f/1.4 AND IS? That's kind of a mind-boggling combo. One of these on a 5D3 would let you shoot a a portrait on a moonless night in Arizona!



... on horseback! ;D


----------



## Woody (Dec 13, 2012)

ahsanford said:


> As was stated before (but I shall echo)...
> 
> This lens should have been expected by all of us. All the non-L primes seem to be getting modern updates with better build quality, internal focusing, USM and IS.
> Such a refresh will have IQ that rivals current equivalently stopped down L glass of that length.
> - A



I will add ring-USM, not just any USM (which may include micromotor USM).

Another point to add to the above list: the new lenses are almost guaranteed to be smaller and lighter than the older equivalents. Canon may even trade-off aperture size just to have them lighter and smaller.

All in all, a brilliant strategy! It's what I've always wanted!


----------



## roadrunner (Dec 13, 2012)

If this comes in at the guesstimated price ($800-$900) then I can't see them killing off the 50 1.4. That's just too much of a price gap in my opinion (And we all know how much Canon values my personal opinion). It would make more sense to me to introduce a 50 1.4 II along with the IS version to fill the gap. If they did that, IS version could be about $300-$400 more than the non-IS counterpart.

I love the idea of IS. It can never hurt to have in case you need it. I just don't know if I would be willing to pay the price premium required for it.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 13, 2012)

roadrunner said:


> If this comes in at the guesstimated price ($800-$900) then I can't see them killing off the 50 1.4. That's just too much of a price gap in my opinion (And we all know how much Canon values my personal opinion). It would make more sense to me to introduce a 50 1.4 II along with the IS version to fill the gap. If they did that, IS version could be about $300-$400 more than the non-IS counterpart.
> 
> I love the idea of IS. It can never hurt to have in case you need it. I just don't know if I would be willing to pay the price premium required for it.



Unless the f/1.8 is replaced with a f/1.8 IS, which would then slot in the 300-400 range...


----------



## roadrunner (Dec 13, 2012)

Sure, that's a possibility too. Basically, as long as they fill that gap, I'm okaywith whatever they do. Though, I would think it would make more sense to use a lens they already designed (The new 1.4) rather than designing an entirely new 1.8 IS. Still, I'm open to whatever route they take. Heck, maybe it will drop the current 1.4 down to about $200 and I'll grab that instead.


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Dec 13, 2012)

So, a bit of math.

w/o IS: 1/60s @ f/1.4 @ ISO 6400 = EV 1 => "Distant view of lighted skyline."

w/ IS: 1/4s @ f/1.4 @ ISO 6400 = EV -3 => "Night, away from city lights, subject under full moon."

@ ISO 25,600 = EV -5 => "Night, away from city lights, subject under crescent moon."

1/2s @ f/1.4 @ ISO 25,600 = EV -6 => "Night, away from city lights, subject under starlight only."

So, yes. With this, if you braced yourself well, you actually could take a handheld landscape picture of the Grand Canyon at midnight on a clear moonless night and have it be as well exposed as one under the noonday Sun. It'll be a bit noisy if you pixel peep, but an 8" x 10" print will be stunning. Indeed, you might even wind up overexposing the Milky Way if you're not careful!

(And, of course, you'll need not have anything in the foreground due to the shallow depth of field.)

God damn.

b&


----------



## dhofmann (Dec 13, 2012)

A Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 IS USM, with ring USM, 9 aperture blades, sharpness exceeding the 24-70 II, and build quality equal to the 85mm f/1.8, would be awesome. The f/1.4 would suddenly become a niche item.


----------



## mememe (Dec 13, 2012)

I dont think 50 1.4 IS will happen...


----------



## EchoLocation (Dec 13, 2012)

I'm thinking a 50mm 1.4 IS will come in at around $999.99 at launch, if not $1149. About 6 months to a year later this lens will be around $899.99.
If Sigma can sell a 35mm 1.4 for $899, then I don't see why Canon would make a new featured fast prime for a price so many people seem to think is reasonable($800ish.) All the new lenses have been shockingly priced at first, and I believe this one will be too, thus $1000 bucks it will be.


