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

IMikeJ9116 wrote:

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.

I’m a 6DII owner with 7k in lenses, as well as willing to spend 3k on a lens.

Rexgig0 wrote:

Tashi 1 wrote:

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

A wide-open aperture setting will limit the Depth Of Field, so that only a very thin “slice” of a three-dimensional scene will be in focus, but, of course, this can be used creatively. Stopping-down the aperture will increase the Depth Of Field, bringing progressively more of “everything” into focus.

Also, the perceived depth of field may not actually be that small in some circumstances even wide open. As an example, while taking a landscape photo where even the closest elements are 50 meters away, a 50mm f/0.95 can do that wide open, with corner sharpness being probably a bigger limitation than depth of field.