# IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 27, 2013)

```
<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/2013/11/is-versions-in-50mm-85mm-135mm-coming-cr1/"></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/2013/11/is-versions-in-50mm-85mm-135mm-coming-cr1/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>More Non L IS Lenses

</strong>We’ve been told that Canon will announce at least 2 new non-L IS prime lenses in 2014. The two you can bank on are a 50mm f/1.8 IS and an 85mm f/2 IS (the source wasn’t totally sure on the aperture, but did say it would be slower than the current f/1.8). Both lenses should be announced some time in the first half of 2014. The replacement to the 50 was originally slated to come in 2013, but fell into the status of delayed like a bunch of other Canon lenses.</p>
<p>The other lens that was mentioned was an IS version of a 135mm lens. It was unknown whether or not the lens would be an “L”.</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## cellomaster27 (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Yessssss!!! Question is when in 2014 and how much.. Haha


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Count me in for 135L IS 

Then I saw it's CR1 -- :-[


----------



## dkyeah (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Finally a 50mm with a decent AF system?
The 135mm f/2 L IS would be lovely for weddings!


----------



## Ruined (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I will buy all of these, I was very satisfied with the 24mm f/2.8 IS, 28mm f/2.8 IS, 35mm F/2 IS. Of those three, I kept the first and the third for their focal lengths. The 28mm did not offer the drama of 24mm nor the faster aperature of the 35mm, which is likely why its priced a bit cheaper.

The image stabilization plus fast apertures is a great combo... My lens strategy lately has been basically to buy these new IS primes and only go to L glass for zooms and the 100 macro. I don't think the value add is there with the current L lineup in primes, as these new IS lenses are so darn good and in some aspects better for 1/3 the price. Yeah, you might not get the super slim DOF of the 85mm f/1.2 compared to 1.8/2, but how often is such a slim DOF really used anyway unless you have some special scenario? Instead, you get IS, faster focusing, less weight, smaller size which I think are more practical in general.


----------



## John (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

count me in for the 85 and 135 with IS. that would be awesome. if have both those lenses and like them a lot. IS will only make them better.


----------



## mackguyver (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Dylan777 said:


> Count me in for 135L IS


+1


----------



## Twostones (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I would buy these too. I hope Canon found it in their, and our, best interest to put a rubber O-ring seal on the mount. It would be a simple thing to do and would add to the popularity of the brand name. Why Canon overlooks this simple modification on all lenses puzzles me.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*


Ah, a brand new "non-L IS refresh" rumor! This is so new! 

The 50 and 85 refreshes with IS like the 24/28/35 are hammerlock certainties occur. The questions, as always, are (a) when will we see it, and (b) will they choose to go with slower apertures than the originals?

But get fired up for these. I have the 28 IS and it is fantastic. Expect:


Fast / accurate / modern USM AF (the current 50 F/1.4 lacks this and is slow to hunt for focus)
Sharpness on par with the corresponding L at same apertures (hell the 50 F/1.4 beats the F/1.2L already after F/2.8 or so)
Internal focusing
Relatively small, lightweight -- for me, this is vital.
100L quality build (minus weathersealing)

...and _hopefully_, Canon will learn from its overpricing of the 24/28/35 IS lenses and just come to market with the right price. I previously said I would gladly pay $799 for all of the above in a 50mm lens. But the market performance of the 24/28/35 puts these lenses in the $500-600 range.

The 85 update is not truly _needed_ unless you are a completist and believe 'the whole line needs to be refreshed', all the lenses need to look the same in a brochure, etc. (i.e. you are in Canon's marketing group or you are a lens collector.) The current 85mm F/1.8 is quite possibly the greatest bang for buck lens that Canon currently sells. It's a stellar lens for the dollar, even 15-20 years after its release: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/419-canon_85_18_5d?start=1

The 135L is a special lens that I don't think will be lumped in with a 50/85 refresh (keep in mind that there also is a 100m F/2 USM that no one talks about, also in need of a refresh). I see the 135L being a very serious piece of kit that will get its own fanfare when it is released.

Canon, give me my new 50! (Or Sigma will beat you to it. They will 'Art' the crap out of this focal length, and soon.)

- A


----------



## thedman (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

If the "Year of the Lens" turns out to be just slapping IS on some existing lenses, I will be highly disappointed.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Twostones said:


> I would buy these too. I hope Canon found it in their, and our, best interest to put a rubber O-ring seal on the mount. It would be a simple thing to do and would add to the popularity of the brand name. Why Canon overlooks this simple modification on all lenses puzzles me.



If weathersealing was as simple as this, all the third party lens makers would be doing it.

The rubber gasket is a bit of a placebo for weathersealing. It's important, but it's only a portion of the sealing a lens needs to be protected from dust, sand and water. A good primer on that is here: http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/02/14/how-a-lens-becomes-weather-sealed/

A guy was selling a kit to gasket-ize any EF lens for something modest, like $25, on Kickstarter, but it seems to have died despite hitting its target: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/77243737/dust-donuttm-add-a-weather-seal-to-the-mount-of-an/

I'm off-topic, sorry, but I thought I'd pass that on.

- A


----------



## traveller (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> The 135L is a special lens that I don't think will be lumped in with a 50/85 refresh (keep in mind that there also is a 100m F/2 USM that no one talks about, also in need of a refresh). I see the 135L being a very serious piece of kit that will get its own fanfare when it is released.



The 135mm f/2L is indeed a cut above the non-L primes mentioned; despite the lower price (bonus!), I would place it into a group with the 50mm and the 85mm f/1.2L. What might be interesting would be a lightweight and lower cost 135mm f/2.8 IS. Judging by the price of the 24mm, 28mm and 35mm refreshes, it might hardly be worth it given the current price of the 135 f/2L, unless IS was _really_ important to your shooting (video?).


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



thedman said:


> If the "Year of the Lens" turns out to be just slapping IS on some existing lenses, I will be highly disappointed.



Again, see my last post. These will be _night and day_ better lenses than their predecessors. It might not be the 14-24L, 35L II, or 100-400L II that everyone screams about in these forums, but these lenses are a killer option, and in the 50mm length in particular, address a comically unmet need for photographers. 

The 50 prime is perhaps the most embarrassing hole in Canon's lens lineup. I am an amateur, but I see many pros with the old 50 F/1.4 on their rigs because the F/1.2 is a specialist arty / wide aperture tool. The L is great at what it does, but overall sharpness and accurate focusing are lacking.

Consider why such guys are using a functional but dated & limited design (from 20 years ago!): there _still_ does not exist a 50mm lens that can do all of these things:


Fast, accurate AF
F/2 or faster
Internal focusing
IS
A modern, well-built lens -- no major quality issues or wild copy to copy variation
At least as sharp as the current 50mm F/1.4

*That's* the lens I'm waiting for, and I'm certainly not alone. I think it's coming in the next year in this non-L IS refresh.

- A


----------



## Drizzt321 (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

*sigh* Ok, new lenses, probably better optical IQ than their previous, with IS (yay?), more expensive and a lot slower. Yes, I said it, f/2.8 is slow. For a good quality prime that is. For a zoom, yea, that's pretty fast. But for the 85mm going from f/1.8 to f/2.8? Ugh. IS is great and all, but it does NOT help when you need faster shutter speeds to freeze subject motion in low light when you are already up to ISO 3200+. 

Although I'd definitely take a 135L f/2 IS. That'd be rockin', even if all it is is the exact same optical quality with IS, and another $500 on top of the current retail. Improve the optical quality, and bonus!


----------



## drjlo (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

50 f/1.4 IS would be the thing that (again) separates Canon from the rest. At least I hope the rumored 50 f/1.8 IS is more than decently sharp wide open. 

85L IS or 135L IS, yes those would be automatic buys 8)


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



drjlo said:


> 50 f/1.4 IS would be the thing that (again) separates Canon from the rest. At least I hope the rumored 50 f/1.8 IS is more than decently sharp wide open.
> 
> 85L IS or 135L IS, yes those would be automatic buys 8)



I highly doubt they are talking about the 85_*L*_ with this rumor. I think they are referring the venerable 85 F/1.8, which is almost a budget version of the 135L -- sharp, cheap, and reliable. But it's old and would benefit from all the bells and whistles the other non-L primes have gotten in recent refreshes.

- A


----------



## traveller (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Drizzt321 said:


> *sigh* Ok, new lenses, probably better optical IQ than their previous, with IS (yay?), more expensive and a lot slower. Yes, I said it, f/2.8 is slow. For a good quality prime that is. For a zoom, yea, that's pretty fast. But for the 85mm going from f/1.8 to f/2.8? Ugh.



The rumour states f/2 not f/2.8: granted that's 1/3rd stop slower, but not as bad as you're suggesting. I'd take 1/3rd stop slower maximum aperture if it meant higher resolution at f/2 and lower longitudinal CAs than the current 85mm f/1.8.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> ...and _hopefully_, Canon will learn from its overpricing of the 24/28/35 IS lenses and just come to market with the right price. I previously said I would gladly pay $799 for all of the above in a 50mm lens. But the market performance of the 24/28/35 puts these lenses in the $500-600 range.



+1



ahsanford said:


> The 135L is a special lens that I don't think will be lumped in with a 50/85 refresh (keep in mind that there also is a 100m F/2 USM that no one talks about, also in need of a refresh). I see the 135L being a very serious piece of kit that will get its own fanfare when it is released.
> 
> Canon, give me my new 50!



+1



traveller said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > *sigh* Ok, new lenses, probably better optical IQ than their previous, with IS (yay?), more expensive and a lot slower. Yes, I said it, f/2.8 is slow. For a good quality prime that is. For a zoom, yea, that's pretty fast. But for the 85mm going from f/1.8 to f/2.8? Ugh.
