Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
  

Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of...

  
 
Photosbydlee
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?




Atlasman2 wrote:
I would buy such a lens!

I currently own both the RF 50mm f1.8 and the EF 50mm f1.4. Like a few other posters here have stated: upgrade the AF and add some weather-sealingóleave the optics the same. I really like how the 50mm f1.4 renders!


Looks quite nice wide open!

I think with RF lenses Canon have tried to do something different with most lenses so they canít be accused of simply porting lenses over but IMO there are a lot of lenses that could benefit from being ported over with slight updates like the EF 16-35mm.

Third parties entering the RF mount would probably be best, Iíd buy the 85mm DN Art without hesitation.



Aug 04, 2022 at 06:51 AM
deepbluejh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


The old 50/1.4 is in terrible need of an update. That lens is so out of date, it should have been replaced about a decade ago. Its so neglected that it appears as if Canon has abandoned it entirely.

There would be a huge market for a modern 50/1.4 with good optics, in the $600-700 range.

Could Canon make this lens? Absolutely. Will they? Probably at some point, but it appears as if the lens is just not a priority right now.



Aug 04, 2022 at 08:07 AM
garyvot
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


gipper53 wrote:
I'm all still EF, and part of that reason is that most of the newer Canon primes just aren't checking the right boxes for me. I'm sure I'd be happy with them, but nothing is tempting me to swap the EF glass.


Fair enough, though I'm feeling something of the opposite.

For EF, Canon never offered a coherent set of modern non-L primes as alternatives to the larger, heavier f/1.2/1.4 L-series lenses. You had the older, generally faster USM designs (28 1.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 100 2.0), and some newer, generally slower IS lenses (24 2.8 IS, 28 2.8 IS, 35 2.0 IS). For ultrawide, there was just the 20 2.8, also a film-era lens.

I have literally owned all these lenses, sometimes more than one copy, over the years. And while I have a fondness for all of them, they have their limitations. All of the older USM designs have a fair amount of LOCA and/or ghosting at maximum aperture. Of the faster wide angles, the 28 1.8 and the 35 2.0 IS both have nervous or busy bokeh wide open. (The 35 is a modern lens optically, well-corrected across the frame, but the rendering is just not pleasing at maximum aperture--to me. The 28 1.8 and 20 2.8 work best for reportage; both have softer corners, field curvature, and lots of CA, making them unsuitable for landscape or architecture. The EF 24 IS and 28 IS lenses are fine optically, but slower, etc.)

So, in looking at the new lineup of non-L RF primes, I actually see some things to be excited about. The RF 35 f/1.8 is optically modern and well corrected, but more importantly for me (a photojournalist by training), it shows beautiful rendering and bokeh wide open, much improved over the EF 35 f/2.0 IS. The new RF 24mm f/1.8, assuming it is as good optically, will be a more attractive choice for me than the EF 24mm f/2.8 IS due to its being 1.3 stops faster. And the RF 16mm f/2.8 is something of a revelation: a true ultrawide non-L prime that is unlike anything Canon has ever offered in the past. All the new lenses also share a consistent design and build quality, rather than feeling like a collection of lenses from different eras.

I don't know what else there is to say about the RF 50mm 1.8. It has all of the classic qualities of inexpensive double-guass designs, both good and bad. It reviews to be slightly better than the EF 50mm 1.8 STM, the best of the EF "nifty fifty" offerings and is both cheap and cheerful. I think for most users seeking a lighter, affordable prime lens, it ticks all the requisite boxes, and I would not hesitate to use it. While I would hope to see an RF 50mm f/1.4 one day, I don't expect to anytime soon.

I still haven't "upgraded" my EF primes to RF primes either, to be honest, but I like the direction Canon seems to be taking so far.



Aug 04, 2022 at 08:16 AM
ronno
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


Photosbydlee wrote:
Looks quite nice wide open!



The 1.4 is soft and MILKY wide open (especially off center.) And the AF is known to fail early on.
If milky is not what you are looking for then you have to stop it down, in which case it's no better than the 1.8 TBH.



Aug 04, 2022 at 12:47 PM
JRobertson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


ShootPDX wrote:
Have you seen and held the 28-70/2?



