# A Canon 50mm f/1.2L Replacement [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 3, 2015)

```
<p>A new <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/03/canon-ef-50mm-f1-8-stm-coming-next-month-cr1/" target="_blank">Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM is expected sometime in April</a>, although the exact date isn’t known. I suspect it could show up after the new Rebels begin shipping.</p>
<p>We have received two mentions over the last few weeks about a replacement for the EF 50mm f/1.2L. We’re told the latest design of the 50L is slightly smaller, and a bit heavier. The front element is bigger than the current version, and that the focus shift issue will be gone thanks to a floating element.</p>
<p>We think the next L prime from Canon will be a replacement of the EF 35mm f/1.4L, and that a 50L replacement will be in the distant future, likely 2016 at the earliest.</p>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> We think the next L prime from Canon will be a replacement of the EF 35mm f/1.4L...



I hope so.


----------



## infared (Apr 3, 2015)

I bet this lens is $2200 and not as good as the Sigma Art. :
We shall see.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 3, 2015)

Lets hope the EF50mm f1.8 STM lens gets a metal mount like the EF40mm f2.8 STM. Aside from DOF as sensors become more sensitive the need for f1.2 become less relevant and the focus should be on an L version of the f1.4.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 3, 2015)

This lens will no doubt sell a ton anyway, but if it is a significant upgrade over the nifty fifty it could be interesting. I've owned the shorty forty since it came out, and while I rarely use it, I probably will never get rid of it, either. I sometimes do take it in a pocket when I go out with long glass...just in case. 

Also, this new lens, like the 40STM, will probably do very nice double duty on the EOS M system.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2015)

I am *not* going to rant that we need the non-L EF 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM more than this.
I am *not* going to rant that we need the non-L EF 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM more than this.
I am *not* going to rant that we need the non-L EF 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM more than this.
I am *not* going to rant that we need the non-L EF 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM more than this.
I am *not* going to rant that we need the non-L EF 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM more than this.

...annnnnnnnnnnd _100_. Phew. My fingers were getting tired.

- A


----------



## grainier (Apr 3, 2015)

[quote author=Canon Rumors]STM[/quote]

Jeez, what does it take to make a 50 with proper USM?


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2015)

grainier said:


> [quote author=Canon Rumors]STM



Jeez, what does it take to make a 50 with proper USM?
[/quote]

It's going to happen, but it will be with the 50 that I have already consumed all of my rant-love for in this thread. 

- A


----------



## K (Apr 3, 2015)

I doubt this one. The 50 1.2 is a sought after lens. However, Canon does tend to listen to and react to the professional market much more. After all, these are the people buying all of Canon's highest end gear. But looking at things practically, it doesn't seem to warrant any update at least in the near future.

However, a 50mm 1.4 USM that is actually sharp would be very welcome. From the 50mm 1.8 to the 50mm 1.2, there is nothing. The current 1.4 gets a lot of bad press on the internet for quite a while. Most reviewers straight out say to pass on it and get the 1.8 instead.

Reason would indicate that Canon should not forfeit this market segment and address the weakness of their very old 1.4.

Either that, or make the 1.8 better to where there's no point in having anything between the 1.8 and 1.2. 


A new 35mm L would be very welcome.


----------



## Ruined (Apr 3, 2015)

IMO the 85L II needs an update more than the 50mm f/1.2L.

The 50L may require some skill to master, but at least it does not have the mechanical clunkiness, reliability issues, and slow focus of the 85L II. Granted the 85L II output is stunning, but I think they need to revisit the design so it is not so susceptible to damage and also focuses faster.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2015)

infared said:


> I bet this lens is $2200 and not as good as the Sigma Art. :
> We shall see.



This, of course, gets to what is 'as good as'. Let me start by saying that I am not either side of the fence on 50L vs. 50 Art -- they are different lenses for different people. I actually want neither of them (I want the non-L IS refresh of the 50 f/1.4).

From a sharpness perspective -- which is always the first thing we look at -- it's not particularly close. The 50 Art is a stellar instrument, nearly Zeiss Otus good.