> ...



+1


----------



## Sella174 (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Non-IS versions of all these lenses would be very nice.

And where is the replacement for the Compact-Macro, huh?


----------



## hammar (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

An updated budget 85 would definitely be interesting. I would rather see a 85 f/1.8 or f/1.4 than one with IS added, simply because I would use it more or less exclusively for daylight/well lit portraits.

Right now, my kit is missing a good lens for portraits, 24-70II gives me good results, but f/2.8 does not really provide the shallow DOF I would like on some occasions.


----------



## JonAustin (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> The 85 update is not truly _needed_ unless you are a completist and believe 'the whole line needs to be refreshed', all the lenses need to look the same in a brochure, etc. (i.e. you are in Canon's marketing group or you are a lens collector.) The current 85mm F/1.8 is quite possibly the greatest bang for buck lens that Canon currently sells. It's a stellar lens for the dollar, even 15-20 years after its release: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/419-canon_85_18_5d?start=1



I owned an 85/1.8 for several years, and although I liked it very much, I ultimately replaced it with the 100/2.8L IS macro. I used the 85/1.8 primarily for in-studio portraits, where I only used it wider than f/2.8 experimentally. I liked the quality of images from the 100 IS macro better.

Whether or not the 85/1.8 _needs_ an update is for us mere photographers a fairly subjective question. (For Canon, of course, it's a business revenue / profit issue.) FWIW, my minor irritation with the 85/1.8 was its slight CA in some instances, and my major gripe was its clip-on hood, which I found cumbersome to attach correctly; when I didn't get it on right, it would pop off easily.

If I were Canon updating the 85/1.8, I would bring its optics up to current non-L prime standards, add IS (dropping max aperture to f/2.0 would be a small price) and give it a bayonet hood.

I'm looking forward to the release of an updated Canon non-L 50mm with true ring USM, with or without IS.


----------



## KyleSTL (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



thedman said:


> If the "Year of the Lens" turns out to be just slapping IS on some existing lenses, I will be highly disappointed.


Um, have you seen the 35mm IS versus the old 35mm f/2?: TDP Link
Or versus even the 35mm f/1.4L (at f/2): TDP Link

You can't tell me that lens is not impressive considering its size and price. I know its not nearly as impressive as the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art, but it's also much smaller and costs half as much. On paper it is the most hand-holdable lens ever made (using the 1/FL rule of thumb, a sharp picture could be had at 1/2 to 1/2.5 sec).

The 24mm IS and 28mm IS are just as good, and I, for one, welcome our new higher-quality non-L lenses. I think I'll probably pick up the 50mm when it is released. I wasn't happy with the 50mm 1.8II or 50mm 1.8 I, and I think the focusing definitely needs improvement on the 50mm 1.4 (especially when used with a focusing system like the 5D Mark I).


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



JonAustin said:


> FWIW, my minor irritation with the 85/1.8 was its slight CA in some instances, and my major gripe was its clip-on hood, which I found cumbersome to attach correctly; when I didn't get it on right, it would pop off easily.
> 
> If I were Canon updating the 85/1.8, I would bring its optics up to current non-L prime standards, add IS (dropping max aperture to f/2.0 would be a small price) and give it a bayonet hood.



I forgot about the hoods. Great comment!

I have the 50 F/1.4 and the hood attachment is terrible -- you can cross thread it, you can miss the ring and have it slide up the lens barrel, reversing it is a pain, it is poorly secured -- you name it.

If the 24/28/35 IS refreshes are any indication, the new hood for the 50 / 85 will be stellar. I have the 28 IS hood and it's as solid as any L hood I own (save for the war-worthy 70-200 F/2.8 IS II). It's secure, fast, and well built. In fact, on the 28mm length, I just leave it on the lens full-time because I don't have to fiddle with a CPL. (I hate wide angle CPL 'pseudo-vignetting' you get from such a wide variation in polarization, so under 35mm length I don't use CPLs.)

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



KyleSTL said:


> thedman said:
> 
> 
> > If the "Year of the Lens" turns out to be just slapping IS on some existing lenses, I will be highly disappointed.
> ...


+100. 

I've been tooting the horn of these non-L refreshes for some time. In all three cases, the non-L offers as good AF as the L, as good IQ as the L + IS + lighter + cheaper. You only lose a little speed and weather-sealing (in the case of the 24mm F/1.4L).

I'm not calling them L lenses, but calling them the 'cheaper lens option' is entirely missing the point. These lenses are stellar. Since I rarely want or need to shoot at F/1.4, I see no need to pony up for the Ls in these lengths.

- A


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



cellomaster27 said:


> Yessssss!!! Question is when in 2014 and how much.. Haha


31st of December, 11.50 pm HAST, maybe even later


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Canon Rumors said:


> The two you can bank on are a 50mm f/1.8 IS and an 85mm f/2 IS (the source wasn’t totally sure on the aperture, but did say it would be slower than the current f/1.8).


I would love to see a 85 mm with better optical performance even without IS.
But it would be hard for me to have an aperture much slower than f/1.8.
f/2 maybe... but if it was f/2.8 I have zero interest.

A 50mm f/1.8 IS might be interesting if it really outperforms the current f/1.4 in built and optical quality.
(for a decent price)


----------



## RobertP (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

135 IS yes please.
I can see me wandering around with one of these on my camera and a 2x converter in my pocket.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



traveller said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > *sigh* Ok, new lenses, probably better optical IQ than their previous, with IS (yay?), more expensive and a lot slower. Yes, I said it, f/2.8 is slow. For a good quality prime that is. For a zoom, yea, that's pretty fast. But for the 85mm going from f/1.8 to f/2.8? Ugh.
> ...



Oh. Reading fail. f/2 isn't too bad, as long as they tweak the optics to improve it some for wide-open. And keep the price reasonably affordable. And by that, I mean $600-700. Much more and it's starting to get into some L-sale/refurb prices. Granted, maybe not on the 85L, but still.


----------



## deleteme (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



dkyeah said:


> Finally a 50mm with a decent AF system?
> The 135mm f/2 L IS would be lovely for weddings!



I agree but if their recent offerings are any guide it would be an f2.8.


----------



## mwh1964 (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

If the 35 f2 is represents what to be expected, then there is no doubt that we all are in for a treat.


----------



## Twostones (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> Twostones said:
> 
> 
> > I would buy these too. I hope Canon found it in their, and our, best interest to put a rubber O-ring seal on the mount. It would be a simple thing to do and would add to the popularity of the brand name. Why Canon overlooks this simple modification on all lenses puzzles me.
> ...


 When we pay for a weather sealed body it doesn't make sense to have the lens attachment unsealed. There should be a rubber seal on the mount of all lenses or a rubber seal on the body mount or you really don't have a weather sealed body. The reason a third party has not made a retro fit sealed mount available is the patented EF mount is owned by Canon. You won't see it happen if Canon doesn't do it.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Just my two cents, but for me, I'd find an update of the 200 mm f2.8 prime to include IS much more interesting than any of these. Unlikely, I suppose, because it might torpedo sales of the 70-200 zooms.


----------



## Twostones (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



unfocused said:


> Just my two cents, but for me, I'd find an update of the 200 mm f2.8 prime to include IS much more interesting than any of these. Unlikely, I suppose, because it might torpedo sales of the 70-200 zooms.


+1


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

If there is a 135mm f/1.8 IS...

Shut up and take my money canon.


----------



## Vossie (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I would fancy a very sharp 50 1.4 with the same IQ as the recently announced Nikon 58mm. If it is sharper than the 24-70 ii and offers 2-stops larger aperture with fast AF, i wpuld be willing to pay the same pricetag as the Nikon 58mm.


----------



## rbr (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

The 20mm f2.8 really needs an update. And while they're at it a 17 or 18 mm prime would be nice too. The 17 TSE is great, but it's bulky, doesn't take filters, lacks AF, and is very expensive. Canon needs something better than second rate zooms in that range.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Twostones said:


> When we pay for a weather sealed body it doesn't make sense to have the lens attachment unsealed. There should be a rubber seal on the mount of all lenses or a rubber seal on the body mount or you really don't have a weather sealed body. The reason a third party has not made a retro fit sealed mount available is the patented EF mount is owned by Canon. You won't see it happen if Canon doesn't do it.



As I understand it, most lenses advertised as weathersealed by Canon are fully so (i.e. including that gasket you refer to) with the exception of the front element. A filter is needed for the sealing to be 'complete'.

One exception I am aware of is a longer lens like the 300 F/4 or the 100-400 (I forget which) that is weathersealed _except for the gasket on the lens mount_. They just didn't include it for some reason.

The point I was making previously is that a rubber gasket on the lens mount doesn't do much if all access points (switches, silding elements in the case of zooms or external focusers, etc.) aren't also weathersealed. That's why non-sealed lenses from Canon don't bother with a rubber gasket, I would assume -- it would be like having an _almost_ water-tight hull of a boat.

- A


----------



## Stone (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I know I'm in the minority, but I find the 50mm range boring, I much prefer 35mm so no interest there. I'm very happy with my 85 1.8, adding IS won't do a thing to freeze motion, it might allow you to go up a click in ISO but then I consider it a wash. If a 135L f2 IS is released, THAT would get my attention and my money.


----------



## EverydayGetaway (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Normalnorm said:


> dkyeah said:
> 
> 
> > Finally a 50mm with a decent AF system?
> ...



How do you figure that? There recent offerings have been the same apertures as the lenses they replaced...

