Is a new "dream lens" 50mm 0.95 probably coming next year?

Canon needs to put out consumer grade RF lenses if it wants to sell FF MILC cameras in any quantity.  These $2k-$3k lenses are impressive but most people don't care about them or can afford them.

Is it possible: Yes, Canon has the engineering and technical expertise to pull it off.

Is it likely: barely maybe. Had the original 0.95 sold like hot cakes, the probability would rise.

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Canon needs to put out consumer grade RF lenses if it wants to sell FF MILC cameras in any quantity. These $2k-$3k lenses are impressive but most people don't care about them or can afford them.

Well, they can price it at $500... 

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Canon needs to put out consumer grade RF lenses if it wants to sell FF MILC cameras in any quantity. These $2k-$3k lenses are impressive but most people don't care about them or can afford them.

In your opinion, s it the "care about" or the "afford" that most drives the lack of interest?

MitchAlsup wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Canon needs to put out consumer grade RF lenses if it wants to sell FF MILC cameras in any quantity. These $2k-$3k lenses are impressive but most people don't care about them or can afford them.

In your opinion, s it the "care about" or the "afford" that most drives the lack of interest?

I think it is more than my opinion.  I think many people see these high priced lenses as an unnecessary and/or unaffordable luxury.  It is like Ford selling the GT for $450,000 but when most people looking for a performance car will buy a $35,000 Mustang.  The R is not a camera that will sell $2k-$3k lenses.  It is a 6D2 equivalent camera and not many 6D2 owners will spend $10k on 3-4 lenses or even $2k on one lens.

Just like with the EF/EF-S system, the RF system will need to survive on consumer grade gear and most of it will be used on APS-C R cameras.  I understand why Canon came out of the hole with two expensive lenses out of four and one medium class all purpose zoom.  However, they need many more RF lenses like the 35mm in order for the R, and subsequent cameras, to sell in quantity.

J A C S wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Canon needs to put out consumer grade RF lenses if it wants to sell FF MILC cameras in any quantity. These $2k-$3k lenses are impressive but most people don't care about them or can afford them.

Well, they can price it at $500...

If so, I predict they can sell all of them that they can manufacture.  Move over nifty fifty, there would be a new value king in town.

Shiranai wrote:

I know you have your fortune telling crystal ball somewhere in the attic...
But what do you think is the probability that a Canon will bring a revision of their so called "dream lens" 50mm f/0.95 again?
We got Nikon's roadmap and their 58mm f/0.95 is planned for next year. Do you think Canon will counter that move with the "dream lens" or do you think the 50mm 1.2 already covers that base?

Canon’s Lack of attention to good quality 50mm lens design has been the biggest tragedy in an otherwise golden decade and a half of outstanding lenses. In a great year they will come out with 3 or 4 all new high end lenses. Wasting one of those slots  on another high end 50mm lens rather than building out a more broad portfolio would be an even bigger tragedy.

I dont like those kind of lens, cause everything is out of focus.

ed rader wrote:

I think most guys want a reasonably priced 50 1.4 that's sharp wide open, something that canon has NEVER made.

Exactly!

For now I'm going to settle for the new 50/1.2L as soon as it is delivered. This will probably mostly retire my 50/1.4 Art except for when I take the 5DSR out for high res landscapes.

gimp_dad wrote:

Shiranai wrote:

I know you have your fortune telling crystal ball somewhere in the attic...
But what do you think is the probability that a Canon will bring a revision of their so called "dream lens" 50mm f/0.95 again?
We got Nikon's roadmap and their 58mm f/0.95 is planned for next year. Do you think Canon will counter that move with the "dream lens" or do you think the 50mm 1.2 already covers that base?

Canon’s Lack of attention to good quality 50mm lens design has been the biggest tragedy in an otherwise golden decade and a half of outstanding lenses. In a great year they will come out with 3 or 4 all new high end lenses. Wasting one of those slots on another high end 50mm lens rather than building out a more broad portfolio would be an even bigger tragedy.

I'm not sure it quite qualifies as a "tragedy" does it? The 50mm lens as a focal length went out of fashion big time, largely due to zooms replacing it as the standard lens supplied with many cameras. As a result many manufacturers found them very difficult to sell unless they were very cheap, so there wasn't that much incentive to design new versions. Of course there was a fairly consistent but small demand for very fast optics like the 50/1.2 but those only ever sold in limited numbers.

It's also not a focal length that is of much interest to many pros (of course there will be exceptions to that so if you are one that is please don't get upset), so there wasn't even the incentive to design one for that market.

Perhaps now there has been a resurgence of interest in this focal length among certain types of photographer, so things may change.

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Canon needs to put out consumer grade RF lenses if it wants to sell FF MILC cameras in any quantity. These $2k-$3k lenses are impressive but most people don't care about them or can afford them.

I have no problem using a converter on the camera for EF lenses, but the cost of the camera coupled with the specs makes it an unattractive camera for me.  It will be interesting to see how it sells once released, but I don't think the sales are going to be stellar.