Yet some other folks rave about the draw/bokeh/magic of the 50L. This usually starts a fight on these forums as 'magic' is not quantifiable, what is good/bad bokeh is subjective, and some people really want numbers.

And I constantly harp on features and non IQ issues: IS, size/weight, ergonomics, build quality, focus speed, focus reliability, etc.

I'm not sticking up for the 50L or it's nutty price tag -- far from it. I'm just saying there is a lot more to a lens than the images it can theoretically capture, otherwise we'd all be shooting MF Zeiss glass. 

So I truly believe 'the best 50' does not exist. The best 50 *for each of us* _does_. Which one that is depends on what's important to you.

- A


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 3, 2015)

Ruined said:


> IMO the 85L II needs an update more than the 50mm f/1.2L.
> The 50L may require some skill to master, but at least it does not have the mechanical clunkiness, reliability issues, and slow focus of the 85L II. Granted the 85L II output is stunning, but I think they need to revisit the design so it is not so susceptible to damage and also focuses faster.


I Disagree.
Canon 85L ii works great for any stationary object. But Canon 50L was beaten by Sigma Art, and will probably be beaten by the new 50mm STM (in the same aperture diaphragm).


----------



## sanj (Apr 3, 2015)

K said:


> I doubt this one. The 50 1.2 is a sought after lens. However, Canon does tend to listen to and react to the professional market much more. After all, these are the people buying all of Canon's highest end gear. But looking at things practically, it doesn't seem to warrant any update at least in the near future.
> 
> However, a 50mm 1.4 USM that is actually sharp would be very welcome. From the 50mm 1.8 to the 50mm 1.2, there is nothing. The current 1.4 gets a lot of bad press on the internet for quite a while. Most reviewers straight out say to pass on it and get the 1.8 instead.
> 
> ...



Ahm.


----------



## infared (Apr 3, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > I bet this lens is $2200 and not as good as the Sigma Art. :
> ...



Well said...I love my 50mm Art...I have my 85mm L II when I REALLY want to get all creamy! LOL!....I think the lens that everyone would like to see would be an decently built f/1.4 IS. One that is reasonably priced. They would sell a ton of them for years. Right? Not my thing...but I get that ...why doesn't Canon??????


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2015)

infared said:


> Well said...I love my 50mm Art...I have my 85mm L II when I REALLY want to get all creamy! LOL!....I think the lens that everyone would like to see would be an decently built f/1.4 IS. One that is reasonably priced. They would sell a ton of them for years. Right? Not my thing...but I get that ...why doesn't Canon??????



Again, you won't get an argument from me. I've been saying what's in the attached pic for some time.

I just want a sharp, great focusing 50 prime that fits in roughly the same housing as the 35 f/2 IS USM. I want a competent little 50. I don't need a pickle jar with record-breaking resolution or a specialist arty lens that can't resolve in the corners. 

Honestly, I'd plunk $500 down right now for an existing EF 50 f/1.4 with proper/real/fast/consistent ring-USM focusing and internal focusing (no more extending the front element to focus). That's all I need. The IS is gravy.

- A


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 3, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Well said...I love my 50mm Art...I have my 85mm L II when I REALLY want to get all creamy! LOL!....I think the lens that everyone would like to see would be an decently built f/1.4 IS. One that is reasonably priced. They would sell a ton of them for years. Right? Not my thing...but I get that ...why doesn't Canon??????
> ...


Could not have said it better. We want nay we need an EF50 f1.4 IS USM lens period thats sharp across the frame and has minimum lateral & axial chromatic aberration.


----------



## sulla (Apr 3, 2015)

Oh I'm all in for a premium IQ, reliable AF 50mm with at least 1.4, red ring or not. Just love the look of 50mm.


----------



## Ruined (Apr 4, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Ruined said:
> 
> 
> > IMO the 85L II needs an update more than the 50mm f/1.2L.
> ...



Canon 85L II is quoted by Lens Rentals as one of the lenses most frequently requiring repairs. I can't imagine how that is a good thing regardless of how good the output is.

Also, the Sigma 50 Art seems to have severe AF issues - I recall the owners thread here the people who had one that autofocused properly were in the minority. The Sigma also has a slower aperture and thus less DOF isolation. Finally, sharpness is not the only criteria to judge a lens with; if it were, the Canon 24-70 II wins everything!