-24/2.8 replaced by 24/2.8 IS
-28/2.8 replaced by 28/2.8 IS
-35/2 replaced by 35/2 IS

Get the picture? I think Canon's original plan was to just start updating all the old Primes that lacked USM focusing and then they realized that adding IS was a good idea so they've stuck with it and now it appears they're going to carry it over into the lenses which already had USM (which is great!). I don't get why people refuse to accept new technology. If you don't want IS, turn it off...

If the rumor is right then it makes perfect sense that the new 50mm will be a 1.8, which is fine. People claiming they NEED f/1.4 are usually amateurs with a "bokeh" fetish. There's not a whole lot of DOF difference between f/1.4-f/1.8. When shooting on FF you'll need to stop to f/2-2.8 for most subjects anyway, unless you really just want one eye or one tiny sliver of your subject in focus... the internet is ridiculous. I'd buy a 50/1.8 IS with optical quality matching the other new IS primes in a heart beat, I'd even be fine with it being an f/2 lens, possibly even a f/2.8 (which it won't be).


----------



## Drizzt321 (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Stone said:


> I'm very happy with my 85 1.8, adding IS won't do a thing to freeze motion, it might allow you to go up a click in ISO but then I consider it a wash. If a 135L f2 IS is released, THAT would get my attention and my money.



I was saying the same thing, but if the 85mm is improved optically a decent amount and only lose a 1/3 of a stop (f/1.8 -> f/2), that's not too bad of a tradeoff. Unless they jack the price up to $1k. Then they should just go ahead and give it an L treatment, even if it's not going to be the same as the 85mm f/1.2.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*


I find it interesting that fans of great lenses like the 135 F/2L salivate over the chance to see something new added to it (perhaps IS, perhaps F/1.8, etc.), but a lot of folks are ho hum about the 50 F/1.4 just getting modernized and roundly improved on many fronts.

I see things the opposite way. What if this 50 update is the great sharpness and color tool for the 50mm crowd that the 135 F/2L has been for so long? I see so much opportunity for the 50 prime length to improve, while the 135 F/2L, from all I've heard on this forum (it's adored like the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II), just logically isn't going to get that much better with a next generation offering -- it's already excellent, right?

- A


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

It's shameful lack of a Canon 50mm with AF fast and accurate, with good sharpness when wide open. If you have the image quality and robust construction of the new Image Stabilizer 24/28/35, will be a success. : Unless it costs 4 times more than current models. :-X


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ajfotofilmagem said:


> It's shameful lack of a Canon 50mm with AF fast and accurate, with good sharpness when wide open. If you have the image quality and robust construction of the new Image Stabilizer 24/28/35, will be a success. : Unless it costs 4 times more than current models. :-X



It will be pricey for a while and then come down. Consider (a) the price performance of the three refreshes that came before, and (b) consider how densely packed with options the 50mm length is. 

Based on those trends, I'd say they'd open with $799 which would become $500-$600 in a year's time. I still think they will open as high as the prior refreshes because they know there are guys like me who really want that 8 to 9 out of 10 _at everything_ standard prime with IS. Again, many pros still use that 50 F/1.4 over the F/1.2L and would gladly pay good money for something that is better. Canon knows this and (for a short while) will command a high price.

- A


----------



## 9VIII (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



RLPhoto said:


> If there is a 135mm f/1.8 IS...
> 
> Shut up and take my money canon.



I was just looking at the Olympus 150F2, it's pretty much the same thing (and not cheap).

How much would you pay for a 135f1.8? I mean, if something like that did come out it very well could end up costing $3,000.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



9VIII said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > If there is a 135mm f/1.8 IS...
> ...



You can get away with that if you go all Zeiss Otus on a focal length that has never had an all-around spectacular lens (like 50mm primes!).

But very few folks would pay that much when the current 135mm F/2L is so damn good and so cheap at around $900-$1000. Folks won't pay +$2k for IS and a 1/3 of a stop faster if the resolution is the same as the old 135mm F/2L.

- A


----------



## Drizzt321 (Nov 27, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



If all they did to the 135L was to add IS, no way would I pay an additional $1K+ for that. I can understand the cost going up some, but I can't believe that the IS system would cost that much additional. $1400 or so at introduction? Maybe. Prices would probably come down to $1200-1300 after a year or two which is decent. If they tweaked the optics a bit and improved them somehow, maybe a touch higher for introduction. Honestly, while f/1.8 would be great, I'm not sure I'd need a 1/3 of a stop. If I was limited to ISO 800, sure, but with pretty good 3200 and often acceptable 6400, 1/3 of a stop is a bit less important IMHO.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



EverydayGetaway said:


> Normalnorm said:
> 
> 
> > dkyeah said:
> ...



It depends on what you shoot. Wedding photogs certainly NEED 1.4, and most of them swear by the 50mm 1.2 because it gives subject isolation even with focus close to infinity. Additionally, the quality of a 1.8 lens wide open is usually worse than a 1.4 lens stopped down to 1.8. However, if canon makes 1.8 tack sharp on this new 50mm I'd say they have a winner. Still, personally, I'm just dying for sharp 50mm 1.4. If sigma updates their 50 to the Art series it will most definitely outsell a slower, IS offering from Canon.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Drizzt321 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...



Sony A99 IS system + Zeiss 135mm F/1.8 combo exists already. I would pay the premium because A lens like that is meant to be expensive, Just like the 85LII. I would rather buy a 135mm F/1.8 IS than a 70-200L II for my uses.


----------



## verysimplejason (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

A 50mm f1.8 IS with fast accurate AF is what I'm dreaming for along with an 85mm f1.8 IS. Please Canon...


----------



## Proffarm (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Really? Will a 50 f1.8 IS REALLY be in the 500-600$ range?


----------



## Ruined (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

For those dogging these lenses because they are "the same lens with IS added for much more money," frankly that is BS. i.e. look at the difference in performance between the old and new 35mm:

35mm f/2 vs 35mm f/2 IS
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=122&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=824&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


----------



## Zv (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



RLPhoto said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



+1 RLP that's it exactly!! The current 135L is a freakin bargain! Look at the 35L it's priced at over $1300 maybe more and it has no IS or weather sealing yet it sells like hot cakes. If Canon put IS in a 135 and increased the aperture to 1.8 tell my why you sceptics think it wouldn't be worth $2k easy? Is the 135mm focal length special and must remain under a grand?? I think we have been spoiled by the price of this wonderful lens! The 85LII and just about every other L prime costs way more and people pay it without complaint!


----------



## Woody (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Can't wait for the 50 f/1.8 IS USM lens. ;D

And the 16-50 f/4L IS USM....


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

The 135mm f/2 IS will be a killer.... The current lens is still one of the best in Canon line-up and with AF and IS like the one in the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II is unbeatable.
The 50mm f/1.8 IS is very welcomed addition to improve AF, IQ and bokeh of current low-cost 50mm f/1.8 lens. 
In regards to the 85mm f/2 IS will be 1/3 stop slower than the current lens but with the aid of IS we'll be able to shot in low light at lower shuter speeds. I hope the AF with the addition of IS will be as fast as the current lens.


----------



## noncho (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I would love such lens... for M. 85/100 F2 IS would be small and beautiful.


----------



## CarlTN (Nov 28, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

An 85 f/2 IS would be the one of this group I would want, but if it's an "STM", and not even an L...what if it still costs $1k? If it's not an L, would it really be worth $1k? *Would it be worth over $1k* (seems likely it would be $1199 or something)?? If it's not going to autofocus as fast as a USM lens, and I wouldn't be using it for video very much...would it be worth the high price they're likely to ask, to me? Or do I not matter? Haha, don't answer that!


----------



## Ruined (Nov 29, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



CarlTN said:


> An 85 f/2 IS would be the one of this group I would want, but if it's an "STM", and not even an L...what if it still costs $1k? If it's not an L, would it really be worth $1k? *Would it be worth over $1k* (seems likely it would be $1199 or something)?? If it's not going to autofocus as fast as a USM lens, and I wouldn't be using it for video very much...would it be worth the high price they're likely to ask, to me? Or do I not matter? Haha, don't answer that!



It is unlikely it will be STM, as the 24 IS, 28 IS, and 35 IS were all Ring USM. To switch gears mid-stream would just be weird. Also, pricing will likely be similar to the aforementioned lenses, perhaps with some gouging at first


----------



## Solar Eagle (Nov 29, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

One point nobody mentions is that Canon's new lenses (24/28/35/40/24-70) have a TStop that matches their FStop, which is quite the achievement from what I have seen. How many other lenses offer that? I'm guessing the new 50mm IS will follow that trend; just as it will be sharp wide open, light/compact, and one of the best looking lenses around. 

People requiring more speed than what these new IS primes offer can get one of the GIANT alternatives at TWICE the weight. I for one can do without the extra 10oz in my hand. As to the expected pricing of the new 50mm, I would expect it to be similar the 35mm. The old cheapo 50mm was replaced by the 40mm as the new budget non-IS prime. 

I really don't see that there is anything to complain about with Canon's new primes. I think some people would rather just focus on what they can't have, rather than what they can. Those people will never have what they want, and will always be complaining about one thing or another. ;-)


----------



## Loren E (Nov 29, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

135mm F1.8L IS please! I'll take one along with a 16-50m F4L IS and a 7D mk II


----------



## ashmadux (Nov 30, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Maximilian said:


> I would love to see a 85 mm with better optical performance even without IS.



