EF 50mm f/1.4 USM update?

[scrivyscriv]

<p>On the f/1.8 II version note, I've been using the newer 50mm f/1.8 Mk II lens for about three years now.<br>

It's been fine, most of the time, even as cheap as it looks. But yesterday I found a guy selling an EOS 650 with 50mm f/1.8 mk I for $45 on Memphis CL... I got it quick as I could, and let me tell you the mk I version is basically what everyone wants in the Mk II. It's just like the other prosumer primes - same(ish) size, same(ish) weight, and just a solid build. IQ looks similar but man. I love the downgrade! In fact it even takes my 28mm f/2.8 hood - mounted to the lens body, no less.<br>

I never would put a hood on my Mk II 50mm because the hood clips on to the moving focus group on the front.. You can see problems with that a mile away, especially considering its record with that front group breaking from impacts.<br>

Anyway, my $.02 USD on the 50s.<br>

The f/1.4 version suits me just fine; I'd rather see the f/1.8 mk II version worked on. More aperture blades, not necessarily USM but definitely a re-worked focus train that moves the manual focus ring off the front of the lens, bring back the DOF scale, and move the lenshood clip area to a static part of the lens body. I don't think $150-185 USD would be too much to pay for that. Canon's f/4 & f/5.6 L's are built just as nice as the f/2.8s... Why should the f/1.8 be crappier than the f/1.4?</p>

[anders_carlsson]

<p>I wouldn't mind some sacrifices in the 50mm line-up if that's what it takes for Canon to replace the current 50/1.4 with a more reliable lens. Let the 50/1.2L stay and replace the other two with 1) an all-new and well-built 50/1.8 USM and 2) a cheapo and even smaller non-USM 50/2. That way, the middle lens wouldn't compete too much with the L.</p>

[fotograf]

<p>A couple of Canon's consumer lenses are built similar to the 50mm 1.8-including the 28mm 2.8 and 35mm f/2</p>

[tim gray]

<p>I used to think the 50/1.4 was a great buy until the AF broke while sitting on a shelf in the closet. Worked when I put it in, broken when I got it out a couple weeks later.</p>

<p>If it was built on par with the 28/1.8, 85/1.8, or 100/2, even if a little more expensive, it'd be a much better lens.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>Speaking of rumors, that mill is cooking up all kinds of great specs for the 1Ds Mark IV as well.</p>

<p>All of which is why many of us get e-mail notifications from Bob's own "rumor" page: Bob doesn't post it until it is almost a certainty.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>