----------



## ddashti (Dec 13, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> Where's the 12-24?


A lot of us are waiting for that lens from Canon, too...


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 13, 2012)

dhofmann said:


> A Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 IS USM, with ring USM, 9 aperture blades, sharpness exceeding the 24-70 II, and build quality equal to the 85mm f/1.8, would be awesome. The f/1.4 would suddenly become a niche item.



The build quality for this new lens will far surpass the non-L 85 prime.

The Digital Picture gent was surprised that the new IS 24 and 28 lenses didn't get a red ring -- they were _that _well built. I expect the 35 IS and this 50 IS to be similar.

My 28 IS is effectively the 100L macro for build quality, minus the weather sealing gasket. 

- A


----------



## Nishi Drew (Dec 13, 2012)

This far into the thread and I don't see a mention of the Sony 50mm f/1.8 OSS ??
That lens may not be FF -able but it already exists, this puts Canon behind if the 50 1.4 IS is supposed to be a jaw-droppingly amazing rumor. It's about time for a new mid-level 50, and I'm not against the IS, but that's if the IS isn't an excuse to as predicted, raise the price to an insane level. For the video market this makes sense, but shooting at 1.4 is very difficult to keep focus and just looks amateurish anyways, even IS won't help anyone with keeping focus. So you stop down to 2.8 and by then you're better off cost-wise to just get a 24-70, and so far only Tamron has a stabilized version. Or, move to a system with in-camera stabilization and you're g2g with all lenses....

This trend just proves Canon won't ever move to EVFs, guess Sigma and Tamron will continue to be the winners even with their own price jumps


----------



## Pixelsign (Dec 13, 2012)

Nishi Drew said:


> shooting at 1.4... just looks amateurish



this is something new to me


----------



## Nishi Drew (Dec 13, 2012)

Pixelsign said:


> Nishi Drew said:
> 
> 
> > shooting at 1.4... just looks amateurish
> ...



For video, going super shallow is cool, but so easily overdone, and has become a 'special effect' with DSLR video these days that's often used too much, with no regards to keeping anything particularly in focus to show off bokeh.
I like shallow, but for subject separation or for a nice dreamy feel when needed, but not for an excuse for poor composition, you can't just keep a single point in focus and ignore how the overall image is composed.
If you need 1.4 for the light, then that's certainly great if IS is part of the package too, but one is better off with a fast wide angle for lowlight video anyways


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 13, 2012)

Nishi Drew said:


> Pixelsign said:
> 
> 
> > Nishi Drew said:
> ...



I think what's amateurish is when you use something you don't know how to use. Having a capability of an aperture of 1.4 certainly isn't amateurish. It's how you use it. Your explanation didn't prove 1.4 as amateurish.


----------



## roadrunner (Dec 13, 2012)

Nishi Drew said:


> Pixelsign said:
> 
> 
> > Nishi Drew said:
> ...



I fail to see how one would be better off with a fast wide angle. They are two completely different lenses. As a wedding photographer, I need fast everything... fast wides, fast portrait, and fast telephoto. Not sure how one replaces the other.


----------



## Viggo (Dec 13, 2012)

If you don't like IS, then turn it off and bring your monopod ! And it is not just for video, you have a much smaller apertures without changing iso's..

And all the cool effects with longer speeds for street photo for example, because I don't like using a tripod, especially when it's almost not need for it. Panning with a fast 50 would be really cool. You would have loads and loads of new options, if you weren't busy thinking that you must hate it because increased the price of a product that's hugely improved... are we also mad that a 2012 car is more expensive and have tracktion control than a 1993 of the same car?


----------



## Bob Howland (Dec 13, 2012)

Nishi Drew said:


> Pixelsign said:
> 
> 
> > Nishi Drew said:
> ...



I watch a lot of TV shows that have a documentary flavor. They rarely, maybe never, use selective focus. If anything, they go to the other extreme, with everything in sharp focus.


----------



## RC (Dec 13, 2012)

Well its about time! I've been yearning for an acceptable 50mm for a long time. If the L didn't have the back focus problem I'd go that route. F 1.4 with or without IS and I'm likely in. I wouldn't be surprised to see a 50 1.4 II with ring USM and round aperture and a new 50 2.8 IS member. And its not early to update the 50L!

