canon rumors FORUM

Rumors => Lenses => Topic started by: Canon Rumors on December 05, 2017, 11:19:54 AM

Title: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Canon Rumors on December 05, 2017, 11:19:54 AM
We’ve received another mention of a Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM coming in the first half of 2018, we see the CP+ show in Japan as a good time to announce the lens.

We’re told production of the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS will have to meet global demand before the announcement.

We’re also told that the original non-IS version will remain current for some time after the new lens appears.

Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: CanonFanBoy on December 05, 2017, 12:03:49 PM
Exciting times! So thankful for the information this website brings. Image stabilization and better chromatic aberration control will make this one very fine lens. I wonder whether BR will appear here.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Talys on December 05, 2017, 12:16:31 PM
We’re told production of the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS will have to meet global demand before the announcement.

Having demand exceed supply is pretty awesome, with both being high end primes.

A refreshed 135/2 will be a no-brainer for me.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Pixel on December 05, 2017, 12:22:07 PM
f2.0?   :(
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: brianleighty on December 05, 2017, 12:48:43 PM
f2.0?   :(
I think I'd rather have 2.0 and IS vs 1.8 and no IS like the ART.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: infared on December 05, 2017, 01:39:46 PM
f2.0?   :(
I think I'd rather have 2.0 and IS vs 1.8 and no IS like the ART.

Yes...that makes sense...but I have the ART and LOVE it...so....I am going to love/hate the comparisons when they appear!!  :P
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: tron on December 05, 2017, 02:24:28 PM
f2.0?   :(
I think I'd rather have 2.0 and IS vs 1.8 and no IS like the ART.
+1000000000000000  :)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: slclick on December 05, 2017, 02:35:12 PM
take.my.money
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: jolyonralph on December 05, 2017, 02:35:42 PM
But will it work with extenders?

For me that's the biggest plus about the 135 2.0L
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: yoms on December 05, 2017, 02:46:14 PM
When I look at Canon (high-end) lens lineup, it's really 8)
Now, I'm wondering what's left to be updated a part from 50mm and 70-200 (and this latest only deserves an update because other brands did, but is not in need of an update)
Nice job Canon! I'm more skeptical as regards their bodies, but lenses are waouh.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: LeeBabySimms on December 05, 2017, 02:56:14 PM
Please update the 50L with 1.4 and IS before you touch the 135
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: midluk on December 05, 2017, 03:07:27 PM
Please update the 50L with 1.4 and IS before you touch the 135
No, this will not happen. Canon will release an update of every other lens with added IS before a new 50mm.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 05, 2017, 03:27:53 PM
Please update the 50L with 1.4 and IS before you touch the 135
No, this will not happen. Canon will release an update of every other lens with added IS before a new 50mm.

I bet if ahsanford just stopped asking, they'd make the new 50/1.4 IS USM.   ;)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Maximilian on December 05, 2017, 03:33:31 PM
Please update the 50L with 1.4 and IS before you touch the 135
No, this will not happen. Canon will release an update of every other lens with added IS before a new 50mm.
+1 just because they want to drive one single customer mad ;)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: geekpower on December 05, 2017, 04:26:49 PM
I wonder whether BR will appear here.

As everybody tells you every time you ask this about every new lens, no, BR is only useful for wide angle lenses.

Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: scyrene on December 05, 2017, 05:22:23 PM
f2.0?   :(
I think I'd rather have 2.0 and IS vs 1.8 and no IS like the ART.

The difference between f/1.8 and f/2 is essentially negligable anyway. Everybody raves about the current 135L, I don't recall seeing people complain about the aperture.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: brad-man on December 05, 2017, 06:08:00 PM
f2.0?   :(
I think I'd rather have 2.0 and IS vs 1.8 and no IS like the ART.

The difference between f/1.8 and f/2 is essentially negligable anyway. Everybody raves about the current 135L, I don't recall seeing people complain about the aperture.

Agree. f/1.8 is bragging rights, while 2.0 with IS is a real world benefit. I'm going to start the bidding at $1600, same intro price as the 85.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: angrykarl on December 05, 2017, 06:46:47 PM
Another pricy L glass... Seems to me that Canon now cares only for high-end L glass or shitty APS-C zooms. People who don't need L glass, but who want a better camera/lens (potentially a fullframe) and who would buy lenses like 50mm f/1.4 IS USM or 85mm f/1.8 IS USM are a non-attractive category. I get it, the sales are happening elsewhere. But are there really only two categories? People who buy Rebels and then pros with no price/weight limits?

I always thought the Canon's strategy of not-offering better EF-S glass is to lure people into fullframe. But how many people really jump into fullframe with such a huge money leap? Because it's mostly targetted on pros, the bodies are expensive and so are L lenses (and heavy because f/1.4 etc). The non-L primes are mostly really old. Sure, people could buy older versions of L glass, but that usually means no IS, serious IQ pitfalls and big weight. I would expect Canon to offer more tiers of fullframe bodies and lenses (f/2 or f/2.8, STM, no weather sealing), especially with the potential release of a mirrorless EF fullframe and DSLR sales falling. Canon seems like a split personality, they are luring people in and keeping it an exclusive club at the same time.

Sure, Canon still sells a lot (but mostly Rebels right?), and Canon knows the market best, but it's inevitable that in a couple of years even more people would be happy with cameras in their phones. Which would mean even less people would care for entry-level APS-C cameras. Isn't this the best time to move more people into fullframe, where the prices will inevitably be higher?

Sorry for the rant, I guess I'll just have to get used to the fact I am not the market. ;D
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: bluenoser1993 on December 05, 2017, 09:13:51 PM
But will it work with extenders?

For me that's the biggest plus about the 135 2.0L

+1  I would actually prefer the new 85L IS and sell my 135 for it because the focal length would be better for me in a lot of cases.  The thing stopping me for now is the ability to travel with the 135 and 1.4x and leave the 100-400 home when I'm needing to get through airports with my gear plus assist 4 kids with their stuff.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: CanonFanBoy on December 06, 2017, 01:18:02 AM
I wonder whether BR will appear here.

As everybody tells you every time you ask this about every new lens, no, BR is only useful for wide angle lenses.

Well, then why don't you explain to me why that is and what makes you say that... other than forum speculation. Show me the facts / data or where Canon says this. Then I'll stop asking. So far only the 35mm f/1.4 II has it. Personally, I think you are wrong. BTW, everybody does not tell me this. Just a few who have no facts to back it up. None.

Geek out over this:
http://lenses.reviewed.com/features/canon-quietly-shows-new-600mm-f4l-do-with-br-optics
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: dolina on December 06, 2017, 03:44:42 AM
135/1.8 IS!!!!!!
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: MayaTlab on December 06, 2017, 05:56:32 AM
Another pricy L glass... Seems to me that Canon now cares only for high-end L glass or shitty APS-C zooms. People who don't need L glass, but who want a better camera/lens (potentially a fullframe) and who would buy lenses like 50mm f/1.4 IS USM or 85mm f/1.8 IS USM are a non-attractive category. I get it, the sales are happening elsewhere.