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 4, 2015)

Ruined said:


> Also, the Sigma 50 Art seems to have severe AF issues - I recall the owners thread here the people who had one that autofocused properly were in the minority.



I've heard _some_ of this. Besides various internet forum anecdotes :, the example I cite is Bryan Carnathan's finding on the 50 Art:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-50mm-f-1.4-DG-HSM-Art-Lens.aspx

Go halfway down through his review and find the Butterfly graphic. Then read the three paragraphs above it, and _then mouseover the 1-10 under the graphic and watch what happens_. That -- that single example -- is likely to be considered somewhat troubling to a person that is considering picking up their first 3rd party lens.

*But one-off examples are not a trend.* This is something we need more data on. I'd love to see a large equipment house (say Roger Cicala at LR) play the AF game with a large population of different camera bodies. We may find out Sigmas work best with later camera bodies, more recent camera body firmware, etc. or we might find out it excels with _certain_ AF points but not all of them.

I'm not trying to protect Sigma here so much as bound where any AF problems might be. Hate to see a company that is offering such IQ per dollar get blacklisted unnecessarily.

- A


----------



## JonAustin (Apr 4, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> I just want a sharp, great focusing 50 prime that fits in roughly the same housing as the 35 f/2 IS USM. I want a competent little 50. I don't need a pickle jar with record-breaking resolution or a specialist arty lens that can't resolve in the corners.
> 
> Honestly, I'd plunk $500 down right now for an existing EF 50 f/1.4 with proper/real/fast/consistent ring-USM focusing and internal focusing (no more extending the front element to focus). That's all I need. The IS is gravy.
> 
> - A



I'm almost reluctant to chime in here, since ahsanford "owns" this thread, but I could not agree more with his above post, except that for me, IS would be part of the meat, and not gravy. +100. My recently acquired 35/2 IS needs some company in the 50mm department, but looks down his nose at my humble 50/2.5 CM ...


----------



## cayenne (Apr 4, 2015)

infared said:


> I bet this lens is $2200 and not as good as the Sigma Art. :
> We shall see.



It may not be as sharp..but the Sigma Art even now, is *significantly slower* than the current 50L, much more so than the 1.2 to 1.4 would suggest.

The coatings on the Sigma Art 50, seem to drop it down to a total closer to a whole stop than you'd think.

I did them side by side and this seems to be the case.

I shoot a lot of video with the 5D3, and often in dark, very dim bars, and the current 50L really shines here. If I were ONLY shooting stills, I might go for the Sigma Art, as that it is sharper, but I need that extra low light. And if the new 50L fixes the back focus and gets a bit sharper....I'd have to go for it.

I just hope the new one can keep most of the creamy bokeh the current one has.

I just wish it would come out sooner. I've been close to pulling the trigger on the 50L, but guess I'll hold off and wait a bit, at least till we can find out a more accurate time for release.

Just my $0.02,

cayenne


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 4, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> ...
> EF 50mm f/1.8 STM is expected sometime in April
> ...
> a 50L replacement will be in the distant future, likely 2016 at the earliest.


Oh no!!! 2016??? At the earliest??? 
CR, I really pray you're wrong. Because this would mean, that the 50 1.whatever USM will be even later   
Maybe it's really time to consider the 50 A...


----------



## rowlandw (Apr 4, 2015)

How'bout an update of the venerable 50 f/1.4 starting with making the AF less fragile?


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Apr 4, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Ruined said:
> 
> 
> > Also, the Sigma 50 Art seems to have severe AF issues - I recall the owners thread here the people who had one that autofocused properly were in the minority.
> ...



I hate to add that I also documented some AF inconsistencies in my review of the 50A, too. http://dustinabbott.net/2014/11/sigma-50mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-art-review/

My issues were intermittent, which is part of the whole issue with Sigma's lenses. It is AF reliability that seems to be the issue. Is this issue magnified by perception? Probably, but I've also yet to use a Sigma lenses where I didn't notice it, going back to the 50-150mm (first Sigma I used) for crop (a lens I liked a lot, otherwise).