Imagine the Canon 50mm lineup with a 1.2L II, 1.4 II, 2.8 IS, 1.8III, and the 2.5 macro. Maybe too many options but something for everyone, bases covered. 

Oh and next is a 85 IS


----------



## mb66energy (Dec 13, 2012)

This lens has the potential to be a killer lens:
- reasonable high max aperture
- IS to extend shooting ability in sparse light
- chance to get wider DOF by using the IS and a smaller aperture
- chance to deliver much higher contrast @f/1.4 as the current version by use of special glasses or/and aspherical lens(es)

Hopefully it gets a good minimum focus distance of about 30mm 30cm (is sufficient) - very helpful to stretch its applications as universal standard lens (on FF) or light telephoto (on APS-C).

If it costs 800€/$ and delivers perfect qualitiy (contrast, flare resistance, texture fidelity, bokeh, low distortions & vignetting) it will be a very well priced lens.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 13, 2012)

I'll buy one ASAP, but will it replace my 50L? Only time will tell.


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Looking at the other new primes, under $800 is a pipe dream.. If it stays at 1.4 and has IS, i'd suspect it will be just shy of $900. If its a 1.8 or a 2.0, then it may be under $800. But not if its as fast as 1.4
> ...



+++ 1
Also...a 50mm lens is a simpler design than a wide or telephoto, generally. Especially non- "L".


----------



## KyleSTL (Dec 13, 2012)

This (50mm f1.4 IS) would be the most hand-holdable lens ever (EV 0 @ ISO 640), which puts it slightly ahead of the 35mm f2 IS (ISO 1000) and 24mm f2.8 IS (ISO 1250). Compared to the venerable 200mm f2 (ISO 5000) or 70-200mm f2.8 IS II (ISO 4000-10000) that is an impressive feat. All these estimates go by the 1/FL rule (minus 4 stop of stabilization) and shot wide open and EV 0 is defined as proper exposure of subject in ISO 100 | f/1 | 1 sec.


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

LOALTD said:


> I don’t usually use this word but: what a bunch of haters!
> 
> I have been DREAMING about this lens since I got my first DSLR. 50mm is my favorite focal length; I shoot primarily landscape and adventure (mountaineering) photography. I’m not sure why everyone thinks you need a wide-angle to shoot things in the great outdoors, I shoot with a 50 f/1.4 about 90% of the time, everyone has their own style.
> 
> ...



So, I see that you 'HATE" Canon camera bodies! (I just couldn't resist pointing that out ;D ;D).

I love my Canon 5DIII. It does a LOT, well. I just wish I had cashed in on the $2499 "give-away"! Although when I got mine for $3399 I was able to sell my 5DII at $2100 so that kind of all equals out the cash disparity for me if I had done the same thing now I would get nothing near that for my 5DII. So...its all good.


----------



## dstppy (Dec 13, 2012)

If the rumor is true, and if it's under $1k (meaning they don't REALLY put the screws to us on pricing) then it's going to be a great lens. And 5 years from now, when it's selling at $500, it'll STILL be a great lens.

Buuuuut we're complaining about price already. If there were no IS, we'd complain about that. 

You know it doesn't come with free cookies, are we going to whine about that next? Where's the napkin with the cookies?


----------



## EOBeav (Dec 13, 2012)

Yeah, at this point IS is gimmicky. 

This lens has been a workhorse, although it can be finnicky and a bit fragile at times. All they need to do is make that inner barrel out of something besides plastic and this will be a fantastic lens.


----------



## KyleSTL (Dec 13, 2012)

EOBeav said:


> Yeah, at this point IS is gimmicky.
> 
> This lens has been a workhorse, although it can be finnicky and a bit fragile at times. All they need to do is make that inner barrel out of something besides plastic and this will be a fantastic lens.


What about the cheap micro-USM? And mediocre performance wide open? It's 2012, Canon can do much better than this. A lens designed in 1993 was likely not computer generated. Check out my post on page 3 comparing the new primes (24mm and 28mm IS) to the older primes and the current L lenses. Don't tell me that kind of performance out of a <$900 lens is not desirable.