Id like to see this as well, and hopefully it doesn't lose that super duper Af in the process. Its gotta lost that horrible purple fringing...its very bad


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 30, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



CarlTN said:


> An 85 f/2 IS would be the one of this group I would want, but if it's an "STM", and not even an L...what if it still costs $1k? If it's not an L, would it really be worth $1k? *Would it be worth over $1k* (seems likely it would be $1199 or something)?? If it's not going to autofocus as fast as a USM lens, and I wouldn't be using it for video very much...would it be worth the high price they're likely to ask, to me? Or do I not matter? Haha, don't answer that!



To me, were I to very crudely ranking the focus systems, on a scale of 1-10:

8-10 = Ring USM (yes, some are blindingly fast, and others not so much)
6 = Non-ring USM (like in the current 50 F/1.4)
3 = STM
1 = no designation at all, the squeaky noisy AF of the 50 F/1.8, the kit 18-55, etc.

But keep in mind that I am a still shooter, and STM is crap for most of us unless we are doing all-the-time-in-the-world-to-shoot photography like in the corny Nikon Df teaser videos. STM is a slowly focusing system that is better suited _video_ AF for those that want/need it. I see STM as a nice little bonus for those who want to shoot video with AF on their Rebels, but it's not a best-in-class focusing system for still shooters at all.

This _single_ distinction is why I don't use the super sharp 40mm pancake -- even the crummy 50 F/1.4 'hunt for a while' non-ring USM AF is faster to target than the pancake.

So I would bet the farm that any EF mount fast primes (L or non-L) will be proper ring USM... just like the other (24/28/35) refreshes.

- A


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 30, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Ruined said:


> For those dogging these lenses because they are "the same lens with IS added for much more money," frankly that is BS. i.e. look at the difference in performance between the old and new 35mm:
> 
> 35mm f/2 vs 35mm f/2 IS
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=122&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=824&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0



Don't be so mean to those people ! 

They're 'special'.


----------



## dgatwood (Dec 1, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> This _single_ distinction is why I don't use the super sharp 40mm pancake -- even the crummy 50 F/1.4 'hunt for a while' non-ring USM AF is faster to target than the pancake.



Your experience doesn't match mine. With a 6D, my 40mm focuses almost as quickly as my 24–105. It isn't instant—maybe a quarter second (and occasionally a bit longer if it is trying to focus on something near the minimum focus distance), but it is hardly objectionable. Either way, though, it's still a heck of a lot faster than the pre-USM lenses I've used, which verged on live view levels of slowness.


----------



## Ruined (Dec 1, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

When I had the 40mm pancake, it was faster than most non-USM implementations and also faster than MicroUSM. But, for instance, the 35mm IS USM was significantly faster than the 40 STM.

Some also are not aware that there are two implementations of STM just like there were two implementations of USM - lets call them Micro STM and Screw STM. 18-135 uses Screw STM, 40mm pancake uses Micro STM. That is why the pancake is louder and slower focusing than the 18-135.

Screw STM is almost on par with Ring USM, though manual focusing must be done by wire which some dislike.

Thus I would say in terms of speed/quality:

BEST - Ring USM > Screw STM > Micro STM > Micro USM > everything else - WORST

In terms of quietness, Screw STM is the most quiet of them all, but has tradeoffs for that quietness as noted above.


----------



## Ruined (Dec 1, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

What makes these lenses so great are their high quality, simplicity and size. Photozone/DXOMARK etc all show in sharpness they often match the L primes at same aperture.

Many of us lug around big f/2.8 zoom lenses because quite simply f/4 doesn't cut it sometimes. It is rare, though, that ~f/2.8 + IS doesn't cut it. There may be special applications where this is the case, but with IS most of those situations are negated.

However, when this latest series of Canon primes are shot wide open, their sharpness and quality generally MATCH (and sometimes exceed) the 1.2-1.4 L prime lenses that cost 3x as much and weigh 3x as much. Only thing wide open is vingetting, but that is easily removed if it looks bad in a shot. Otherwise they are sharp across the frame, fast focusing, have real manual focusing, light, and well built. No they aren't weatherproofed, but hey if you want to stand out in the rain just use one of those big zooms with weatherproofing  As an example, the 35mm f/2 IS USM for most people's uses would be overall superior to the 35mm f/1.4L - the f/2 IS actually has better bokeh quality and is lighter/smaller than the L. Obviously the f/2 IS does not have 1.4, but whether the 1.4 is worth the increased cost, increased weight, increased size and worse bokeh is the question; FWIW, DXOMARK ranks the 35mm f/2 IS above the 35mm f/1.4L.

So, when you have a few big f/2.8 L zooms, these new IS lenses are great to have as backups to the zooms or simply when you want a lightweight companion with you. They compliment the f/2.8 L zooms very well and in some cases exceed them. Thus, a great addition overall to your kit!! You could build and carry a whole kit of these for the price/size of one L prime, and probably get about the same results in image quality - very cool.

24mm IS + 35mm IS + 50mm IS + 85mm IS + 135mm IS = ~$2500
24mmL + 35mmL + 50mmL + 85mmL + 135mmL = ~$7500

Given the quality exhibited by the IS lenses, is it really worth spending $5000 more on the L versions and carrying all that extra weight/size around? For some purposes, it may be worth having one of the L lenses, like maybe a nighttime star photographer might want a 24mm f/1.4 for the low coma at f/2.8 (though the 24-70 II zoom @ f/2.8 can do the same)... Or a portrait photographer may want the 85mm 1.2 for its speed... But for most applications I would think a kit of the IS lenses just makes a lot more sense - and if you pair with f/2.8 L zooms you have all bases covered IMO.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Dec 1, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Interesting news, but I hope they are reasonably priced ... the pricing of the earlier non-L IS primes were far too expensive.


----------



## Ruined (Dec 1, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Rienzphotoz said:


> Interesting news, but I hope they are reasonably priced ... the pricing of the earlier non-L IS primes were far too expensive.



Given the L-grade sharpness, I think $500-600 range is fair and is probably what we will see.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Dec 1, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Ruined said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting news, but I hope they are reasonably priced ... the pricing of the earlier non-L IS primes were far too expensive.
> ...


I doubt that very much ... all the non-L primes that were released were sold at close to $800 ... it is just recently that they have been selling for about $500 to $600 range.


----------



## Ruined (Dec 1, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Rienzphotoz said:


> Ruined said:
> 
> 
> > Rienzphotoz said:
> ...



Yeah, there may be an initial gouging period, but luckily with the last set of IS lenses it was short lived. I mean more the "settled" price, as Canon lenses almost always appear to be overpriced at release. Though, the 28mm IS was on sale cheap many times since it was released likely due to it being an unpopular focal length.


----------



## thedman (Dec 2, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



rbr said:


> The 20mm f2.8 really needs an update. And while they're at it a 17 or 18 mm prime would be nice too. The 17 TSE is great, but it's bulky, doesn't take filters, lacks AF, and is very expensive. Canon needs something better than second rate zooms in that range.



Dead-on. I'm patiently waiting for a top of the line wide-angle (zoom or prime, I'll consider everything) from Canon, not some "hey this is pretty good for the price" lens. I care not about IS, because I'm 90% on a tripod. Just make it sharp. Sharp enough to make me forget my Zeiss. I grit my teeth every time I haul out the 17-40.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 4, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > An 85 f/2 IS would be the one of this group I would want, but if it's an "STM", and not even an L...what if it still costs $1k? If it's not an L, would it really be worth $1k? *Would it be worth over $1k* (seems likely it would be $1199 or something)?? If it's not going to autofocus as fast as a USM lens, and I wouldn't be using it for video very much...would it be worth the high price they're likely to ask, to me? Or do I not matter? Haha, don't answer that!
> ...



I hope you are right, but if they aren't "L" lenses, isn't STM a likelihood?


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 4, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



CarlTN said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Categorically: no. These lenses will be USM for certain -- again, just like the 24/28/35 refreshes.

USM has been on non-L primes for 15-20 years. 

- A


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 4, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> You only lose a little speed and weather-sealing (in the case of the 24mm F/1.4L).



"Only" use weather sealing? Well, it obviously depends on what you shoot, but for me it makes *the* difference between usable and no ends of repair bills like I experienced with my old non-L macro :-\

I have to admit I find it hilarious if Canon will go on reserving sealing (which would consist of some rubber rings and such - please correct my if I'm wrong) for "L" lenses, for a €600-€800 lens this should be a given - at least to a standard that covers light rain, but maybe reserves wartime usage in the tropical rainforest for the premium models.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Dec 5, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Marsu42 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > You only lose a little speed and weather-sealing (in the case of the 24mm F/1.4L).
> ...



IMHO, this is one of those times it's justified to demand a high price for a feature, in face of it's [I assume] low manufacturing cost.

I look at it like this: assume the new non-L primes have weather sealing. On the one hand you have non-L primes with IS, USM, good IQ, and weather resistant sealing, and on the other hand you have L primes with no IS, are just a stop or two faster (which today's ISO performance isn't as important as it used to be 15 years ago), and the question of why would a photographer pay an extra for the red ring.

So I think it makes sense L lenses would have an extra stop, better IQ, and that "neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these lenses from the reliable completion of their work" build, which includes weather sealing.


----------



## KyleSTL (Dec 10, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Just a thought, but how many people (especially unhappy 17-40mm or 16-35mm owners complaining of soft corners) would be please if Canon replaced the 20mm f/2.8 USM with a 20mm f/2.8 IS or 18mm f/2.8 IS for around the same street price as the 17-40mm (not initially, but eventually drift down like the 24/28/35mm IS primes)?

I know 20mm is much longer than 16mm or 17mm, but I'm sure a new IS prime would be incredible sharp, and still fairly small. Sounds like the perfect solution for video (widest stabilized lens in Canon EOS mount) and tripod-free nighttime landscape photography (theoretically handholdable at 0.8 sec). What does the CR community think of such a replacement?