----------



## Haydn1971 (Apr 4, 2015)

To echo the above, I got rid of my 50 f1.4 in a lens rationalisation about 18 months back, but would love to get another, I'm fudging at the moment with my (lovely, but toy like) Lensbaby Sweet 35 as an artistic alternative, but would love a sharp 50 f1.4 built like the 35 f2.0, I can live without the IS, but hey, IS would be nice too... I fear we are going to end up with a 50mm f1.8 IS like the 35 f2.0 and nothing else, the 40/24mm pancakes have become in my view the new nifty fifty, a view that "could" be shared by Canon, leaving the really fast glass f1.2-1.4 in the expensive L range.


----------



## switters (Apr 4, 2015)

Jeez. If anyone from Canon reads any of these forums, you'd think they'd take note of the overwhelming demand for an updated 50/1.4? Seems to me they'd sell a boatload of them. But I guess that's not what Canon wants if they're losing potential 50L II customers to an excellent 50/1.4.


----------



## lintoni (Apr 4, 2015)

switters said:


> Jeez. If anyone from Canon reads any of these forums, you'd think they'd take note of the overwhelming demand for an updated 50/1.4? Seems to me they'd sell a boatload of them. But I guess that's not what Canon wants if they're losing potential 50L II customers to an excellent 50/1.4.


Yeah, but they're losing customers for an excellent 50 f/1.4 to Sigma...


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 5, 2015)

switters said:


> Jeez. If anyone from Canon reads any of these forums, you'd think they'd take note of the overwhelming demand for an updated 50/1.4? Seems to me they'd sell a boatload of them. But I guess that's not what Canon wants if they're losing potential 50L II customers to an excellent 50/1.4.



I see the non-L 50 1.4 as a 'do everything really well' lens and see the 50L as 'do 2-3 things _spectacularly_ well' sort of lens. As much as people harp on sharpness (and goodness knows, I'm one of them), the draw/bokeh of the 50L is pretty damn great. I see the 50L -- perhaps unfairly -- as a lens you only shoot from 1.2 to 2.8 or you're wasting your money.

So I just don't see a non-L 50 1.4 stealing L dollars. There's a vast, vast gulf in price between the nifty fifty 1.8 and the 50L, and that's a nice price point for a solid lens to come in. Canon won't leave that money on the table much longer, I think.

- A


----------



## grainier (Apr 5, 2015)

switters said:


> Jeez. If anyone from Canon reads any of these forums, you'd think they'd take note of the overwhelming demand for an updated 50/1.4? Seems to me they'd sell a boatload of them. But I guess that's not what Canon wants if they're losing potential 50L II customers to an excellent 50/1.4.


Well, they didn't blink an eye when the original Sigma 50/1.4 came out, and that, for all the talk about AF issues, is a better lens.


----------



## The Bad Duck (Apr 5, 2015)

looking forward to the upgrade of the 50 L. But as many, I am more interested in an updated 50 non-L in the same manner as the 35/2 IS. F/1.4 to 2 would make me happy, but more importantly reliable AF.


----------



## Maiaibing (Apr 5, 2015)

cayenne said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > I bet this lens is $2200 and not as good as the Sigma Art. :
> ...



"Significantly slower" is of course a relative term, so I'm not sure what you mean (I trust you are not talking autofocus speed here). Apart from that I would like to see what you build your statement on. 

No matter what the 50 ART is a fast lens with a huge light gathering potential. Some people may need f/1.2 instead of f/1.4 for the shutter speed advantage. But it would be this difference that would count. Not any possible variation from the Sigma moving above f/1.4.

DXO thus has light transmission @1.7 for the Sigma and @1.4 for the Canon 50L on the 5DIII. That's pretty close (actually a little less) to the one stop difference between the two you pay for at the counter. 

For all the criticism DXO get for their tests this is one number that really works - and counts.


----------



## sulla (Apr 6, 2015)

Yea, the Sigma with its many more lenses clearly has a disadvantage in this category.


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 24, 2015)

So where's my canon 50mm f1.2 II ? Hurry up.


----------

