Why are Canon 35mm lenses much more expensive than their equivalent 50mm lens?

[mokolp3]

The Canon EF 35mm 1.4 L is/was much more expensive than the EF 50mm 1.2 L. Even the old EF 35mm 2.0 non IS lens was much more expensive than the EF 50mm 1.8 II even though the 35mm had about the same poor build quality, except for a distance gage and a metal mount.

[rs-eos]

More glass/parts.

The EF 35mm f/1.4L has 14 elements in 11 groups. Whereas the 50mm f/1.2L has 8 elements in 6 groups.

[ebiggs1]

"The EF 35mm f/1.4L has 14 elements in 11 groups. Whereas the 50mm f/1.2L has 8 elements in 6 groups."

What Ricky says is only part of the story. The two lenses are totally different in build partly as noted. Looking at the outside you can't tell as it is not readily apparent. Extra special and expensive lens coating along with a 9 blade VS an 8 blade aperture not to mention weather resistant.. The Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Lens requires a filter on the front to be considered weather resistant.

I can tell you that the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens and the Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Lens are fantastic lenses and two of my very favorite primes. Also my Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Lens which just happens to be sitting right in front of me on my computer desk as we speak. Love'em.