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 11, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



KyleSTL said:


> Just a thought, but how many people (especially unhappy 17-40mm or 16-35mm owners complaining of soft corners) would be please if Canon replaced the 20mm f/2.8 USM with a 20mm f/2.8 IS or 18mm f/2.8 IS for around the same street price as the 17-40mm (not initially, but eventually drift down like the 24/28/35mm IS primes)?
> 
> I know 20mm is much longer than 16mm or 17mm, but I'm sure a new IS prime would be incredible sharp, and still fairly small. Sounds like the perfect solution for video (widest stabilized lens in Canon EOS mount) and tripod-free nighttime landscape photography (theoretically handholdable at 0.8 sec). What does the CR community think of such a replacement?



You can handhold a 24-105 IS for .8 seconds at 24mm, can't you? I think I've done it...well at least for .5 seconds. Of course that's an f/4 lens...One of the shots I posted in the "anything shot with a 6D" thread, was at 105mm handheld, I think for 1/8 or 1/5 of a second, ISO 5000...was during the "blue hour".

I think Zeiss should make an f/1.4 wide angle zoom that autofocuses, has tilt shift, along with IS, weather sealing, and magnesium/carbon fiber construction...for $500!


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Dec 11, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



KyleSTL said:


> Just a thought, but how many people (especially unhappy 17-40mm or 16-35mm owners complaining of soft corners) would be please if Canon replaced the 20mm f/2.8 USM with a 20mm f/2.8 IS or 18mm f/2.8 IS for around the same street price as the 17-40mm (not initially, but eventually drift down like the 24/28/35mm IS primes)?
> 
> I know 20mm is much longer than 16mm or 17mm, but I'm sure a new IS prime would be incredible sharp, and still fairly small. Sounds like the perfect solution for video (widest stabilized lens in Canon EOS mount) and tripod-free nighttime landscape photography (theoretically handholdable at 0.8 sec). What does the CR community think of such a replacement?


I am not "unhappy" with my 16-35 but I really like the idea of a 18mm or 20mm IS prime (non-L) lens ... if it costs less than $800, I'm in.


----------



## KyleSTL (Dec 11, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



CarlTN said:


> KyleSTL said:
> 
> 
> > Just a thought, but how many people (especially unhappy 17-40mm or 16-35mm owners complaining of soft corners) would be please if Canon replaced the 20mm f/2.8 USM with a 20mm f/2.8 IS or 18mm f/2.8 IS for around the same street price as the 17-40mm (not initially, but eventually drift down like the 24/28/35mm IS primes)?
> ...


That is not what I was trying to say, at all. Carl, you are one of the most argumentative and unreasonable people on this forum, your level of discourse brings the entire community down. 

It is not unreasonable to say that Canon will replace the 20mm f/2.8 in the near future with IS, if they are replacing the 85mm f/1.8 USM with an IS version. Price should be pretty comparable to the 24/28/35mm IS primes. My assumption of this future lens was in no way unrealistic.

Also, a stop faster lens means either: 1) a lower ISO for less noise, or 2) even lower light levels than the 24-105mm f/4L. I'm sure you can get sharp pictures at 24mm at 0.8 sec with a somewhat acceptable keeper rate, but a wider, 20mm lens should in-theory increase that keeper rate (especially with the newest IS version and a fixed focal length lens that they can really optimized its effectiveness). I'm not trying to convince you I'm right, but your tendency to denegrate fellow forum members is disturbing.

EDIT: Sorry if I misread the tone of your post, I just noticed the tongue smiley.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 11, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



KyleSTL said:


> Just a thought, but how many people (especially unhappy 17-40mm or 16-35mm owners complaining of soft corners) would be please if Canon replaced the 20mm f/2.8 USM with a 20mm f/2.8 IS or 18mm f/2.8 IS for around the same street price as the 17-40mm (not initially, but eventually drift down like the 24/28/35mm IS primes)?
> 
> I know 20mm is much longer than 16mm or 17mm, but I'm sure a new IS prime would be incredible sharp, and still fairly small. Sounds like the perfect solution for video (widest stabilized lens in Canon EOS mount) and tripod-free nighttime landscape photography (theoretically handholdable at 0.8 sec). What does the CR community think of such a replacement?



I like the idea. I got the 28 f/2.8 IS and am impressed with it. If Canon do get a similar result with the 20mm, then I'm all for it. It would make me that much closer to getting rid of the 16-35 II.


----------



## Zv (Dec 12, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



KyleSTL said:


> Just a thought, but how many people (especially unhappy 17-40mm or 16-35mm owners complaining of soft corners) would be please if Canon replaced the 20mm f/2.8 USM with a 20mm f/2.8 IS or 18mm f/2.8 IS for around the same street price as the 17-40mm (not initially, but eventually drift down like the 24/28/35mm IS primes)?
> 
> I know 20mm is much longer than 16mm or 17mm, but I'm sure a new IS prime would be incredible sharp, and still fairly small. Sounds like the perfect solution for video (widest stabilized lens in Canon EOS mount) and tripod-free nighttime landscape photography (theoretically handholdable at 0.8 sec). What does the CR community think of such a replacement?



I would take a 17 or 18mm prime with IS or not if it was available and then sell my 17-40. I see that lens as a 17-24mm lens in reality as over 24mm IQ starts to fade. I would gladly take a non L 17mm f/4 prime under $1000. 

20mm is a tiny bit longer than I like but if it was in the same league as the other IS primes I could see it being very popular as a travel WA lens. It would also make a close to 35mm lens on crop bodies.


----------



## KyleSTL (Dec 12, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Just out of curiosity, I ran the numbers for these rumored lenses for 'hand-holdability'. Here's the breakdown:

The 50mm f/1.8 IS would tie the 35mm f/2 IS for 'most handholdable':
EV 0 = 35mm | f2 | 0.4 sec | *ISO 1000*
EV 0 = 50mm | f1.8 | 0.5 sec | *ISO 1000*

A 50mm f/1.4 IS would be the new 'most handholdable' lens:
EV 0 = 50mm | f1.4 | 0.5 sec | *ISO 640*

The 85mm f/1.8 IS would be 
EV 0 = 85mm | f1.8 | 1/6 sec | *ISO 2000*

And 135mm f/1.8, 2 and 2.8 would be
EV 0 = 135mm | f1.8 | 1/10 sec | *ISO 3200*
EV 0 = 135mm | f2 | 1/10 sec | *ISO 4000*
EV 0 = 135mm | f2.8 | 1/10 sec | *ISO 8000*

Nothing important, just thought I'd share what I found.


----------



## CarlTN (Dec 15, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



KyleSTL said:


> That is not what I was trying to say, at all. Carl, you are one of the most argumentative and unreasonable people on this forum, your level of discourse brings the entire community down.
> 
> It is not unreasonable to say that Canon will replace the 20mm f/2.8 in the near future with IS, if they are replacing the 85mm f/1.8 USM with an IS version. Price should be pretty comparable to the 24/28/35mm IS primes. My assumption of this future lens was in no way unrealistic.
> 
> ...



Frankly I am offended by your personal attack, just a bit...it seems like you just couldn't wait to lambast me. You were saving up obviously. The little tack on at the end, since you still left the rest in, is obviously just you trying to cover your ass a bit, while still letting me have both barrels. I'm not sure where your anger is coming from, and I don't recall saying you were being unrealistic...nor why you should take such a thing so personally in any case, even if that is how you took it. This is all just speculation about these lenses anyway!

Regarding the last comment about the Zeiss lens, that was definitely me JOKING...because it's about as realistic as resurrecting Marilyn Monroe from the grave, and attempting to make her forget all about JFK! (That's meant as a joke too, so don't go telling me he was your uncle or something!!) What I mean with all this is, I can wish for things too...I'd like a Zeiss lens, and then that carbon fiber hood that someone DIY'ed popped into my head, so I just threw it all together...and laughed.

I come here to learn, and to share. I've learned a lot! Sometimes I get into arguments with people. But that's life. I don't come here with the idea that I'm going to get along with, or please everyone. That's just not me. If I feel a certain way, then I defend how I feel, if it seems important. I do try to be polite, until given a reason not to.

To say "your level of discourse brings the entire community down"...is just harsh, uncalled for, and a lie...it really is. GO BACK AND READ ALL OF MY POSTS BEFORE YOU SAY SOMETHING LIKE THAT. You are in dire need of getting the hell over yourself...you are taking yourself too seriously! My level of discourse is appropriate at least over half the time, and especially here now. Sometimes I've been inappropriate and I apologized for it. But nobody's perfect, my God man!! Not even you... 

If I have brought the entire CR "community" down in this thread, then wow I do apologize...but I just don't see it! You proclaiming it does not make it so, not by a mile...

I think my main interest in this thread was speculating, selfishly, about which of the lenses I would be interested in (85mm f/2 IS). There's no telling what 2014 holds, but I have a feeling there could be disappointment, along with gratitude...towards Canon. I don't claim to have any inside info though, just my two cents!

At some point it becomes time to sell and consolidate lenses, cameras, etc. I'm trying to do a bit of that now. There's not any one lens that's going to magically transform my photographic life...


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Dec 15, 2013)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



KyleSTL said:


> It is not unreasonable to say that Canon will replace the 20mm f/2.8 in the near future with IS, if they are replacing the 85mm f/1.8 USM with an IS version. Price should be pretty comparable to the 24/28/35mm IS primes. My assumption of this future lens was in no way unrealistic.



I agree with you that it is realistic, but here's another way to look at it: the 20mm f/2.8 is apparently selling well enough to stay in production for many years. Canon could make a new non-L 20mm, and have one 20mm prime lens in production, or a new 20mm L prime and keep on selling the non-L as well.

