New - EF 50 f/1.2 L in February 2006 ?

My guess for the price was based on looking at all the other sweet L primes. I would have to agree with Tom W, does it really need to be L, and carry the $1000+ price or could we simply upgrade to a 50mm f1.4 mark II with a smoother more damped focus ring, and a tweak on the optics and build so the lens could stay below say $500, I mean I like the price point it's in right now.

Well they would sell a few of them. It doesn't make any sense for me to upgrade my 50mm f/1.8 II right now. I wouldn't even consider getting the 1.4 until I have quite a few other lenses. By that time I'll probably be more capable of making a large upgrade and a 1.2L, if it lived up to it's hype, would be my first choice.

So my question is why would an f1.2L be so much more likely to succeed then the f1.0L before it. I can't believe it was a price issue, folks on this forum by L's and 1D's like it's nothing

MrChad wrote:
So my question is why would an f1.2L be so much more likely to succeed then the f1.0L before it. I can't believe it was a price issue, folks on this forum by L's and 1D's like it's nothing

I think it would be specialized like the 85 1.2. So would it sell? Yes. But would it be a common sell. Probably not. For people dealing with portraits, I think it would be up there with the 85 1.2 and 35 1.4.

In the old times I had the FD 1.2/55mm that had a unique, dreamlike rendition.
It literally fell apart in the middle of a shooting. A pity.
Is anybody using the variable soft-focus portrait lenses?
My "Inner Hamilton" could be interested in having one...

When I was in Singapore, I went into John 3:16 to have a look & saw the 50mm f/1.0 in a box high on a shelf.

I decided not to insult the salesman by asking if he could take it down & let me try a couple of shots before asking the price & then returning it.

I did get the f/1.4 (elsewhere) though, an absolute stoater of a lens it is too

mijbril wrote:
When I was in Singapore, I went into John 3:16 to have a look & saw the 50mm f/1.0 in a box high on a shelf.

I decided not to insult the salesman by asking if he could take it down & let me try a couple of shots before asking the price & then returning it.

I did get the f/1.4 (elsewhere) though, an absolute stoater of a lens it is too

Are you going to sell your 1.8 then?

MrChad wrote:
So my question is why would an f1.2L be so much more likely to succeed then the f1.0L before it. I can't believe it was a price issue, folks on this forum by L's and 1D's like it's nothing

There were a couple of reasons that the 50/1.0L didn't stay on the market. One of them was the fact that it contained leaded glass. Another was that it was very expensive. It's optical reputation wasn't all that good either, though it did produce very smooth bokeh.

Oh God, here we go again; more rumors and speculations.

While we are at, make me a 200 f/1.0.

Not sure... I think as I upgrade cameras & lenses slowly, it might be handy to keep to the 1.8 attached permanently to the 350D.

Then again, if someone offered my $100 Australian (they go for about $150 Au brand new), I might say yes.

But I'm also the sentimental type & like to keep old stuff, especially when it works well

EOSX wrote:
Oh God, here we go again; more rumors and speculations.

While we are at, make me a 200 f/1.0.

Ditto

mijbril wrote:
Not sure... I think as I upgrade cameras & lenses slowly, it might be handy to keep to the 1.8 attached permanently to the 350D.

Then again, if someone offered my $100 Australian (they go for about $150 Au brand new), I might say yes.

But I'm also the sentimental type & like to keep old stuff, especially when it works well

Fair enough. Glad to see you are happy with the 1.4. It's my only prime that I own for my EOS system, but I love it.

EOSX wrote:
Oh God, here we go again; more rumors and speculations.

While we are at, make me a 200 f/1.0.

YEAH, BABY!!!

Now, you're talking!

How did somones wishfull thinking on another forum become a "rumor"

EOSX wrote:
Oh God, here we go again; more rumors and speculations.

While we are at, make me a 200 f/1.0.

Oh jesus. How much do you think that would cost? Bets? If a stinkin' 50 is going for $3k+, I'm thinking this would easily do $10-12k. That having been said, I wouldn't buy one even if I had the money lying around. Just too short for an expensive prime like that. I'm either for wide, or reaaaaaaaally long.