Mark B. wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Canon needs to put out consumer grade RF lenses if it wants to sell FF MILC cameras in any quantity. These $2k-$3k lenses are impressive but most people don't care about them or can afford them.

I have no problem using a converter on the camera for EF lenses, but the cost of the camera coupled with the specs makes it an unattractive camera for me. It will be interesting to see how it sells once released, but I don't think the sales are going to be stellar.

I agree.  I think the R is going to be a repeat of the 6D2.  It is way overpriced and way under on features.  Also, people looking to buy the two non stabilized expensive RF lenses will not want to use the under featured R with them.  In today's world, buying a $3k unstabilized lens and using it on a camera without IBIS, and other features, is far less tolerated as there are better options now like the Sony cameras and lenses.  Nikon's Z cameras are also a better option, IMO.

robblackett wrote:

gimp_dad wrote:

Shiranai wrote:

I know you have your fortune telling crystal ball somewhere in the attic...
But what do you think is the probability that a Canon will bring a revision of their so called "dream lens" 50mm f/0.95 again?
We got Nikon's roadmap and their 58mm f/0.95 is planned for next year. Do you think Canon will counter that move with the "dream lens" or do you think the 50mm 1.2 already covers that base?

Canon’s Lack of attention to good quality 50mm lens design has been the biggest tragedy in an otherwise golden decade and a half of outstanding lenses. In a great year they will come out with 3 or 4 all new high end lenses. Wasting one of those slots on another high end 50mm lens rather than building out a more broad portfolio would be an even bigger tragedy.

I'm not sure it quite qualifies as a "tragedy" does it? The 50mm lens as a focal length went out of fashion big time, largely due to zooms replacing it as the standard lens supplied with many cameras. As a result many manufacturers found them very difficult to sell unless they were very cheap, so there wasn't that much incentive to design new versions. Of course there was a fairly consistent but small demand for very fast optics like the 50/1.2 but those only ever sold in limited numbers.

It's also not a focal length that is of much interest to many pros (of course there will be exceptions to that so if you are one that is please don't get upset), so there wasn't even the incentive to design one for that market.

Perhaps now there has been a resurgence of interest in this focal length among certain types of photographer, so things may change.

Tragedy is my opinion. And I'm sticking by it.

That said, I agree it is only one tool in the arsenal but it has been missing from Canon and not missing from Nikon, Sigma, Tamron (actually 45), Sony, Zeiss. I'm sure each of these lenses sells a lot more copies than any of the beloved big white primes and yet all are important to the complete portfolio.

I personally find 50mm very useful for group shots or indoor group candids. It forces me to get things tighter than a 35 would. And as a long time user of both generations of 24-70/2.8L they do not (obviously) replace the 2 stop speed, depth of field or low light flexibility of a good 50mm lens.

And my main point was already that they should not over-invest in this category anyway.

gimp_dad wrote:

Shiranai wrote:

I know you have your fortune telling crystal ball somewhere in the attic...
But what do you think is the probability that a Canon will bring a revision of their so called "dream lens" 50mm f/0.95 again?
We got Nikon's roadmap and their 58mm f/0.95 is planned for next year. Do you think Canon will counter that move with the "dream lens" or do you think the 50mm 1.2 already covers that base?

Canon’s Lack of attention to good quality 50mm lens design has been the biggest tragedy

Sigma ART line demonstrated NEW ways to get high corner performance along with center sharpness. It comes with the cost of weight and bulk.

Previous to this the mid-FL primes were of "Double Gauss" design. Sigma's ART line altered not just the prescription, but the way light passes through and arrives at the focal plane. {Much like the Nagler eyepieces in late 1980s revolutionized astronomical eyepieces.}

MitchAlsup wrote:

gimp_dad wrote:

Shiranai wrote:

I know you have your fortune telling crystal ball somewhere in the attic...
But what do you think is the probability that a Canon will bring a revision of their so called "dream lens" 50mm f/0.95 again?
We got Nikon's roadmap and their 58mm f/0.95 is planned for next year. Do you think Canon will counter that move with the "dream lens" or do you think the 50mm 1.2 already covers that base?

Canon’s Lack of attention to good quality 50mm lens design has been the biggest tragedy

Sigma ART line demonstrated NEW ways to get high corner performance along with center sharpness. It comes with the cost of weight and bulk.

Previous to this the mid-FL primes were of "Double Gauss" design. Sigma's ART line altered not just the prescription, but the way light passes through and arrives at the focal plane. {Much like the Nagler eyepieces in late 1980s revolutionized astronomical eyepieces.}

Definitely the old style double gauss designs have certain disadvantages for sharpness, etc. And, the new design techniques are not pioneered by Sigma. But what is true is that

1. Canon is much better at it (achieving sharpness across the frame without many of the other downsides found in the Art series (like LoCA, bokeh, etc.); just look at the 35/1.4LII to see what is possible,
2. Canon has not yet applied these new techniques to the 50mm prime FL until the new RF50/1.2L.

That was my point. They were neglecting the 50mm category. I'm glad they've fixed that but I hope they don't now over-invest in that category to the detriment of other parts of the lens portfolio.