Yes, daily. It's a beast, it's unlike any other lens on the market. It also keeps my arms looking amazing!

Hard to say if Canon will eventually come out with an RF 50 f/1.4. If they do I suspect it won't be anything close to their L glass. I guess it just depends on whether or not Canon opens their mount to Sigma and Tamaron. If they do, then they really have no reason to release a 50mm 1.4 because 3rd parties will.



Aug 04, 2022 at 01:02 PM
Photosbydlee
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?




ronno wrote:
The 1.4 is soft and MILKY wide open (especially off center.) And the AF is known to fail early on.
If milky is not what you are looking for then you have to stop it down, in which case it's no better than the 1.8 TBH.


I personally never used it before. Iíve seen very mixed results from it, I know some people who have very good copies but back when I was looking for a 50mm f/1.4 I went for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX lens which was a lot better at the time, aside from AF lol.



Aug 04, 2022 at 05:03 PM
the-ninth
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


I am a bit torn when it comes to this question.

I just switched to an R5, coming from a 5D3. With the 5D3 I was using the EF 50/1.4 and EF 85/1.8, together with the 35/1.4L and the 135/2.0L. The 1.2L variants seemed not that attractive to me, the reviews of especially the EF 50/1.2's optical performance were mixed, they were heavy and expensive, and making good use of the 1.2 aperture with the DSLR autofocus seemed a bit taunting.

With the R5 I decided that due to the improvements in autofocus and lens designs the 1.2 lenses are more feasible and also bought the RF 50/1.2 and have the RF 85/1.2 on the way. I am a low light shooter and so far love the RF 50/1.2, often using it at its widest aperture. The autofocus works great and also optically the results at 1.2 are perfectly fine.

Still, for travelling or a day out with the family, those lenses are simply to heavy to carry around. However, that also applies to 1.4 glas, I love my EF 35/1.4, but still, it is a bit bulky and heavy. That is why I bought the Fuji X100T a few years ago, in my eyes a perfect travel camera. Still, especially with the R5 now being a bit more compact than its DSLR predecessors, I am thinking of having a light travel setup based on the R5 instead of the Fuji, to get better image quality and not have to switch between two operational concepts.

So, when it comes to L-grade lenses with 1.4-1.8, while they may be easier to carry around than the 1.2 glas, I think on the one hand I'd already miss the 1.2 when doing my low light work, on the other hand it would still be too heavy for real portability.

So I think what I am looking for would be super small and light traveling lenses, such as a 35/2.0 or even 35/2.8 pancake lens. The RF 35/1.8 seems still a bit big to me, and I'd be willing to forfeit the macro capability and some of the maximum aperture for an even lighter lens. Such a lens would probably make me sell the Fuji and use the R5 as everyday camera. I'd probably then also buy the RF 85/1.8 and sometimes take it a along, though also here something even lighter and smaller with a bit smaller max aperture and without the macro capability would be even better.



Aug 04, 2022 at 10:52 PM
garyvot
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


the-ninth wrote:
So I think what I am looking for would be super small and light traveling lenses, such as a 35/2.0 or even 35/2.8 pancake lens.


While waiting for Canon to make such a lens, you might consider the EF 40mm f/2.8 pancake. Focusing is a bit loud and slow-ish, but it's got a pleasing character, and even adapted it's not too bulky.




Aug 04, 2022 at 11:20 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

Mike_5D
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


the-ninth wrote:
Still, especially with the R5 now being a bit more compact than its DSLR predecessors, I am thinking of having a light travel setup based on the R5 instead of the Fuji, to get better image quality and not have to switch between two operational concepts.


I am going in a similar direction. I had a 5D3 and still have nice EF-L zooms which I use with my R6. I also own a GH-3 as a smaller kit since their 2.8 zooms are tiny in comparison. The key to any system's size is the lenses. Now that smaller, slower RF lenses exist, I prefer using them on my R6 vs using an entirely different system. Using one camera results in better muscle memory than splitting my time between systems, especially when the secondary system gets little use. I'm happy with the flexibility the RF 50/1.8, 24-105 STM, and 24-240 bring me in situations where weight is more important than low light capability or completely blowing out the background.