Then again, maybe Canon never made a 20mm L because 20mm f/2.8 sales are too low to justify two primes at that focal length, in which case it might be too low to justify a new 20mm f/2.8 IS USM.


----------



## clartephoto (Jan 2, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I have the 14LII, 24LII, 35L, 50L, 85LII and 180L and reckon all of them need IS.

My personal opinion is anyone who claims fast primes don't need IS has (fortunately) not had to push their lenses into service in truly low light situations.

The amount of times I have had to contend with camera shake because of using the 85L at 1/20, 1/30 etc. is very frustrating.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 2, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



clartephoto said:


> I have the 14LII, 24LII, 35L, 50L, 85LII and 180L and reckon all of them need IS.
> 
> My personal opinion is anyone who claims fast primes don't need IS has (fortunately) not had to push their lenses into service in truly low light situations.
> 
> The amount of times I have had to contend with camera shake because of using the 85L at 1/20, 1/30 etc. is very frustrating.



Agree 100%. I'm a handheld, available light shooter who often ends up in the ISO 3200 - 6400 range on my 5D3. I'll take IS on everything.

In low light / non-moving subject scenes, IS simply buys you speed and options. IS lets you either bring the ISO down to something more reasonable or lets you stop the lens down to gain more DOF and sharpness. 

Remember, a huge aperture lens like an F/1.4 might seem a creative opportunity, but lack of IS on it will make that F/1.4 a light-driven necessity that punishes you when you don't want a small DOF. Put differently, an F/1.4 lens might seem better than (say) an F/2.8 IS lens, but if you always have to slam the F/1.4 wide open to net a long enough shutter, your shots will be soft and have a limited DOF. Stopping the F/2.8 down to F/4 will net sharper shots with more working DOF, so in low light, _and for what I shoot_, I'd choose the F/2.8 IS over the F/1.4 every time.

- A


----------



## Zv (Jan 3, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



ahsanford said:


> clartephoto said:
> 
> 
> > I have the 14LII, 24LII, 35L, 50L, 85LII and 180L and reckon all of them need IS.
> ...



Exactly, I agree with that summary. More dof in moderate to dim light is more important to me than shallow dof in low light. It makes perfect sense why Canon made the newer IS primes slower. I can't recall the last time I actually wanted to use f/1.4 for any reason. I find myself shooting at f/8 and f/11 more to get sharpness front to back. When you're walking about in the evening pics look really nice with more dof as it is "unusual" and not expected. I also don't want to carry an extra 2 or 3Kg of weight in the shape of a tripod when I'm traveling around South East Asia. There's no room for tripods on those narrow, broken dusty streets anyway! 

IS is my most loved fearure of all. Can't wait for the 50 IS!


----------



## dgatwood (Jan 4, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Zv said:


> Exactly, I agree with that summary. More dof in moderate to dim light is more important to me than shallow dof in low light. It makes perfect sense why Canon made the newer IS primes slower. I can't recall the last time I actually wanted to use f/1.4 for any reason.



If I had to choose one or the other, sure, but I'd rather have an f/1.2 or f/1.4 IS so that I have the stabilization with the wider DoF for 95% of the shots, *and also* can dial in that great subject isolation of a fast lens for the other 5%.

I'll readily admit that I've never owned or used a lens quite that fast—the closest I have is a full-manual 58mm f/2.0 lens—but I'd like to. I just can't justify spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on a lens that I can't use for day-to-day shooting because of the lack of IS.


----------



## Zv (Jan 4, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



dgatwood said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > Exactly, I agree with that summary. More dof in moderate to dim light is more important to me than shallow dof in low light. It makes perfect sense why Canon made the newer IS primes slower. I can't recall the last time I actually wanted to use f/1.4 for any reason.
> ...



Yeah that's true both are desireable in a lens really. 

I tend to get most of my subject isolation shots using a telephoto lens. Even at f/4 you can get lovely background blur at 200mm. It becomes harder to get that look I guess with the wider focal lengths so you would need f1.4 in that case. It would be awesome to have a 50 1.4 with IS but I don't think that will happen. 

There is one point I also hadn't considered and that's APS-C users. I think for those users fast lenses still play an important role since high ISO stinks and the crop factor takes away the really shallow dof capability. My f/4 zooms are fairly limiting on the 7D. 

The only fast I have now is the 135L which on crop really needs IS! You have to use it at at least 1/250s if you want any chance of avoiding camera shake. And with flash sync at 1/250s on the 7D options get real limited quickly.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 5, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I find the 50mm focal length quite boring. I'd rather shoot wider or longer. Canon please skip the 50mm IS and just make a 40mm F/1 IS cupcake (because f/1 wont fit into a pancake)


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 5, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



StudentOfLight said:


> I find the 50mm focal length quite boring. I'd rather shoot wider or longer. Canon please skip the 50mm IS and just make a 40mm F/1 IS cupcake (because f/1 wont fit into a pancake)


I think a hypothetical 40mm F1.0 Image Stabilizer would be more like a jar of juice.


----------



## Zv (Jan 6, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



StudentOfLight said:


> I find the 50mm focal length quite boring. I'd rather shoot wider or longer. Canon please skip the 50mm IS and just make a 40mm F/1 IS cupcake (because f/1 wont fit into a pancake)



See, that statement makes no sense to me - how can a focal length be "boring"? That means you must not know how to use it properly if all you get are boring shots. You can use a 50 to get some very nice close portraits with shallow dof. You can do product shots, you can shoot landscapes, street, groups of people etc. the list of subject matter is endless really. Now if all you shoot is pics of you cat then I guess that's a different story ...


----------



## Marsu42 (Jan 6, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Zv said:


> See, that statement makes no sense to me - how can a focal length be "boring"?



Personally, I do think it makes sense if you read it like "usual": The ~50mm is a "normal" lens which happens to replicate what you perceive with the human eye - so it's a bit harder to create an "unusual" shot based on the focal length *alone*, but of course using 85mm+ doesn't mean that all your shots will be instant classics 

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/cameras-vs-human-eye.htm#angle-of-view

Last not least, with the proliferation of digital camera gadgets wide angle looks much more "normal" to me by now than the actual normal lens


----------



## Sporgon (Jan 6, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Zv said:


> Now if all you shoot is pics of your cat then I guess that's a different story ...



50 mil is the ultimate cat focal length ! This was shot at f3.2, ISO 800 and 1/20th. It's just luck that there's little shake, the others were all blurred. I'd really find a 50 f2/1.8 IS useful. Trouble is the cats keep dying of old age and by the time the IS version is released all ours may be dead.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 6, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Sporgon said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > Now if all you shoot is pics of your cat then I guess that's a different story ...
> ...


I must agree. When cats and children are standing in front of a 50mm lens with image stabilizer is the best thing for intimate photos. With the delay in launching the Canon 50mm IS, children grow and cats die of old age.


----------



## Mr_Canuck (Jan 8, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Marsu42 said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > See, that statement makes no sense to me - how can a focal length be "boring"?
> ...



Photographers can be boring. Lenses aren't. 50mm can be spectacular. 16mm can be crap. 400mm can be crap. Photographers can be amazing.


----------



## Ruined (Jan 18, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



StudentOfLight said:


> I find the 50mm focal length quite boring. I'd rather shoot wider or longer.



Not to pile on, but if I had to pick just one focal length to use, it would be 50mm.

50mm is the most versatile focal length to me, because it has little distortion and can be used as a wide, normal, or tele lens depending on your positioning. It also can provide fantastic creamy bokeh with a fast lens that wider lenses struggle to do, and can do so without being locked into a 85mm+ telephoto shot.

I have gotten some of the most interesting shots with my 50mm f/1.2L... I think it depends more on your style if your photographs come out interesting or not.


----------



## AudioGlenn (Jan 18, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I sold my 50mm f/1.4 a while ago because I didn't like what I saw between f/1.4-f/2.5. I was always shooting at f/2.8 anyway so I figured my 24-70 f/2.8 will do. With the new Sigma Art 50mm and these rumors, It'll be an exciting year. I'll be waiting for reviews and for prices to settle before I buy but I definitely want a "large aperture" 50 back in my arsenal.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Jan 21, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Normalnorm said:


> dkyeah said:
> 
> 
> > Finally a 50mm with a decent AF system?
> ...



I agree... It's a trend for them now to swap bigger apertures for IS and increasing the price. I'm happy with the current 135L and super high ISO capable bodies


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 21, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Chosenbydestiny said:


> Normalnorm said:
> 
> 
> > dkyeah said:
> ...



Let's try your math again: 

"It's a trend for them now to swap bigger apertures for IS + increased sharpness + much higher build quality + internal focusing + faster/more-modern USM and increasing the price."

The non-L IS refreshes have been _massive_ upgrades for what they replaced, and they often stack up well against their slightly quicker L-series counterparts. 

From all the threads I've read on this, I'd peg the CR forum readers (by any measure an enthusiast/pro community) would be about 50/50 split on the new Sigma 50 F/1.4 Art (assuming it's as good as their 35 Art) vs. a new Canon 50 F/2 IS (assuming it's as good as the 24/28/35 refreshes). There are willing buyers for both who see the value of a lens somewhat differently. Neither is right, neither is wrong.

- A


----------



## Caps18 (Jan 21, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I would still buy the 50mm f/1.2 compared to a 50mm f/1.8 IS or f/2 IS. 50mm f/1.4 IS might be a hard choice. 50mm f/1.2 IS L would be the best, but I might have to save my money for a few months to be able to afford it (if it is possible).