Actually, there's plenty of evidence that at least in terms of volume, the sales are happening exactly right where Canon's current prime lineup is failing the most : mid-range 50 and 85mm lenses (around €500). Heck, on Amazon, the Nikon 50mm f1.4G outsells the f1.8G, despite most reviews stating that the latter is a better buy. Also, Fuji delayed the development of faster lenses in favour of their smaller f2 lineup when they saw how well it was selling.

Quote
Canon knows the market best

Relative to other manufacturers ? Most likely. In absolute terms ? They make plenty of mistakes. For example they got the 5DS/5DSR production ratio completely wrong at launch despite the fact that there were very strong indications that the 5DSR would be the most popular of the two.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: BillB on December 06, 2017, 06:28:18 AM
Another pricy L glass... Seems to me that Canon now cares only for high-end L glass or shitty APS-C zooms. People who don't need L glass, but who want a better camera/lens (potentially a fullframe) and who would buy lenses like 50mm f/1.4 IS USM or 85mm f/1.8 IS USM are a non-attractive category. I get it, the sales are happening elsewhere. But are there really only two categories? People who buy Rebels and then pros with no price/weight limits?

I always thought the Canon's strategy of not-offering better EF-S glass is to lure people into fullframe. But how many people really jump into fullframe with such a huge money leap? Because it's mostly targetted on pros, the bodies are expensive and so are L lenses (and heavy because f/1.4 etc). The non-L primes are mostly really old. Sure, people could buy older versions of L glass, but that usually means no IS, serious IQ pitfalls and big weight. I would expect Canon to offer more tiers of fullframe bodies and lenses (f/2 or f/2.8, STM, no weather sealing), especially with the potential release of a mirrorless EF fullframe and DSLR sales falling. Canon seems like a split personality, they are luring people in and keeping it an exclusive club at the same time.

Sure, Canon still sells a lot (but mostly Rebels right?), and Canon knows the market best, but it's inevitable that in a couple of years even more people would be happy with cameras in their phones. Which would mean even less people would care for entry-level APS-C cameras. Isn't this the best time to move more people into fullframe, where the prices will inevitably be higher?

Sorry for the rant, I guess I'll just have to get used to the fact I am not the market. ;D

Inexpensive APS-C zooms, yes, but not all of them are poor quality.  Also, the core EF lens market  would seem to be zooms, not primes, and that is what Canon has been concentrating on for quite a while now.  They have kept the 50mm f1.4 and the 85mm f1.8 on the market for less than $350, and they seem to sell pretty well.  From the reviews, a lot of the sales seem to be to APS-C owners buying their first lenses.  Not sure how well they would sell if they were upgraded with IS and priced over $500, or what Canon's margins would look like.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Canoneer on December 06, 2017, 07:38:04 AM
But will it work with extenders?

For me that's the biggest plus about the 135 2.0L

I'm not sure if optical stabilization works with extenders since it's inherently designed to work with a specific focal length. I'd like to know this as well. Maybe Canon has IS teleconverters?
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: midluk on December 06, 2017, 08:04:14 AM
I'm not sure if optical stabilization works with extenders since it's inherently designed to work with a specific focal length. I'd like to know this as well. Maybe Canon has IS teleconverters?
It works for the 100-400 and 70-200 with IS. It does not really matter for the IS if you put a sensor behind the lens or first a TC and then a sensor. The image leaving the lens is already stabilized, you can do with it whatever you want.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: jolyonralph on December 06, 2017, 08:25:58 AM
I bet if ahsanford just stopped asking, they'd make the new 50/1.4 IS USM.   ;)

I bet if everyone stopped buying the current 50mm f/1.4 USM they'd make a new one.

That won't happen though!
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: jeffa4444 on December 06, 2017, 10:31:40 AM
Another pricy L glass... Seems to me that Canon now cares only for high-end L glass or shitty APS-C zooms. People who don't need L glass, but who want a better camera/lens (potentially a fullframe) and who would buy lenses like 50mm f/1.4 IS USM or 85mm f/1.8 IS USM are a non-attractive category. I get it, the sales are happening elsewhere.

Actually, there's plenty of evidence that at least in terms of volume, the sales are happening exactly right where Canon's current prime lineup is failing the most : mid-range 50 and 85mm lenses (around €500). Heck, on Amazon, the Nikon 50mm f1.4G outsells the f1.8G, despite most reviews stating that the latter is a better buy. Also, Fuji delayed the development of faster lenses in favour of their smaller f2 lineup when they saw how well it was selling.

Quote
Canon knows the market best

Relative to other manufacturers ? Most likely. In absolute terms ? They make plenty of mistakes. For example they got the 5DS/5DSR production ratio completely wrong at launch despite the fact that there were very strong indications that the 5DSR would be the most popular of the two.
Not so sure I agree with your logic. Firstly they aimed the 5DS/Sr at studio photographers mainly focused on fashion and certain materials give a moire effect without an AA filter even a weak one like they have in the 5DS. Secondly its even more of an issue in shooting video that's why ALL high end camera manufacturers (Red, Arri, Sony, Panasonic) have them fitted in their TV and motion picture cameras.
Granted the 5DS/Sr is not really a high end video camera but it is used for high end fashion and I for one didn't buy the 5DSr because of moire concerns. 
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 06, 2017, 10:38:25 AM
But will it work with extenders?

For me that's the biggest plus about the 135 2.0L

I'm not sure if optical stabilization works with extenders since it's inherently designed to work with a specific focal length. I'd like to know this as well. Maybe Canon has IS teleconverters?

I can use the same 1.4xIII or 2xIII with my 70-200/2.8L IS II and my 600/4L IS.  The only reason a new 135/2L IS would not work with extenders is of the extra elements for IS alter the optical design such that the rear element is too close to the mount for the lens to accept a TC.

IIRC, Canon did file at least one patent on a TC with IS. 
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: slclick on December 06, 2017, 10:38:35 AM
If I want a high quality ~200mm lens I'll get one. If I want a 135 I'd prefer small optical improvements over the current model, not if it can be expanded to a different focal length.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: rbr on December 06, 2017, 10:43:23 AM
I agree with everything you say.  Not everyone needs, can afford, or wants to carry a slow zoom or a sack of heavy and expensive fast L primes no matter what your level of experience is. When the 24/28/35 IS trio came out I thought they were just the first in a new series of nice practical lenses to come out, but that was the end of it.  They need to expand that line with a few more.


Another pricy L glass... Seems to me that Canon now cares only for high-end L glass or shitty APS-C zooms. People who don't need L glass, but who want a better camera/lens (potentially a fullframe) and who would buy lenses like 50mm f/1.4 IS USM or 85mm f/1.8 IS USM are a non-attractive category. I get it, the sales are happening elsewhere. But are there really only two categories? People who buy Rebels and then pros with no price/weight limits?

I always thought the Canon's strategy of not-offering better EF-S glass is to lure people into fullframe. But how many people really jump into fullframe with such a huge money leap? Because it's mostly targetted on pros, the bodies are expensive and so are L lenses (and heavy because f/1.4 etc). The non-L primes are mostly really old. Sure, people could buy older versions of L glass, but that usually means no IS, serious IQ pitfalls and big weight. I would expect Canon to offer more tiers of fullframe bodies and lenses (f/2 or f/2.8, STM, no weather sealing), especially with the potential release of a mirrorless EF fullframe and DSLR sales falling. Canon seems like a split personality, they are luring people in and keeping it an exclusive club at the same time.