Aug 05, 2022 at 12:13 AM
the-ninth
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


garyvot wrote:
While waiting for Canon to make such a lens, you might consider the EF 40mm f/2.8 pancake. Focusing is a bit loud and slow-ish, but it's got a pleasing character, and even adapted it's not too bulky.


Yes, the 40mm may be an option, but IĎd prefer something in the range of 28-35mm. Samyang makes a nice 35/2.8 for Sony and since they already ported some of their glas to RF I was kind of hoping for that one. I am not in a hurry, and will wait a bit for the really right lens to come along. ;-)



Aug 05, 2022 at 09:37 AM
hugodrax
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


One lens I really like is the 35mm 2.0 IS. Its an excellent little lens. Wish they came out with an equivalent in the 50mm.


Aug 05, 2022 at 01:39 PM
rscheffler
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


Photosbydlee wrote:
Iíd love a non L 50mm f/1.4 that has a similar size to the EF lens but with Nano USM AF motor. It would be good to have something that fits in the middle price wise between that f/1.8 and f/1.2L.

Atlasman2 wrote:
I would buy such a lens!

I currently own both the RF 50mm f1.8 and the EF 50mm f1.4. Like a few other posters here have stated: upgrade the AF and add some weather-sealingóleave the optics the same. I really like how the 50mm f1.4 renders!

Photosbydlee wrote:
Looks quite nice wide open!

ronno wrote:
The 1.4 is soft and MILKY wide open (especially off center.) And the AF is known to fail early on.
If milky is not what you are looking for then you have to stop it down, in which case it's no better than the 1.8 TBH.

Photosbydlee wrote:
I personally never used it before. Iíve seen very mixed results from it, I know some people who have very good copies but back when I was looking for a 50mm f/1.4 I went for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX lens which was a lot better at the time, aside from AF lol.


IIRC over the years there has been discussion about changes in lens performance due to possibly Canon making silent manufacturing changes, or improvements in quality control. Similar has been said about the contentious EF 50/1.2L - some loved it, many hated it because it was too soft, or inconsistent in performance.

I also have the EF 50/1.4 and given it's an old double Gauss design with no asperhical or floating element correction, it has a fair amount of spherical aberration at and near wide open that gets stronger the nearer the focusing distance.

Lens Rentals looked at it and other 50s for MTF and performance 'variance' in this blog post.

As for the sentiment of the original post, I too would LOVE a reasonably fast 50 of very high optical quality and also with pleasing rendering/character quality as an alternative to the two existing RF options. 50/2 would be fine with me and up to around $1000-1200. Basically a Canon version of the Voigtlander 50/2 APO but with AF. As someone posted earlier, I think the closest in any mirrorless system at the moment is the Nikon 50/1.8, though there's also the superb optically unrestrained Leica 50/2 APO for the L mount system. But it clocks in at ~$5K.



Aug 05, 2022 at 07:16 PM
rscheffler
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


ronno wrote:
RF 50 1.8 STM Is ok - not well corrected, not great out of the center of the imageÖ
I also have the Nikon Z 1.8, and while $600, it is better all around, super sharp, better & faster focusing, etc. etc.
Also, amazingly the Z50 1.8 has shallower depth of field at 1.8! Iíve compared side by side with the Canon on my R5 vs. the Z lens on my Z7Öthe Z lens looks more like a 1.4 wide openÖ


There is an answer for this, and the guru to provide it, is Leica's head of lens design, Peter Karbe. But in a nutshell, it's because the Nikon 50/1.8 is more highly corrected wide open, with lower spherical aberration, which results in a much more clearly defined plane of focus. Higher contrast in the plane of focus results in the impression of much more rapid focus transition just outside the plane of focus as micro contrast is lost to defocus. The Canon 50 is not as well corrected and the resulting spherical aberration 'contamination' gives the impression of a wider, less well defined plane of focus, with less 'pop.'

Karbe specifically refers to this in his designs for the APO Summicron-SL line of f/2 primes for the L mount system (ranging from 21-90mm). He says that although they're f/2, image look like they're from faster lenses because of the rapid focus transition out of the plane of focus.

---------------------------------------------


ShootPDX wrote:
Maybe a 1.4 or 1.8 thatís stellar in quality but not the size of small boat.