The tricky part is that I have started to shoot some video. Most of the time I use my tripod, but IS comes in very handy when hand holding video. I would use f/1.2 for night time photography more however.


----------



## Cali Capture (Jan 23, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

assuming we get a 135mm f/2L is, What say everyone about the Paint? will it be white or black? Since this would be a great indoor sports lens perhaps this will be the new "baby white tele"! Perhaps we should be looking for a small white lense during the Souci Olympics! What sport would a 135mm IS be most likely used? Do they have outdoor night events?


----------



## CarlTN (Jan 25, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Zv said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > I find the 50mm focal length quite boring. I'd rather shoot wider or longer. Canon please skip the 50mm IS and just make a 40mm F/1 IS cupcake (because f/1 wont fit into a pancake)
> ...



Both points of view are correct. You can use a 50mm to do all of those things, even do them well. But an _angle of view_ can become boring to a photographer, very much so. Why? Because our eyesight has a fixed angle of view that is very wide. Depending on my mood, sometimes I want to focus on things that occupy a very narrow part of that view, sometimes wide, sometimes in between...sometimes it's nice to zoom in and out of that field of view.

The whole reason 50mm is popular, is because that's the focal length that makes things appear through the viewfinder, the same size as they do to the naked eye (at least on 1 series finders, and the 7D's...as well as many if not most classic 35mm film camera bodies...depending on their viewfinder magnification). 

50mm is also an angle of view that is still wide enough to allow a perspective on things (at least on a full frame body), while imposing little or no perspective distortion...or technically "rectilinear projection" distortion...at least with full frame or smaller camera sensors.

And on a full frame body, if the 50mm is f/2 (or faster especially), it allows you to get so close to a subject that the focal plane becomes paper thin, throwing most everything out of focus. 

I become bored with 50mm much of the time. I preferred the angle of view the 40mm pancake allowed. I sold it anyway though, because I can't afford to just own every lens there is...and the 24-105 is really all I need in that range for now (besides my Voigtlander 58mm).


----------



## Moose (Feb 26, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Any recent word on a stabilized 85mm? Just got the new 35mm IS and love it. Come on Canon, these shaky hands are waiting...


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 26, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Moose said:


> Any recent word on a stabilized 85mm?



I'm sure there will be a [CR1] about the release month sooner or later  ... but obviously many people are baffled by Canon's (non-)release policy, either long-awaited lens upgrades or the famed radio successor the the 430ex2. And the 85IS isn't even on this short list


----------



## Moose (Feb 26, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Marsu42 said:


> Moose said:
> 
> 
> > Any recent word on a stabilized 85mm?
> ...




Thanks for the reply, I'll stick with my 100mm f/2 for now


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 27, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I'd like to put my order in for a 28mm f/1.4 with IS...35mm is not quite wide enough.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Feb 28, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

What would be nice to see in a 135 IS:
1) Maximum aperture of f/2 or faster
2) L-series lens with silky-smooth focus ring
3) Full weather sealing
4) Nine-blade aperture which remains circular down to at least f/4
5) Full macro (or quasi-macro) capability


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 2, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I have no desire to trade a large aperture for is. I used to consider only lenses with is... but I shoot at apertures and shutter speeds that don't require Is. And with usable isos of full frame... I have to be in near pitch black... ok that's an exaggeration, but still.


----------



## RavePixel (Mar 9, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



jdramirez said:


> I have no desire to trade a large aperture for is. I used to consider only lenses with is... but I shoot at apertures and shutter speeds that don't require Is. And with usable isos of full frame... I have to be in near pitch black... ok that's an exaggeration, but still.



I can certainly understand this as I have a host of large aperture lenses.

But, I think the new Canon "IS" line of primes - including these new ones - are probably the most practical solution for 99% of photographers out there. And in some cases, they have some nice improvements over what they are replacing not even including IS. They aren't necessarily the cheapest, but they offer a great combination of features, build, and image quality.

First, two of the lenses most notable for being able to "shoot in the dark" are the 50mm f/1.2 (my current favorite lens) and the 85mm f/1.2. However, by having an aperture this large you can run into focus shift issues, lesser performance when smallest aperture is desired, slower autofocus due to more glass to move, and potentially increased lens flare at smaller apertures. The IS alternatives that will be at f/1.8 might not get the magical bokeh of f/1.2 nor color/contrast on par, but it will be somewhat close and still have excellent dark capabilities at f/1.8 - enhanced even moreso by IS. The f/1.8 IS lenses will autofocus faster, be lighter, usable in all scenarios, and require less skill to use. Thus, for most photographers they would probably be a better buy at least for general usage. For specialty usage, the 50 1.2/80 1.2 will remain supreme... But that does not mean these lenses are junk, I would just say more practical.

The 135mm f/2L is an interesting case because it does focus quite quickly and is easy to master - plus it is comparatively cheap. However, it also is an older design with straight aperture blades that can result in angular bokeh balls that can be distracting - and the focal length is getting a bit long without IS indoors even for f/2. When shooting dimly lit indoors, I generally like to keep things at minimum 1/100 to get sharp pictures in avoiding motion blur while still letting a decent amount of light in. But at 135mm, 1/100 introduces increased risk of camera shake - thus I'd have to increase shutter and perhaps ISO to keep things where I'd like them. For these reasons, an F/2L IS 135mm would be much welcomed. While this rumored 135mm is only f/2.8, pricing suggests that the F/2L will likely be discontinued and probably replaced by an aforementioned F/2L IS, and the f/2.8 IS will fill the under $1000 price vacuum created as a result. And it will have curved aperture blades for nice circular bokeh balls! 

So, while I also would often not trade larger aperture (f/1.2-f/1.4) for smaller aperture ( f/1.8-f/2.8 ) + IS, it is rare that the former offers no disadvantages and the latter no advantages. In fact, I'd say for most the new "IS" range is probably the best bang-per-buck combination in the primes. Another example at 24mm - the 24mm f/1.4L II lets in tons of light, but for the typical usage of 24mm landscape, the 24mm f/1.4 is much more flare-prone at f/8+ than the cheaper 24mm f/2.8 IS; at 24mm I'd actually prefer the 2.8 IS over the 1.4L. With Canon zoom lenses, though, getting the more expensive L range is almost a necessity as the non-L lenses are too slow (f/4+).


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 9, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



RavePixel said:


> So, while I also would often not trade larger aperture (f/1.2-f/1.4) for smaller aperture (f/1.8-f/2. 8) + IS, it is rare that the former offers no disadvantages and the latter no advantages. In fact, I'd say for most the new "IS" range is probably the best bang-per-buck combination in the primes. With Canon zoom lenses, though, getting the more expensive L range is almost a necessity as the non-L lenses are too slow.



I agree with you on the new range of non L IS primes; they are very good and not only the best value for money but also versatility, as you say. 

However I don't agree on the 135L; the Sporgon crystal ball doesn't see an IS version of this coming, or at least not in the foreseeable future. Whilst the current lens may be the Holy Grail of L lenses to many aspiring photographers - indeed if CR had Coat of Arms it would probably be two crossed 135L lenses mounted in front of a FF sensor atop a pile of third party junk - it's reached that position because it is 'affordable'. To be worthwhile for Canon to develop a better lens with IS it is going to have to be considerably more expensive, and I suspect at the present time they won't feel there is a financial benefit to themselves as a business. Also the third party manufacturers haven't produced a 135 IS or 1.8 version which is a sign they don't think the sales volume / price point is worthwhile. 

I do think we will see a 50 IS very soon, and possibly a 85 version after that which bridges the price gulf between the current version and the 1.2L


----------



## RavePixel (Mar 9, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

You make a good point, in that the 135L is a fantastic bang for buck and built up a great reputation because of it. Perhaps it would not make sense to replace it. I also haven't seen any published patents for a 135L replacement.

My thought is, instead of just selling the current L version for $999, Canon could discontinue the current model and come out with an F/2L IS for $1699 and a F/2.8 IS for $699. Canon did exactly this with the 24-70 - they discontinued the 24-70 and came out with a more expensive 24-70 II f/2.8 plus a cheaper 24-70 f/4 IS. It is also helpful that the length of the 135L and simple design allows for the internal space to add an IS group without major hardship.

By doing so, Canon may get the legions of 135L owners to upgrade for the IS and circular aperture blades, while opening up a new market with the new cheaper f/2.8 lens.

While the current F/2L is spectacular @ f/2 in decent light, when you stop it down or attempt to use it in dim light, its lack of the latest technology can become apparent due to the straight aperture blades and long focal length w/o IS respectively.

That being said, I do realize the camera market isn't doing so hot lately so this may be more fantasy than reality  It would just be nice to have a more compact, lighter, modern alternative to the 70-200 f/2.8 II for dim indoor situations.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 9, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I think it comes down to the fact that the 135mm is a niche focal length, at least that is my experience over the years with 35mm format; maybe it'll change with aps as it 'becomes' a 216mm but we are probably moving more towards potential 135 L customers moving to FF anyway. 

I realise that on CR it is about the most popular lens ever produced, but IMO that's not reflected across photography in general.


----------



## Corvi (Mar 10, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Cali Capture said:


> assuming we get a 135mm f/2L is, What say everyone about the Paint? will it be white or black? Since this would be a great indoor sports lens perhaps this will be the new "baby white tele"! Perhaps we should be looking for a small white lense during the Souci Olympics! What sport would a 135mm IS be most likely used? Do they have outdoor night events?



Lets hope they dont make it an ugly white lens. Thats a reason for me not to buy lenses, the white ones are extremly obstrusive in my oppinion. I dont want my gear to be that noticable, thats why i also carry a leica for general shooting and only do jobs with my canon gear ..