Sure, Canon still sells a lot (but mostly Rebels right?), and Canon knows the market best, but it's inevitable that in a couple of years even more people would be happy with cameras in their phones. Which would mean even less people would care for entry-level APS-C cameras. Isn't this the best time to move more people into fullframe, where the prices will inevitably be higher?

Sorry for the rant, I guess I'll just have to get used to the fact I am not the market. ;D
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: MayaTlab on December 06, 2017, 10:58:59 AM
Another pricy L glass... Seems to me that Canon now cares only for high-end L glass or shitty APS-C zooms. People who don't need L glass, but who want a better camera/lens (potentially a fullframe) and who would buy lenses like 50mm f/1.4 IS USM or 85mm f/1.8 IS USM are a non-attractive category. I get it, the sales are happening elsewhere.

Actually, there's plenty of evidence that at least in terms of volume, the sales are happening exactly right where Canon's current prime lineup is failing the most : mid-range 50 and 85mm lenses (around €500). Heck, on Amazon, the Nikon 50mm f1.4G outsells the f1.8G, despite most reviews stating that the latter is a better buy. Also, Fuji delayed the development of faster lenses in favour of their smaller f2 lineup when they saw how well it was selling.

Quote
Canon knows the market best

Relative to other manufacturers ? Most likely. In absolute terms ? They make plenty of mistakes. For example they got the 5DS/5DSR production ratio completely wrong at launch despite the fact that there were very strong indications that the 5DSR would be the most popular of the two.
Not so sure I agree with your logic. Firstly they aimed the 5DS/Sr at studio photographers mainly focused on fashion and certain materials give a moire effect without an AA filter even a weak one like they have in the 5DS. Secondly its even more of an issue in shooting video that's why ALL high end camera manufacturers (Red, Arri, Sony, Panasonic) have them fitted in their TV and motion picture cameras.
Granted the 5DS/Sr is not really a high end video camera but it is used for high end fashion and I for one didn't buy the 5DSr because of moire concerns.

I wasn't arguing whether the 5DS is worth it or not.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: ahsanford on December 06, 2017, 12:09:40 PM
Sorry for the rant, I guess I'll just have to get used to the fact I am not the market. ;D

Depends on what you want.  If you want small + fast + prime + crop lenses, leave Canon APS-C and move to Fuji now.  Canon will never make these.  I agree that Canon seems to have abandoned mid-to-high-end EF-S glass.

But if you can give a little on your requirements, you're better off than you think.  Canon offers a wonderful list of not pricey mid-level EF primes to complement the EF-S offerings already out there:

Standard prime --> get the EF-S 35 f/2.8 IS Macro STM or EF 35 f/2 IS USM for a FF 50-ish lens
Indoor Portraiture --> get either the 50 f/1.8 STM or 50 f/1.4 USM for an FF 85-ish lens
Outdoor Portraiture --> get the EF 85 f/1.8 USM for an FF 135-ish lens
Macro with some working distance --> get the EF-S 60 f/2.8 Macro USM for a FF 100-ish macro lens

The only area you are SOL on crop is a wide prime or if you insist on lenses being no bigger than they need to be for a crop sensor, in which case, again, Fuji is 100% the move.

- A
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: ahsanford on December 06, 2017, 12:12:45 PM
I can use the same 1.4xIII or 2xIII with my 70-200/2.8L IS II and my 600/4L IS.  The only reason a new 135/2L IS would not work with extenders is of the extra elements for IS alter the optical design such that the rear element is too close to the mount for the lens to accept a TC.

IIRC, Canon did file at least one patent on a TC with IS.

Yep, but this would be a takeaway compared to the current 135L.  They can take away our FTM mechanically focusing USM from mid-range EF primes, but I don't see them taking away this (second-tier but still nice) feature from the 135L II, which will surely be marketed as a top-end tool.  Just a hunch.

- A
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 06, 2017, 12:23:50 PM
I can use the same 1.4xIII or 2xIII with my 70-200/2.8L IS II and my 600/4L IS.  The only reason a new 135/2L IS would not work with extenders is of the extra elements for IS alter the optical design such that the rear element is too close to the mount for the lens to accept a TC.

IIRC, Canon did file at least one patent on a TC with IS.

Yep, but this would be a takeaway compared to the current 135L.  They can take away our FTM mechanically focusing USM from mid-range EF primes, but I don't see them taking away this (second-tier but still nice) feature from the 135L II, which will surely be marketed as a top-end tool.  Just a hunch.

Agreed.  Looking at the current 135/2L design, there's plenty of space for the IS group.

(http://global.canon/ja/c-museum/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/ef335-lens-construction.gif)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Antono Refa on December 06, 2017, 01:03:23 PM
People who don't need L glass, but who want a better camera/lens (potentially a fullframe) and who would buy lenses like 50mm f/1.4 IS USM or 85mm f/1.8 IS USM are a non-attractive category. ... But are there really only two categories? People who buy Rebels and then pros with no price/weight limits?

As far as those two lenses go, I think there are only two categories.

An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: slclick on December 06, 2017, 01:55:28 PM
Another thing to keep in mind is that this wouldn't be just another pricey lens. This would be a hotly anticipated followup to many Canon shooters favorite piece of glass. Magical is thrown around for a few lenses, this being one of them. It's prized, coveted and in the right hands deservingly so.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: ethanz on December 06, 2017, 03:08:44 PM
Sorry for the rant, I guess I'll just have to get used to the fact I am not the market. ;D

The only area you are SOL on crop is a wide prime or if you insist on lenses being no bigger than they need to be for a crop sensor, in which case, again, Fuji is 100% the move.

- A

The EF-S 10-18 is a great wide angle lens for the price, though not prime, its still good.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: stevelee on December 06, 2017, 03:38:43 PM
Not so sure I agree with your logic. Firstly they aimed the 5DS/Sr at studio photographers mainly focused on fashion and certain materials give a moire effect without an AA filter even a weak one like they have in the 5DS. Secondly its even more of an issue in shooting video that's why ALL high end camera manufacturers (Red, Arri, Sony, Panasonic) have them fitted in their TV and motion picture cameras.
Granted the 5DS/Sr is not really a high end video camera but it is used for high end fashion and I for one didn't buy the 5DSr because of moire concerns.

https://petapixel.com/2017/03/23/comic-thats-moire-photography/ (https://petapixel.com/2017/03/23/comic-thats-moire-photography/)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: aceflibble on December 06, 2017, 05:10:53 PM
An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.
Plus it'd also immediately face competition from the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 VC. At the moment those two lenses avoid each other as there is just enough of a price and size difference for them to co-exist, but a Canon 85mm f/1.8 IS would at least be the size and price of the Tamron.
 

The Canon 100mm f/2 has a better chance of being updated to have IS because there aren't any third-party lenses hitting that spec, and there's enough room 'under' the 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro for the f/2 to be updated without cannibalising Canon's own lenses. The 85mm has loads of competition and needs to stay as simple and cheap as possible to remain viable ('cheap and simple' being its main selling point), but the 100mm has fewer competitors despite being practically the same lens.