I love the 1.2 IQ, but the portability of the 1.8. A nice in-between I think would sell well.

Same goes for the 85 1.4 and a great 35mm.


Toothwalker wrote:
Stellar in quality implies a large size. When we talk about 50-mm lenses, we can safely say that a similar size implies similar performance. Dozens of compact (f/1.4, f/1.7, f/1.8) designs have been produced in the past 50 years. These are all variations on the same (double Gauss) theme and perform similarly. They are soft wide open, and corners are poor. Stopped down, however, the image quality improves rapidly. At mid apertures they are still among the best lenses available.

Then came lenses like the Zeiss Otus 55/1.4 and the Sigma 50/1.4 Art. They are much bigger than previous designs,
...Show more

This might be the general rule, but there are exceptions. One is the Voigtlander 50/2 APO in Sony FE and Leica M mounts. Another is the Leica 50/2 APO ASPH in M mount. Yes, the Leica is eye-wateringly expensive, but the Voigtlander is reasonable at around $1K.

The reason IMO we see so many fast well corrected lenses is because that is what consumers have been telling manufacturers to make. Fast lenses are sexy. Fast lenses blow out the background. Therefore the popular opinion is that only fast lenses are worth buying and as a result the lens manufacturers mostly put their efforts into this niche. Plus it's easier (cheaper) to make well corrected lenses with many elements than to make them with fewer. It can be done smaller, but the tradeoff is what you see with Leica's 50/2. The tolerances for each element and each element's surfaces become much more critical, along with assembly tolerances. As a result the price increases considerably. The new Leica 35/2 APO ASPH M-mount is another example of this - super small, super sharp, super expensive. Bottom line is it can be done small, but it will be at a premium.

I think Canon could do it much cheaper than Leica, but in the minds of many potential buyers, it would probably still be too expensive for a 'slow' 50/2. It's kind of a no-win position for mainstream manufacturers because the mindset of a majority of advanced photographers doesn't appear to align with the concept of high image quality, moderate aperture speed and premium price point.



Aug 05, 2022 at 07:38 PM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


Atlasman2 posted an image from the 50/1.4 from his R5 - I've had that lens for several years, and while it's not the sharpest tool in the shed wide open, it does exactly what his image showed - it renders well, it smooths the bokeh very, very well. Could it use some modern design and build? Of course. But that rendering is really very, very nice, and especially from a pretty inexpensive, light lens.

All that said, I'd love to see Canon come out with a new R version, mid-priced 50/1.4.



Aug 05, 2022 at 07:55 PM
swldstn
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


Canonís f/1.2 primes are excellent and I own the RF 50/1.2 and RF 85/1.2L but Iím the type who would build a kit with both fast primes and slower alternatives that also offer high quality for use when I travel. Of course I would not take both. Sony and itís partners have done a much better job here IMHO for primes at 14, 20, 24, 35, 50, and 135. Everyone is smaller than Canonís and optically equal or superior. Partners like Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, And Voigtlander also have some great f/1.4, f/1.8, and f/2 primes

Nikon Z mount f/1.8 S primes are well done as well.



Aug 09, 2022 at 11:00 AM
Toothwalker
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Will Canon ever make a high quality (L) 50mm lens thatís not the size of the 1.2?


rscheffler wrote:
This might be the general rule, but there are exceptions. One is the Voigtlander 50/2 APO in Sony FE and Leica M mounts. Another is the Leica 50/2 APO ASPH in M mount. Yes, the Leica is eye-wateringly expensive, but the Voigtlander is reasonable at around $1K.

The reason IMO we see so many fast well corrected lenses is because that is what consumers have been telling manufacturers to make. Fast lenses are sexy. Fast lenses blow out the background. Therefore the popular opinion is that only fast lenses are worth buying and as a result the lens manufacturers mostly put
...Show more

I am sure these are exquisite designs, and would be interested to see them in comparisons. However, there is a big difference between f/2 and f/1.4. The Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH cannot compete with the large and well-corrected f/1.4 and f/1.2 designs which popped up in the last decade.



Aug 13, 2022 at 05:29 AM
1       2      
3
       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username      Reset password