----------



## Roadtrip (Dec 13, 2012)

I didn't need IS with my FD 50mm f1.4, and I don't need it now, especially for the extra $400 over the current lens....


----------



## curby (Dec 13, 2012)

Roadtrip said:


> I didn't need IS with my FD 50mm f1.4, and I don't need it now, especially for the extra $400 over the current lens....



Then I'm glad you're not Canon's only customer, and you're glad this won't be Canon's only 50mm option. :


----------



## 2n10 (Dec 13, 2012)

curby said:


> Roadtrip said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't need IS with my FD 50mm f1.4, and I don't need it now, especially for the extra $400 over the current lens....
> ...



So you both should be satisfied with your options?


----------



## curby (Dec 13, 2012)

I'm pretty excited.

More accurately, I'm looking for more, not less: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11619.msg207413#msg207413


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

Afraid if you want all of that from a Canon Camera you will have to jump up a notch and get into the full-frame arena.
There are other manufactures with very good systems that offer more in the crop-frame format.
We just can't have it all the way we want it...Sadly, everything is a compromise.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 13, 2012)

KyleSTL said:


> What about the cheap micro-USM? And mediocre performance wide open? It's 2012, Canon can do much better than this. A lens designed in 1993 was likely not computer generated. Check out my post on page 3 comparing the new primes (24mm and 28mm IS) to the older primes and the current L lenses. Don't tell me that kind of performance out of a <$900 lens is not desirable.



+1 except for the price point.

I have benn waiting for an optically greatly improved 50/1.4 II [better than Nikon AF-S 50/1.4 and Sigma 50/1.4] with true Ring-USM AF and mechanically less fragile at a price point of USD/€ 500

There is no way on earth I will be shelling out 800 or 900 for a standard 50mm, IS or not.


----------



## e-d0uble (Dec 13, 2012)

I'm no lens designer, but I bet if canon took the 50mm f/1.2 and redesigned to add a floating rear element such as the 85mm f/1.2 II has it would be incredible. It's already a killer. Not sure if image stabilization on such a short prime lens would make a tremendous amount of difference except in terms of weight.


----------



## pedro (Dec 13, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> Where's the 12-24?


+1 here. No IS please. If not, we top the 3.5 k (?).


----------



## LOALTD (Dec 13, 2012)

infared said:


> LOALTD said:
> 
> 
> > I don’t usually use this word but: what a bunch of haters!
> ...



Guilty as charged! For my type of photography, all I wanted was better IQ, I didn't care about the shooting speed or crappy AF of the Mk II. 

The only real benefit I've gotten out of upgrading to the Mk III is maybe 1/3 stop better high ISO performance.

As I often tell people: the 5D Mk III is better than the Mk II in EVERY way...except IQ.

There is a problem when the cheapest DSLR Nikon makes has more dynamic range than the $3500 Mk III...


----------



## Caps18 (Dec 14, 2012)

I'll save up for a 50mm f/1.2 IS... 

Hopefully the 50mm f/1.4 has internal focus too. Maybe the newer lenses do. I'm not an expert of the f/1.4.


----------



## EOBeav (Dec 14, 2012)

Caps18 said:


> I'll save up for a 50mm f/1.2 IS...



You'll be saving up for awhile. The current 50L doesn't have IS.


----------



## rj79in (Dec 15, 2012)

I'd buy the new lens if it locked focus properly. I don't particularly care about IS (not at 50mm anyway), but it would be great if they could improve the AF with the damn thing. 

My current 50mm 1.4 has driven me crazy with the AF on the 7D. On the 5DM3 its much better but it COULD be so much better. No point taking portraits with the eyes blurred and the nose tack sharp


----------



## switters (Dec 17, 2012)

Anyone care to hazard a guess when this theoretical lens might be announced? Photokina? Later?


----------



## CharlieB (Dec 26, 2012)

Jonesing for the 50/1.2.... but if a 50/1.4 with IS comes along, I'd get it in a NY second.


----------