 
As far as the 135mm goes, I think giving it IS and more robust build quality was inevitable, especially now that several other companies make optically-better equivalents, including the very cheap Samyang. (While optic quality isn't the be-all end-all of a short telephoto lens, it's the main selling point of the 135mm; if you want a soft look you typically go for the 85mm f/1.2 instead.) I would expect every single one of Canon's 'core' L lenses to be updated with IS and more robust sealing over the next ten years. There's going to come a time when there's no such thing as a non-IS lens, and it makes sense to start on that inevitable journey with the biggest-selling L lenses.

Personally, I'm waiting for an IS update of the 180mm, but in the meantime, sure, I'll take the 135mm with IS.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: geekpower on December 06, 2017, 05:55:38 PM
I wonder whether BR will appear here.

As everybody tells you every time you ask this about every new lens, no, BR is only useful for wide angle lenses.

Well, then why don't you explain to me why that is and what makes you say that... other than forum speculation. Show me the facts / data or where Canon says this. Then I'll stop asking. So far only the 35mm f/1.4 II has it. Personally, I think you are wrong. BTW, everybody does not tell me this. Just a few who have no facts to back it up. None.

Geek out over this:
http://lenses.reviewed.com/features/canon-quietly-shows-new-600mm-f4l-do-with-br-optics

Let me google that for you...

This is from Canon themselves:

http://www.canon-asia.com/cplus/en/br-lens-elements/

"As conventional glass lens combinations are unable to correct chromatic aberration, this is usually done using special lenses with different refractive indices, such as fluorite or UD lenses. However, there are some residual chromatic aberrations even these lenses may not be able to fully correct, which we refer to as “secondary spectrum”. Large, wide-angle lenses tend to be particularly prone to them."

So while BR certainly wouldn't hurt on a telephoto, the phenomenon that BR is meant to combat is much more severe in wide-angle lenses, and it's very reasonable to assume that from a bang for the buck perspective, that's where you will tend to see it applied.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: CanonFanBoy on December 06, 2017, 07:14:26 PM
I wonder whether BR will appear here.

As everybody tells you every time you ask this about every new lens, no, BR is only useful for wide angle lenses.

Well, then why don't you explain to me why that is and what makes you say that... other than forum speculation. Show me the facts / data or where Canon says this. Then I'll stop asking. So far only the 35mm f/1.4 II has it. Personally, I think you are wrong. BTW, everybody does not tell me this. Just a few who have no facts to back it up. None.

Geek out over this:
http://lenses.reviewed.com/features/canon-quietly-shows-new-600mm-f4l-do-with-br-optics

Let me google that for you...

This is from Canon themselves:

http://www.canon-asia.com/cplus/en/br-lens-elements/

"As conventional glass lens combinations are unable to correct chromatic aberration, this is usually done using special lenses with different refractive indices, such as fluorite or UD lenses. However, there are some residual chromatic aberrations even these lenses may not be able to fully correct, which we refer to as “secondary spectrum”. Large, wide-angle lenses tend to be particularly prone to them."

So while BR certainly wouldn't hurt on a telephoto, the phenomenon that BR is meant to combat is much more severe in wide-angle lenses, and it's very reasonable to assume that from a bang for the buck perspective, that's where you will tend to see it applied.

Ahhh... but that is not what you wrote. You wrote: "BR is only useful for wide angle lenses." That's what you wrote. Now you admit, I see, that it can also be useful in telephoto lenses. The 135 f/2L (current lens) suffers from CA. So it is reasonable to ask if the new lens will have it. Especially since Canon has a 600 DO prototype with BR. Canon does not say in your googled link what you want Canon to say. So, I guess I'll keep wondering whether BR will be included with each new L lens that gets released.

Bang for the buck? For who? I'd be happy to pay for it on my end, especially since I see how well it performs on my 35 II. You know what happens when we assume. People paying $10k for a great white would be happy not to have CA problems too. That's real bang for the buck.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Pippan on December 06, 2017, 07:23:57 PM
I bet if everyone stopped buying the current 50mm f/1.4 USM they'd make a new one.

That won't happen though!
I've stopped buying it. In fact I've never bought it!  :)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: ahsanford on December 06, 2017, 07:25:57 PM
An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.

Because the 85 f/1.8 USM ruined the 85 f/1.2L USM II sales, and no one owns the 50 f/1.2L due to the powerhouse value that is the 50 f/1.4 USM.   ::)

Lenses' value are so much more than their max aperture and if they have IS.

- A
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: CanonFanBoy on December 06, 2017, 09:00:33 PM
An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.

Because the 85 f/1.8 USM ruined the 85 f/1.2L USM II sales, and no one owns the 50 f/1.2L due to the powerhouse value that is the 50 f/1.4 USM.   ::)

Lenses' value are so much more than their max aperture and if they have IS.

- A

Perfect. ;)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: CanonFanBoy on December 06, 2017, 09:05:46 PM
I bet if everyone stopped buying the current 50mm f/1.4 USM they'd make a new one.

That won't happen though!
I've stopped buying it. In fact I've never bought it!  :)

We need a petition and a boycott.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: stevelee on December 07, 2017, 12:37:46 AM
I bet if everyone stopped buying the current 50mm f/1.4 USM they'd make a new one.

That won't happen though!
I've stopped buying it. In fact I've never bought it!  :)

I bought just one 50mm f/1.4 several years ago, and then I quit buying them. I got it mainly to be a portrait lens for my T3i. I've never had occasion to try it on my 6D2. I haven't shot a real portrait in the short time I've had it, and would probably use the 100mm f/2.8 macro for that purpose on the 6D2 if the situation comes up. So far the kit zoom covers that range just fine, and I haven't needed to use a faster lens. In theory I think I should have an 85mm lens, and I certainly loved the 85mm lens I used with my film Canon decades ago. But since I haven't missed having one, my priorities will be toward lenses outside the 24-105mm range. My old 75-300mm lens is not that great, and I don't have anything in the super-wide range. For now, if that latter need came along, I'd still use the T3i with the 10-22mm lens that won't work on the 6D2.

So the odds of my ever buying a 50mm lens again are closer to none than to slim.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Maximilian on December 07, 2017, 02:41:16 AM
I bet if everyone stopped buying the current 50mm f/1.4 USM they'd make a new one.

That won't happen though!
I've stopped buying it. In fact I've never bought it!  :)

We need a petition and a boycott.
I did and do boycott Canon on 50 mm lenses since I was born ;)

In my family my father was the last one to buy a 50 mm lens, I suppose shortly after I was born.
It was a Canon FD 50mm F/1.2 (non L) and was stolen several years ago.

And I will keep boycotting that until I see a (non L) 50 mm lens similar to ahsanfords specification. ;)


Edit: but I am really interested in that 135 mm refresh as well
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Antono Refa on December 07, 2017, 11:20:18 AM
An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.

Because the 85 f/1.8 USM ruined the 85 f/1.2L USM II sales, and no one owns the 50 f/1.2L due to the powerhouse value that is the 50 f/1.4 USM.   ::)

Lenses' value are so much more than their max aperture and if they have IS.

