Canon just can't win. Everyone was complaining and whinning that Canon does not make a new prime lens and only focus on 'consumer' zoom lenses. Now, Canon produces another 'exotic' prine lens after the 85f1.2 ll. What happen? Most people complains it is no good, too expensive, I am happy with what I already have, etc, BEFORE even having a chance to review the lens. I really feel sorry for Canon .
Koivulehto wrote:
This is where http://www.cornevaniperen.nl/proddetail.php?prod=can5012 ebeaydojraes found this lens listed for 1125 EUR in Netherlands. As far as I can understand Dutch, it looks like they only ship within Benelux countries, and you need to pay in advance to their bank account. Both these limitations might be wrong, since I have never learnt any Dutch ...
I bought my 24-105L, 85L II and 500L from him. No problems what soever. It's about the cheapest I could find and the service was great.
The lenses were deliverd in person.
rbraun wrote:
Amazon has an MTF chart on it. I wonder if it's real. Could someone who understands MTF give a comparison to the other 50's in the lineup? Amazon MTF
Unfortunately, Canon does not provide enough data to make the right comparison. The MTF charts show wide-open performance and at f8. Since wideo open aperature is different for the 50f1.2 and 50f1.4, the first comparison is kind of useless. The second less important to most people. FWIW, it looks like at f1.2, the new lens is softer than 50f1.4. The corner performance drops to zero essentially.
The bottom line seems that you don't want to buy this lens for sharpness improvement, but rather, the need for f1.2 to blur backgound or gain more light...
slau wrote:
Canon just can't win. Everyone was complaining and whinning that Canon does not make a new prime lens and only focus on 'consumer' zoom lenses. Now, Canon produces another 'exotic' prine lens after the 85f1.2 ll. What happen? Most people complains it is no good, too expensive, I am happy with what I already have, etc, BEFORE even having a chance to review the lens. I really feel sorry for Canon .
Couldn’t say it better myself... I was hoping for a 50L and they produced... From what I have gathered on it, it seems to be not what I was hoping for... Am I crying about it? No, I wont rag on it until I have it in my hands and take 100’s of photos with it... Then and only then will I be able to determine if the cost of such a lens is worth the extra money over the 1.4...
slau wrote:
Canon just can't win. Everyone was complaining and whinning that Canon does not make a new prime lens and only focus on 'consumer' zoom lenses. Now, Canon produces another 'exotic' prine lens after the 85f1.2 ll. What happen? Most people complains it is no good, too expensive, I am happy with what I already have, etc, BEFORE even having a chance to review the lens. I really feel sorry for Canon .
I don't feel sorry for Canon. They do alright.
I think a lot, a very lot of people, including myself wanted an updated 50 prime.
A better built, better focusing 50 f1.4 L for the cost of the 35L & 24L.
Sharp at 1.4 and 1.8
Not much difference between a f1.2 and f1.4 lens.
That's why there's a lot of talk about this new lens :0)
d~
Sep 09, 2006 at 01:53 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
slau wrote:
Canon just can't win. Everyone was complaining and whinning that Canon does not make a new prime lens and only focus on 'consumer' zoom lenses. Now, Canon produces another 'exotic' prine lens after the 85f1.2 ll. What happen? Most people complains it is no good, too expensive, I am happy with what I already have, etc, BEFORE even having a chance to review the lens. I really feel sorry for Canon .
I don't feel sorry for anyone, as I think whatever Canon comes out with is a win-win situation for everybody. If you don't think it's good enough and/or is too expensive, you can pass it up. For sure, a lot of people will still buy them - which means there are people out there who can use these lenses and are willing to pay for them - and that must a be good thing. If anything, I feel sorry for Nikon users as they don't have "Photokina Rumors" to talk about.
One thing that I'm sure is that there will be claims that 50/1.2L produces subtle but noticeable differences in colors and bokeh. I just hope the diff b/n 50/1.2 and 1.4 will be greater than the diff b/n 85/1.2 and 1.8
The simplicity of that sort of Popular Mechanics' consumerism modelling has left me almost speechless, but not quite:
For one, I simply abhore having to spend lottsa dough on "expensive lenses". Conversely, I delight in being able to spend as little as possible on "expensive lenses". I think I am far from being unique that way.
Show me a person who likes to spend a lot of money on goods they purchase and I'll show you a person who has not earned a nickel thru hard and honest labours of their own.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
People who don't like to spend a lot of money on expensive lenses will always find something on the 85L or the new 50L that make them not buying it
Bingo.
I think half the people who complain about certain lenses probably have never seen one outside of a .jpg on the internet.
bobbytan wrote:
I don't feel sorry for anyone, as I think whatever Canon comes out with is a win-win situation for everybody. If you don't think it's good enough and/or is too expensive, you can pass it up.
By what stretch of the imagination is that a win situation for anybody?
Canon lose a sale and the photographer doesn't get the kit he either wants or can afford.
The pricing and availability of lenses, for example, is a balancing act. There has to be a demand for it, as with both the new lenses, and they have to be available at a price the majority of the target market can afford, definitely NOT with the new lenses.
I'd have thought that getting kit into the largest amount of users hands while turning a decent profit would be Canons overwhelming priority. Given recent pricing, its obvious a low sales, high profit approach has been taken. Shame and very short-sighted.
