Which Lens Are You Looking Forward To?

[muteteh]

I would like a new zoom as well, but the prices are high.

I could probably afford the EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 (or it's upgrade, if the price is similar), but the Nikon AF-S VR 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED is definitely too expensive for me.

[I'm sure the difference is justified, an extra stop at the long end makes for twice the front element surface, the ability to use a 1.4x extender without loosing autofocus, etc, but that doesn't change my salary.]

[Osiris30]

A 200-400 f/4 zoom like the Nikon one will be nice... maybe stick in a DO if it doesn't affect the quality too much - that might cut some weight off the potential monster.

Well, things would like nice as long as we don't ask about the price

+1 for that lens...  Even better would be 200-400 2.8-4.0.  It's already going to cost a fortune, why not do it right

[that1guy]

I would love a 2.8 version of the 24-105.  that is the perfect range to complement the 16-35, and i refuse to buy anything slower than 2.8.  I love my shallow DOF

^I could get on board with this!    I love my 24-105 but the 2.8 would make it even better.  Of course it would be huge, but I don't care.  I believe Tamron made one of these (maybe it was a 28-105 2.8...does anyone remember?) at one point.

For the survey, I marked that I was waiting on the 24-70 2.8 IS.  I am anxious to see how it performs optically and it would be an awesome lens w/ the IS (the only reason I didn't get the current 24-70 was because it didn't have IS). 

[that1guy]

I think you should add EF 15-60mm f/4L IS USM.

+1  That would be cool too!

[ashah214]

^I could get on board with this!    I love my 24-105 but the 2.8 would make it even better.  Of course it would be huge, but I don't care.  I believe Tamron made one of these (maybe it was a 28-105 2.8...does anyone remember?) at one point.

Tamron still makes it. It's one of their adaptall lenses. http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/m28105mm.asp

I'm happy to hear about the new 35mm. It'll be good for crop bodies as a standard lens as well as those who love the 35mm focal length on FF ( that would be me    ).

[that1guy]

^I could get on board with this!    I love my 24-105 but the 2.8 would make it even better.  Of course it would be huge, but I don't care.  I believe Tamron made one of these (maybe it was a 28-105 2.8...does anyone remember?) at one point.

Tamron still makes it. It's one of their adaptall lenses. http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/m28105mm.asp

I'm happy to hear about the new 35mm. It'll be good for crop bodies as a standard lens as well as those who love the 35mm focal length on FF ( that would be me    ).

Wow, that's cool, thanks for the link!  I haven't seen one of those in a long time

[muteteh]

^I could get on board with this!    I love my 24-105 but the 2.8 would make it even better.  Of course it would be huge, but I don't care.  I believe Tamron made one of these (maybe it was a 28-105 2.8...does anyone remember?) at one point.

Tamron still makes it. It's one of their adaptall lenses. http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/m28105mm.asp

I'm happy to hear about the new 35mm. It'll be good for crop bodies as a standard lens as well as those who love the 35mm focal length on FF ( that would be me    ).

People want an IS on the EF 24-70 f/2.8, but not on a 28-105 f/2.8 ?!

[that1guy]

^I could get on board with this!    I love my 24-105 but the 2.8 would make it even better.  Of course it would be huge, but I don't care.  I believe Tamron made one of these (maybe it was a 28-105 2.8...does anyone remember?) at one point.

Tamron still makes it. It's one of their adaptall lenses. http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/m28105mm.asp

I'm happy to hear about the new 35mm. It'll be good for crop bodies as a standard lens as well as those who love the 35mm focal length on FF ( that would be me    ).

People want an IS on the EF 24-70 f/2.8, but not on a 28-105 f/2.8 ?!

Oh no, we still want it on that too!  I think we were more pointing out the fact that you can make a 28-105 2.8 and so it wouldn't be unreasonable for Canon to do so at some point.  It was also a bit of reminiscing for me as well.  I used to shoot with one of those on an old Kodak 560...ahhh...memories

One thing about me...I would like to have IS on every lens.  I have never been in a situation where I wished I didn't have it on a lens, but I've been in a lot of situations where I wished I did have it on a lens.  Of course, I'm not keen on paying a $500 premium 

[RichFisher]

How about something not on the list?

a zoom extender - 1 to 1.5 would be great.

100-400 F4 IS (or similar  - like Nikon 200-400 F4)

replacement for the 400 F5.6 w/ an IS version.  Either 400 or 500.

180 macro with Tilt capabilities (I don't need shift but extra DOF would help)

Update the 500 F4 by shaving 2 Lbs off it (ditto 400 F2.8 and 600 F4 - they would need to drop 3 lbs)

[Sebastian]

Aside from a 14-...mm ultra wide angle zoom, I'd like to see a 200-400mm f/4 L IS USM (like the Nikon 200-400) or a 400mm f/4 non-DO IS - more reasonably priced and with a better IQ than the 4/400 DO.


Regards,

Sebastian

[Freeze_XJ]

Voted for a 500 5.6 IS, i wouldn't mind DO, unless price doubled ($2500 for a DO IS would be OK, anything higher makes me scratch my head, and go for a 300 2.8 with 2xTC).
Another great one would be a fast cheap prime, like 24 f/1.8, for $400-$500. Alternative would be a 20 f/1.8 and a 35 f/1.8, as a set, both for EF-S, which saves cost. If f/1.4 is affordable (Sigma manages, and i'm already looking at them), then make it faster, but i fear they won't, because of the L lenses, with their 1500+ price tag.

[DetlevCM]

Definitely not a 24-70 IS - simply because I recently got the non-IS version
(Well, I'd only "need" the IS for non-tripod video)

Else in the long run I'll be keen on a 16-35 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 to compliment my 24-70 - but a lot can happen during one year which is when I may onsider a new lens... (finance)

[J]

Not on the list, but I'd like an EF-S 15-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. That puts me in the minority here though; no EF-S are listed in the poll and nobody seems to care.

Barring that, EF 20-60mm f/2.8L IS USM. Something wide enough that I can use it on crop. The only full frame I can afford is film.

[kubelik]

I think you should add EF 15-60mm f/4L IS USM.

+1  That would be cool too!

that wouldn't just be cool, that would be insane.  I think I'd use that as a walkaround on the 5D Mark II over the 24-70 almost any day

[muteteh]

As Canon has announced it's new lenses, how about opening a new survey ? Would such a survery have the option of splitting a vote between a small number - say two or three - lenses ?

Personally, I would like to see an EF 135mm that would be mechanically and optically better than the 135mm f/2.8 softfocus, and cheaper than the 135mm f/2 L (like the EF 85mm f/1.8 in quality and price), and a reasonably priced upgrade (= no more than 30% price raise) to the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L

[Another way to put it is I hope Canon makes a competitor to the Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3. I'll be happy for something like an EF 200-500mm f/4-5.6 that would cost no more than twice the price of the Sigma. ]