If you have to use a straw man argument, and refer to the 85mm f/1.2 rather than the f/1.4, then you know you don't have an argument.

The f/1.2 lenses are specialty portraiture lenses, which is what makes it "so much more than their max aperture and ... IS", compared to the 85mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.4

Assuming those lenses will be released, what do you expect will make the difference between the 85mm f/1.8 IS USM and the 85mm f/1.4 IS USM? Or the 50mm f/whatever IS USM and the 50mm f/1.4L IS USM?
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: midluk on December 07, 2017, 11:34:23 AM
Assuming those lenses will be released, what do you expect will make the difference between the 85mm f/1.8 IS USM and the 85mm f/1.4 IS USM? Or the 50mm f/whatever IS USM and the 50mm f/1.4L IS USM?
Build quality, weather sealing, red ring, likely some slight differences in optical quality (e.g. vignetting), CPS eligibility, mirror box clipping, price.
But there is no use speculating about 50mm IS, those will not happen any time soon (if at all).
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: mb66energy on December 07, 2017, 12:02:19 PM
Please update the 50L with 1.4 and IS before you touch the 135
No, this will not happen. Canon will release an update of every other lens with added IS before a new 50mm.

I bet if ahsanford just stopped asking, they'd make the new 50/1.4 IS USM.   ;)

Dear ahsanford, please stop asking immediately !   :( :)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: mb66energy on December 07, 2017, 12:08:34 PM
But will it work with extenders?

For me that's the biggest plus about the 135 2.0L

I'm not sure if optical stabilization works with extenders since it's inherently designed to work with a specific focal length. I'd like to know this as well. Maybe Canon has IS teleconverters?

From what I understand:
(1) In lens IS trys to produce a stable image on the (non-stabilized) sensor plane.
(2) A tele converter is a lens / lens arrangement that blows up the image projected by the primary lens.
(3) maybe there are minor imperfections due to variations of the incident angle of the light by the image
      stabilizer group.

If the image generated by the lens is stable, the tele converter should leave this stabilization unchanged.
But: effective shake (amplitude e.g. in pixels) is increased by the factor of the teleconverter - same goes
for lens imperfections.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: CanonFanBoy on December 07, 2017, 07:27:36 PM
An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.

Because the 85 f/1.8 USM ruined the 85 f/1.2L USM II sales, and no one owns the 50 f/1.2L due to the powerhouse value that is the 50 f/1.4 USM.   ::)

Lenses' value are so much more than their max aperture and if they have IS.

If you have to use a straw man argument, and refer to the 85mm f/1.2 rather than the f/1.4, then you know you don't have an argument.

The f/1.2 lenses are specialty portraiture lenses, which is what makes it "so much more than their max aperture and ... IS", compared to the 85mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.4

Assuming those lenses will be released, what do you expect will make the difference between the 85mm f/1.8 IS USM and the 85mm f/1.4 IS USM? Or the 50mm f/whatever IS USM and the 50mm f/1.4L IS USM?

Antonio, I would rather know from you: In what way will the "85 f/1.8 IS USM perform almost like the 85 f/1.4L IS USM"? IQ? Bokeh? CA? Distortion? Build quality? Weather sealing? I ask because if what you say is true then I might save $$$$ buying the 1.8 if the performance is nearly the same as you claim. Maybe Mr. Stanford's comparison to the 1.2L was a typographical error. Straw man or not, I don't think your claim is valid.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: stevelee on December 07, 2017, 08:01:41 PM
In the film era I believe my 85mm FL lens was f/1.8, and I never felt a need for it to be faster or have shallower DOF.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Chaitanya on December 07, 2017, 10:46:42 PM
Another pricy L glass... Seems to me that Canon now cares only for high-end L glass or shitty APS-C zooms. People who don't need L glass, but who want a better camera/lens (potentially a fullframe) and who would buy lenses like 50mm f/1.4 IS USM or 85mm f/1.8 IS USM are a non-attractive category. I get it, the sales are happening elsewhere. But are there really only two categories? People who buy Rebels and then pros with no price/weight limits?

I always thought the Canon's strategy of not-offering better EF-S glass is to lure people into fullframe. But how many people really jump into fullframe with such a huge money leap? Because it's mostly targetted on pros, the bodies are expensive and so are L lenses (and heavy because f/1.4 etc). The non-L primes are mostly really old. Sure, people could buy older versions of L glass, but that usually means no IS, serious IQ pitfalls and big weight. I would expect Canon to offer more tiers of fullframe bodies and lenses (f/2 or f/2.8, STM, no weather sealing), especially with the potential release of a mirrorless EF fullframe and DSLR sales falling. Canon seems like a split personality, they are luring people in and keeping it an exclusive club at the same time.

Sure, Canon still sells a lot (but mostly Rebels right?), and Canon knows the market best, but it's inevitable that in a couple of years even more people would be happy with cameras in their phones. Which would mean even less people would care for entry-level APS-C cameras. Isn't this the best time to move more people into fullframe, where the prices will inevitably be higher?

Sorry for the rant, I guess I'll just have to get used to the fact I am not the market. ;D
You are forgetting about prehistoric 50mm Compact Macro(which was recently discontinued) which in even more dire need of replacement compared to 50mm 1.4. There are rumours of Nikon replacing their AF-S 60mm macro soon which was already an updated version of AF-D 60mm lens. Feels really sad that Canon is concentrating on high end and cheap lenses rather than the ones people can afford to replace their cheap kit lenses.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Antono Refa on December 07, 2017, 11:39:23 PM
An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.

Because the 85 f/1.8 USM ruined the 85 f/1.2L USM II sales, and no one owns the 50 f/1.2L due to the powerhouse value that is the 50 f/1.4 USM.   ::)

Lenses' value are so much more than their max aperture and if they have IS.

If you have to use a straw man argument, and refer to the 85mm f/1.2 rather than the f/1.4, then you know you don't have an argument.

The f/1.2 lenses are specialty portraiture lenses, which is what makes it "so much more than their max aperture and ... IS", compared to the 85mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.4

Assuming those lenses will be released, what do you expect will make the difference between the 85mm f/1.8 IS USM and the 85mm f/1.4 IS USM? Or the 50mm f/whatever IS USM and the 50mm f/1.4L IS USM?

Antonio, I would rather know from you: In what way will the "85 f/1.8 IS USM perform almost like the 85 f/1.4L IS USM"? IQ? Bokeh? CA? Distortion? Build quality? Weather sealing? I ask because if what you say is true then I might save $$$$ buying the 1.8 if the performance is nearly the same as you claim.

As this is a medium telephoto lens, I'll bet IQ, bokeh, CA, and distortion

Photographers who care enough about build quality & weather sealing to pay a premium are a minority.

Maybe Mr. Stanford's comparison to the 1.2L was a typographical error. Straw man or not, I don't think your claim is valid.

Don't make excuses for him. It doesn't help any.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: CanonFanBoy on December 08, 2017, 12:09:57 AM
An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.

Because the 85 f/1.8 USM ruined the 85 f/1.2L USM II sales, and no one owns the 50 f/1.2L due to the powerhouse value that is the 50 f/1.4 USM.   ::)

Lenses' value are so much more than their max aperture and if they have IS.