----------



## jdramirez (Mar 10, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Cali Capture said:


> assuming we get a 135mm f/2L is, What say everyone about the Paint? will it be white or black? Since this would be a great indoor sports lens perhaps this will be the new "baby white tele"! Perhaps we should be looking for a small white lense during the Souci Olympics! What sport would a 135mm IS be most likely used? Do they have outdoor night events?



Paint it all red for all I care.

As for indoor sports... I could see using it in sports like volleyball or diving if you are allowed to get close enough to the action... but those are obviously summer sports...


----------



## Caps18 (Mar 10, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

I would like to see how IS could have handled shooting video on my bike last week. There were some shots that I bet it would have a problem with, but it should smooth out the bumps, and that is a big deal.


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 11, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Sporgon said:


> RavePixel said:
> 
> 
> > So, while I also would often not trade larger aperture (f/1.2-f/1.4) for smaller aperture (f/1.8-f/2. 8) + IS, it is rare that the former offers no disadvantages and the latter no advantages. In fact, I'd say for most the new "IS" range is probably the best bang-per-buck combination in the primes. With Canon zoom lenses, though, getting the more expensive L range is almost a necessity as the non-L lenses are too slow.
> ...



For anyone who has used the 135 f/2 for a long time, we understand the quality of bokeh it has, and it's not something trivial. Any new version, or third party version, will very likely have a poorer quality of bokeh. That's the reason I may never sell mine. Sure, it's priced at a point that is accessible to entry level photogs (and for that reason it's spat on by those who won't be caught dead using any lens under $1500). But its overall image quality combined with its usable medium telephoto focal length (especially on a full frame) really is as good as it gets, it seems to me. It simply can't be improved upon.

And given the history of these new IS primes, they seem to favor replacing the older lens with a slower aperture, along with the IS...and making it all very dinky and feather light. Given the existence of (what I say would actually be on a coat of arms instead) the ubiquitous 70-200 f/2.8 ii IS and the 100mm f/2.8 IS macro, there certainly will never be a 135mm f/2.8 IS, especially one that is a macro.

Is a new 135mm f/1.8 stabilized third party lens, going to be enough to make me buy one (let alone replace my 135L with it)? No. Would I if it were f/1.6 or f/1.4? Yes, I would at least buy it and use it alongside the current 135! I'd love even faster primes at other focal lengths also, though...but I guess since the "rebel masses" don't ever want to buy a big lens of any kind, and the "pro photogs" like things the way they are...it will never happen.


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 11, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



CarlTN said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > RavePixel said:
> ...



I feel the same way its going to be VERY hard to beat the current 135 i always take the 135 over the 70-200 now unless i am shooting something where the zoom is essential


----------



## Albi86 (Mar 11, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



wickidwombat said:


> I feel the same way its going to be VERY hard to beat the current 135



Actually both the Zeiss APO Sonnar and probably the Sony-Zeiss ZA versions beat the Canon in sheer IQ. The now discontinued CV 125mm APO Macro Lanthar was also a jewel (and a macro too!); very difficult to find used and mostly at exorbitant prices.

There is plenty of room for improvement. The Canon does deserve praise though for being still competitive many years after its release.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Mar 11, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



wickidwombat said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



You've touched on an interesting point. The 135L doesn't drop much focal length when it's focussed close to MFD. Most 70-200 lenses drop a little or a lot depending on the design (The newest Nikon version took quite a rap over it). So I find that the difference in framing between a 135L and a 70-200 f2.8 LIS II fully zoomed is only a few foot steps difference. There isn't a great deal between them at the long end if you are prepared to step forward a few feet. 

The 135L is one of Canon's finest in terms of image output and rendering. But there is a small room for improvement, it could do with newer coatings. The MFD could do with matching or exceeding the current 70-200 lenses. It could gain an extra 1/3 stop easily by pushing the filter size to 77mm and upping the objective lens diameter a tad. The aperture blades are from an older era and are a round design when stopped down. Drop down to f2.8 or f4 and shoot at a spectacular highlight and you will see a distinct shape to the bokeh, corresponding to the aperture blades. Wide open, it's fine. 
So yes, it's a stunning lens to use and in the right hands can achieve lovely photographs, yes it's a lot easier to use than a 85mm f1.2 II L. Yes it has a small margin of potential improvement...as long as all of the benefits which the current model has. 
The new 24-70IIL sacrifices some of the older models benefits, the new hood isn't any where near as useful as the old one. The new one flares worse as a result (even with the new coatings). It's slightly wider at the 24mm end...but is no where near a 70mm at the long end. Looks more like a 60mm to me. Plus, it looses focal length as the point of focus draws to MFD and it's MFD isn't anywhere near as close. For wedding work, a stellar copy of the mkI is the better choice. For landscape work, the mkII is the better choice.


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 13, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Albi86 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > I feel the same way its going to be VERY hard to beat the current 135
> ...



I object, you're full of conjecture there. You've not used any of those lenses you mention, have you? Have you even used the Canon 135? Certainly the Zeiss f/2 135 is sharper, but is it "better"? It has no autofocus, not sure about its bokeh. It couldn't possibly have better bokeh...because that's quite impossible. As for the Sony mount f/1.8, I very highly doubt it is as sharp as the Canon. So yeah, sorry but no...neither of those is "better". If you want to speak soley about sharpness, there are a few Leica M lenses that are sharper, but so what?


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 13, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



GMCPhotographics said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Needs new coatings? I see no reason for that. It has superb contrast and very low flare in my experience. The color rendition could be less cool (I'm sure you probably think it's too warm!). As for the aperture blade shape imposing itself on bokeh highlights...never noticed that either, at all. How about posting an example? The 135 has smoother bokeh than the 200 f/2L in my experience, at least wide open. Sure the 200's is more extreme, but it is inferior.

Again, it really can't be improved on, without sacrificing some of its good qualities, even you admit that yourself. Frankly 1/3 stop is not enough, it should be 2/3 and go to an 82mm filter size, or else just use filter inserts and go to f/1.2 or f/1.0. But they'll never do it, because the current 135L, "old" though it is...is just too good and too much value at its price point. They sell so many of them, there's just no incentive to "improve" on it.

Best of all would be, as I keep calling for...a narrow focal range zoom with a really fast aperture, a megabuck lens by comparison. But it would be worth it. And Sigma should make it, rather than Canon. They could call it the "mega art" or something!


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 13, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



CarlTN said:


> Albi86 said:
> 
> 
> > wickidwombat said:
> ...



I like the Sony 135mm 1.8 better than the 135L because of that extra speed and IBIS. That's coming from a die hard 135L user but seriously, Canon should update this lens with at minimum IS and possibly better aperture blades and f/1.8. Plus it'd give canon a great campaign of the first sub f/2 35 mm lens with built in IS.


----------



## slclick (Mar 13, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Yes there is a rumor they are all coming, but not from Canon!


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 14, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



RLPhoto said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Albi86 said:
> ...



I don't know what "IBIS" is?


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 14, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

*I*n *B*ody *I*mage *S*tabilisation.


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 14, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



privatebydesign said:


> *I*n *B*ody *I*mage *S*tabilisation.



Thank you!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Mar 14, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



privatebydesign said:


> *I*n *B*ody *I*mage *S*tabilisation.



Yep and it's not quite as good as an bespoke in lens stabilization...each lens has an optimized IS unit and not a sensor which wobbles


----------



## Zv (Mar 15, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



GMCPhotographics said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > *I*n *B*ody *I*mage *S*tabilisation.
> ...



I've been asked which is better but I still can't say for sure because I don't know the mechanism for IBIS. I understand optical IS is better but why exactly? Can anyone help nail it?


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 15, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*

Canon have always put two main reasons for putting IS in the lens.

First, the IS is custom made for the specific focal length and lens characteristics.

Second, for optical viewfinders lens based IS steadies the view through the viewfinder, this is not the case with IBIS systems with optical viewfinders, it is true for EVF's though.


----------



## Zv (Mar 15, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



privatebydesign said:


> Canon have always put two main reasons for putting IS in the lens.
> 
> First, the IS is custom made for the specific focal length and lens characteristics.
> 
> Second, for optical viewfinders lens based IS steadies the view through the viewfinder, this is not the case with IBIS systems with optical viewfinders, it is true for EVF's though.



Thanks for clarifying. I had forgotton about the second point. 

So the IS in the lens is designed to compensate for movement in ways that a sensor just couldn't do? I imagine a sensor can only move in certain ways - for example up down left right and maybe tilt? And maybe not all at the same time right? That would be some clever sensor acrobatics if it could! 

The in lens is basically a series of small optical elements that move in response to the way light enters the barrel, right? Meaning there is more than just one thing moving. So is in lens IS more acurate too? And what about Hybrid IS? Could a sensor mimic that too or not?


----------



## CarlTN (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]*



Zv said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Canon have always put two main reasons for putting IS in the lens.
> ...



A moving sensor is never going to be able to mimic what in-lens IS can do. However, a stationary sensor with "digital IS", as found in compact cameras, does seem to work pretty well (in my experience). In any case though, IS is a bandaid for people who like to shoot slow shutter speeds hand-held, or on a monopod (like me). Mode 2 IS for panning, is very useful, but stationary IS, is simply a compromise for when your focal length is long, the light is low, and the aperture is not big enough. Sure it comes in handy, especially if you want really deep focus even in bright light...but really the reason you're using it, is because you're too lazy to use a tripod. The final result will never be as sharp as it would have on a tripod, at least with proper technique. But who has time to use a tripod? I usually don't. I use mine mostly for long exposure night images.


----------