If you have to use a straw man argument, and refer to the 85mm f/1.2 rather than the f/1.4, then you know you don't have an argument.

The f/1.2 lenses are specialty portraiture lenses, which is what makes it "so much more than their max aperture and ... IS", compared to the 85mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.4

Assuming those lenses will be released, what do you expect will make the difference between the 85mm f/1.8 IS USM and the 85mm f/1.4 IS USM? Or the 50mm f/whatever IS USM and the 50mm f/1.4L IS USM?

Antonio, I would rather know from you: In what way will the "85 f/1.8 IS USM perform almost like the 85 f/1.4L IS USM"? IQ? Bokeh? CA? Distortion? Build quality? Weather sealing? I ask because if what you say is true then I might save $$$$ buying the 1.8 if the performance is nearly the same as you claim.

As this is a medium telephoto lens, I'll bet IQ, bokeh, CA, and distortion

Photographers who care enough about build quality & weather sealing to pay a premium are a minority.

Maybe Mr. Stanford's comparison to the 1.2L was a typographical error. Straw man or not, I don't think your claim is valid.

Don't make excuses for him. It doesn't help any.

Here's the problem I am having with what you wrote: "EF 85 f/1.8 IS USM". As far as I can tell there is no such lens. In fact, the EF 85 f/1.4L IS USM is the only Canon EF 85 with Image Stabilization. Is that a typo from you? Will you now accept the possibility that Mr. Sanford might have done the same?

So does the pseudo IS in your mythical lens perform as well as the genuine IS in the EF 85 f/1.4L IS USM?

Many professional photographers and enthusiasts care about IS a great deal.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: jd7 on December 08, 2017, 02:44:42 AM
An 85mm f/1.8 IS USM would perform almost like the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM for a much lower price, and would therefore steal sales from it. If it's max aperture is smaller, it would lose sales to zoom lenses.

Because the 85 f/1.8 USM ruined the 85 f/1.2L USM II sales, and no one owns the 50 f/1.2L due to the powerhouse value that is the 50 f/1.4 USM.   ::)

Lenses' value are so much more than their max aperture and if they have IS.

If you have to use a straw man argument, and refer to the 85mm f/1.2 rather than the f/1.4, then you know you don't have an argument.

The f/1.2 lenses are specialty portraiture lenses, which is what makes it "so much more than their max aperture and ... IS", compared to the 85mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.4

Assuming those lenses will be released, what do you expect will make the difference between the 85mm f/1.8 IS USM and the 85mm f/1.4 IS USM? Or the 50mm f/whatever IS USM and the 50mm f/1.4L IS USM?

Antonio, I would rather know from you: In what way will the "85 f/1.8 IS USM perform almost like the 85 f/1.4L IS USM"? IQ? Bokeh? CA? Distortion? Build quality? Weather sealing? I ask because if what you say is true then I might save $$$$ buying the 1.8 if the performance is nearly the same as you claim.

As this is a medium telephoto lens, I'll bet IQ, bokeh, CA, and distortion

Photographers who care enough about build quality & weather sealing to pay a premium are a minority.

Maybe Mr. Stanford's comparison to the 1.2L was a typographical error. Straw man or not, I don't think your claim is valid.

Don't make excuses for him. It doesn't help any.

If you read what ahsanford wrote, I think it's clear he didn't make any error when he referred to the 85 1.2L, and no one needs to make any excuses for him. His point was that there is a lot more to a lens than just maximum aperture and whether or not it has IS, and that that is illustrated by the fact that Canon has for a long time happily sold an 85 1.8 USM alongside a much higher priced 85 1.2L (original and mk II), and sold a 50 1.4 USM alongside a much higher priced 50 1.2L (not to mention a much cheaper 50 1.8 micro USM and more recently STM).

It is hard to see why anyone should expect if Canon produces a cheaper 85 1.8 IS USM (which you'd think is likely to happen at some point or other), it would perform "almost like the 85 1.4L IS USM" (taking into account all facets of lens performance), it is hard to see why Canon wouldn't be happy to sell an 85 1.8 IS USM alongside an 85 1.4L IS, and it is hard to imagine the cheaper lens stealing too many genuine sales from the L lens. (Many of us may want the L lens but settle for the cheaper lens, but that is not the same as saying we would have paid up for the L lens if the cheaper lens was not available.)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Antono Refa on December 08, 2017, 02:54:06 AM
Here's the problem I am having with what you wrote: "EF 85 f/1.8 IS USM". As far as I can tell there is no such lens.

My argument is about why there would or wouldn't be one, so of course there isn't one. If there was, there would be no point in having the discussion, would there?

In fact, the EF 85 f/1.4L IS USM is the only Canon EF 85 with Image Stabilization. Is that a typo from you? Will you now accept the possibility that Mr. Sanford might have done the same?

Now you're joining him in putting words in my mouth. Great work!
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Antono Refa on December 08, 2017, 03:05:13 AM
His point was that there is a lot more to a lens than just maximum aperture and whether or not it has IS, and that that is illustrated by the fact that Canon has for a long time happily sold an 85 1.8 USM alongside a much higher priced 85 1.2L (original and mk II), and sold a 50 1.4 USM alongside a much higher priced 50 1.2L (not to mention a much cheaper 50 1.8 micro USM and more recently STM).

And I explained why, IMHO, that's a different case.

...it is hard to imagine the cheaper lens stealing too many genuine sales from the L lens. (Many of us may want the L lens but settle for the cheaper lens, but that is not the same as saying we would have paid up for the L lens if the cheaper lens was not available.)

No, it isn't.

The 85mm f/1.8 is very good as it is. If Canon just added IS, plenty of people who can afford the L would settle on buying the non-L to save the money.

[Why? Because some people, say those who shoot in a studio, don't need weather sealing. Same for CPS, etc.]
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Maximilian on December 08, 2017, 03:48:24 AM
Hi to Antono and all other discussing the Canon 85 mm lens strategy on a 135 mm Lens thread! ;)

I don't want to add more fuel to the fire but I'd like to give my 5 cents to this discussion because it's a lot of "if's" and "when's" and "how's" of new lenses that might be released and might have some higher or lower quality.

So what do we have right now?

Personally I am sure, that we will see a successor of the 85/1.8 in less than 10 years. But I don't expect it within the next 1 or 2 years. If so, Canon would really surprise me.
If that successor comes the aimed market will stay similar to its predecessor and Canon surely will not make it good enough to steal sales from the two L lenses.
I don't see an IS in that lens or if so, they won't keep the f/1.8. But that's just IMO.

And to this

The 85mm f/1.8 is very good as it is. If Canon just added IS, plenty of people who can afford the L would settle on buying the non-L to save the money.

[Why? Because some people, say those who shoot in a studio, don't need weather sealing. Same for CPS, etc.]
I say:
No I don't see that, in several ways:

But ... if Canon makes the 85/1.8
Then this would be a really great allround (portrait) lens for all hobbyists, available light photographers and so on.
And if they keep the IQ noticeably below the L lenses I see markets for all of them.

But as I've said, I don't expect such a lens soon.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: jd7 on December 08, 2017, 03:48:33 AM
His point was that there is a lot more to a lens than just maximum aperture and whether or not it has IS, and that that is illustrated by the fact that Canon has for a long time happily sold an 85 1.8 USM alongside a much higher priced 85 1.2L (original and mk II), and sold a 50 1.4 USM alongside a much higher priced 50 1.2L (not to mention a much cheaper 50 1.8 micro USM and more recently STM).

And I explained why, IMHO, that's a different case.

I think I understand your point, but I am not so sure about the idea the 1.2Ls are specialist portrait lenses in a way so far different from what a 1.4L IS lens is or would be.

And anyway, think about a different case: Canon sells a 35 1.4L II which doesn't have IS, and yet sells a much cheaper 35 2 IS.

...it is hard to imagine the cheaper lens stealing too many genuine sales from the L lens. (Many of us may want the L lens but settle for the cheaper lens, but that is not the same as saying we would have paid up for the L lens if the cheaper lens was not available.)

No, it isn't.

The 85mm f/1.8 is very good as it is. If Canon just added IS, plenty of people who can afford the L would settle on buying the non-L to save the money.

[Why? Because some people, say those who shoot in a studio, don't need weather sealing. Same for CPS, etc.]

While weather sealing may well be an important drawcard for some buyers, there are other possible reasons to want an L lens too.  There are lots of other qualities to attract buyers - optical qualities like flair resistance, etc), performance factors such as AF speed and accuracy, and build quality factors such as reliability and longevity.

I'm sure there are some who might settle for the cheaper lens even though they would have bought the more expensive L lens if the cheaper one didn't exist, but:

1.  just because someone can afford something doesn't mean they will buy it - sometimes people just don't feel comfortable spending more than a certain amount on a particular thing, especially if it's a hobby (probably much less relevant to someone shooting professionally)

2.  even if Canon loses a few sales of the more expensive lens to the less expensive lens, Canon still gets revenue and presumably some profit when it sells the less expensive lens

3.  even if Canon loses a few sales of the more expensive lens to the less expensive lens, the question is how many extra sales does Canon make by having the cheaper lens on the market compared with just having the more expensive lens on the market? This links back to the two points above - if Canon makes enough sales of the cheaper lens, and many of those sales are sales it would not have made if it only had the more expensive lens on the market, it should be able to make more money overall than if it just had the more expensive lens on the market.

I think there is a good chance Canon will make an 85 1.8 IS USM one of these days, but I don't think it's any surprise the more expensive lens has come out first - to try to maximise the number of people who need a lens now / are impatient to break down and pay for the more expensive lens.  (I'm not saying it always has to be done that way, and yes I know Canon released the 35 2 IS before the 35 1.4L II.  All I'm saying is it doesn't seem particularly surprising for the more expensive version to come out first.)
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: ahsanford on December 08, 2017, 12:17:59 PM
Assuming those lenses will be released, what do you expect will make the difference between the 85mm f/1.8 IS USM and the 85mm f/1.4 IS USM? Or the 50mm f/whatever IS USM and the 50mm f/1.4L IS USM?

I do not assume those lenses will be released.  Non-L primes no longer get ring USM these days (they haven't in a good 5 years or so).  So right there the L vs. Non-L would be a marked difference.

But if they did, the pricier L lenses would likely be sharper, better built, have weather sealing, possibly have larger designs to combat vignetting, aberrations, etc.  They also could have larger focus rings with a longer throw, reel in better color and/or bokeh, focus more quickly, etc.

Again, pegging a prime lens's value on how fast it is and and if it has IS drives around a boatload of features, how it performs, etc.

- A
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: MayaTlab on December 08, 2017, 01:52:43 PM

1.  just because someone can afford something doesn't mean they will buy it - sometimes people just don't feel comfortable spending more than a certain amount on a particular thing, especially if it's a hobby (probably much less relevant to someone shooting professionally)

2.  even if Canon loses a few sales of the more expensive lens to the less expensive lens, Canon still gets revenue and presumably some profit when it sells the less expensive lens

3.  even if Canon loses a few sales of the more expensive lens to the less expensive lens, the question is how many extra sales does Canon make by having the cheaper lens on the market compared with just having the more expensive lens on the market? This links back to the two points above - if Canon makes enough sales of the cheaper lens, and many of those sales are sales it would not have made if it only had the more expensive lens on the market, it should be able to make more money overall than if it just had the more expensive lens on the market.

Count me in that category. I can afford the 85mm f1.4 IS USM. But I'll never, ever buy it. I don't give a rat's bottom about a 85mm lens that's faster than f2. I just don't need it, at all. To me it's unneeded extra weight, cost, and size. But I do need a good 85mm f2/f2.4 lens. And that's where the 85mm f1.8, albeit undoubtedly a great design given its age, falls short in various ways. That's even more so with Canon's 50mm lineup.

Canon not delivering a proper midrange prime lineup above 35mm is one less reason for me to stick with the system.

Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: Antono Refa on December 09, 2017, 01:23:05 AM
Assuming those lenses will be released, what do you expect will make the difference between the 85mm f/1.8 IS USM and the 85mm f/1.4 IS USM? Or the 50mm f/whatever IS USM and the 50mm f/1.4L IS USM?

I do not assume those lenses will be released.  Non-L primes no longer get ring USM these days (they haven't in a good 5 years or so).  So right there the L vs. Non-L would be a marked difference.

But if they did, the pricier L lenses would likely be sharper, better built, have weather sealing, possibly have larger designs to combat vignetting, aberrations, etc.  They also could have larger focus rings with a longer throw, reel in better color and/or bokeh, focus more quickly, etc.

First, you make some assumptions here I could throw in your face just like you & your body just did.

Then some people might look very differently on this list. E.g. smaller lens might be a positive, vignetting can be corrected (the current f/1.8 has <2 stops wide open, reasonable), etc.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: symmar22 on December 09, 2017, 05:22:00 AM

1.  just because someone can afford something doesn't mean they will buy it - sometimes people just don't feel comfortable spending more than a certain amount on a particular thing, especially if it's a hobby (probably much less relevant to someone shooting professionally)

2.  even if Canon loses a few sales of the more expensive lens to the less expensive lens, Canon still gets revenue and presumably some profit when it sells the less expensive lens

3.  even if Canon loses a few sales of the more expensive lens to the less expensive lens, the question is how many extra sales does Canon make by having the cheaper lens on the market compared with just having the more expensive lens on the market? This links back to the two points above - if Canon makes enough sales of the cheaper lens, and many of those sales are sales it would not have made if it only had the more expensive lens on the market, it should be able to make more money overall than if it just had the more expensive lens on the market.

Count me in that category. I can afford the 85mm f1.4 IS USM. But I'll never, ever buy it. I don't give a rat's bottom about a 85mm lens that's faster than f2. I just don't need it, at all. To me it's unneeded extra weight, cost, and size. But I do need a good 85mm f2/f2.4 lens. And that's where the 85mm f1.8, albeit undoubtedly a great design given its age, falls short in various ways. That's even more so with Canon's 50mm lineup.

Canon not delivering a proper midrange prime lineup above 35mm is one less reason for me to stick with the system.

+1 for some non-L IS primes, I work with about 12 lenses, a few are non L (15mm Fisheye, 35mm IS, 40mm, 45 TS-E , 90TS-E) and I never see them as cheaper lenses to my L ones, they do their job, no client ever complained. None of them ever had to be serviced, weather sealing is nice but not a must for me and I very seldom need extreme apertures. The 35mm IS and 40 mm pancake are among my sharpest lenses, I never looked into the 35mm 1.4L, too big and heavy, wouldn't bring anything to my work. My Pelican case full of lenses is too heavy already, and bigger an brighter is not a must in my case.

I too would love to see an 85mm f1.8 or even f2 with IS the same range as the 24,28 and 35mm, I'd buy it the day it's available. The 1.4 seems nice, but it's not a lens I want. I am perfectly happy (and my clients too) with the 35mm IS and cheap 40mm pancake. I even tried to replace my 15mm fisheye with the L zoom, and couln't see a difference except more weight size an price, so I kept the 15mm.

I was a Nikon shooter in film days and started too invest in the brightest series of the AI-S lenses (24 f2, 35f1.4, 851.4 and 135 f2) to realize a few years later that their smaller apertures brothers all did a better job for my work. Fact is that making lenses less bright simplifies the optical formula and allows to make lenses as good if not better than their super bright equivalents. What was true 30 years ago is still true, even more since the digital age where ISO is not a problem anymore. Not everything requires to be shot at 1.4, and for those smaller f-stops, less bright lenses do the same job. If they weight half and cost one third, it's all bonus.

As for the 135mm I vote for a 135mm f2 IS instead of 1.8, but I don't think I'll upgrade mine anyway.

It's a bit of a trick of the marketing to make one believe he always need the biggest and most expensive; some do, most of us don't, but it's not to put aside the social status that a camera and a big lens seem to deliver.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: MayaTlab on December 09, 2017, 07:55:53 AM

1.  just because someone can afford something doesn't mean they will buy it - sometimes people just don't feel comfortable spending more than a certain amount on a particular thing, especially if it's a hobby (probably much less relevant to someone shooting professionally)

2.  even if Canon loses a few sales of the more expensive lens to the less expensive lens, Canon still gets revenue and presumably some profit when it sells the less expensive lens

3.  even if Canon loses a few sales of the more expensive lens to the less expensive lens, the question is how many extra sales does Canon make by having the cheaper lens on the market compared with just having the more expensive lens on the market? This links back to the two points above - if Canon makes enough sales of the cheaper lens, and many of those sales are sales it would not have made if it only had the more expensive lens on the market, it should be able to make more money overall than if it just had the more expensive lens on the market.

Count me in that category. I can afford the 85mm f1.4 IS USM. But I'll never, ever buy it. I don't give a rat's bottom about a 85mm lens that's faster than f2. I just don't need it, at all. To me it's unneeded extra weight, cost, and size. But I do need a good 85mm f2/f2.4 lens. And that's where the 85mm f1.8, albeit undoubtedly a great design given its age, falls short in various ways. That's even more so with Canon's 50mm lineup.

Canon not delivering a proper midrange prime lineup above 35mm is one less reason for me to stick with the system.

+1 for some non-L IS primes, I work with about 12 lenses, a few are non L (15mm Fisheye, 35mm IS, 40mm, 45 TS-E , 90TS-E) and I never see them as cheaper lenses to my L ones, they do their job, no client ever complained. None of them ever had to be serviced, weather sealing is nice but not a must for me and I very seldom need extreme apertures. The 35mm IS and 40 mm pancake are among my sharpest lenses, I never looked into the 35mm 1.4L, too big and heavy, wouldn't bring anything to my work. My Pelican case full of lenses is too heavy already, and bigger an brighter is not a must in my case.

I too would love to see an 85mm f1.8 or even f2 with IS the same range as the 24,28 and 35mm, I'd buy it the day it's available. The 1.4 seems nice, but it's not a lens I want. I am perfectly happy (and my clients too) with the 35mm IS and cheap 40mm pancake. I even tried to replace my 15mm fisheye with the L zoom, and couln't see a difference except more weight size an price, so I kept the 15mm.

I was a Nikon shooter in film days and started too invest in the brightest series of the AI-S lenses (24 f2, 35f1.4, 851.4 and 135 f2) to realize a few years later that their smaller apertures brothers all did a better job for my work. Fact is that making lenses less bright simplifies the optical formula and allows to make lenses as good if not better than their super bright equivalents. What was true 30 years ago is still true, even more since the digital age where ISO is not a problem anymore. Not everything requires to be shot at 1.4, and for those smaller f-stops, less bright lenses do the same job. If they weight half and cost one third, it's all bonus.

As for the 135mm I vote for a 135mm f2 IS instead of 1.8, but I don't think I'll upgrade mine anyway.

It's a bit of a trick of the marketing to make one believe he always need the biggest and most expensive; some do, most of us don't, but it's not to put aside the social status that a camera and a big lens seem to deliver.

When I was a kid in the 90s I was able to borrow my grandfather's rangefinders to play Tintin. So for me large lenses have always been the exception, not the rule, and I've never really loved using them.

To put things in very concrete terms : Canon hasn't received any lens money from me since 2012 other than the €125 50mm STM. There's at least €1500, even 2000 euros in my wallet for Canon if the mid-range prime lineup is developed above the 35mm IS USM's focal range and in that spirit.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: BillB on December 09, 2017, 09:26:15 AM

When I was a kid in the 90s I was able to borrow my grandfather's rangefinders to play Tintin. So for me large lenses have always been the exception, not the rule, and I've never really loved using them.

To put things in very concrete terms : Canon hasn't received any lens money from me since 2012 other than the €125 50mm STM. There's at least €1500, even 2000 euros in my wallet for Canon if the mid-range prime lineup is developed above the 35mm IS USM's focal range and in that spirit.

At least in the US, the Canon Store is now selling the 100mm f2.8 IS macro for $750, usual price $1000.  If I were looking to upgrade my 85mm f1.8 I would grab one.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: MayaTlab on December 09, 2017, 09:58:59 AM

When I was a kid in the 90s I was able to borrow my grandfather's rangefinders to play Tintin. So for me large lenses have always been the exception, not the rule, and I've never really loved using them.

To put things in very concrete terms : Canon hasn't received any lens money from me since 2012 other than the €125 50mm STM. There's at least €1500, even 2000 euros in my wallet for Canon if the mid-range prime lineup is developed above the 35mm IS USM's focal range and in that spirit.

At least in the US, the Canon Store is now selling the 100mm f2.8 IS macro for $750, usual price $1000.  If I were looking to upgrade my 85mm f1.8 I would grab one.

I love the 100mm f2.8 IS USM's overall IQ, and I used to own one, but I find the difference in focal length noticeable and prefer to use the smaller 85mm f1.8 when shooting most of the time.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: slclick on December 09, 2017, 10:45:45 AM
So....back to the focal length at hand, the 135mm lens rumored to be refreshed...

What BESIDES image stabilization are you looking for in an update to this lens?

Vignetting correction? Minimizing flare? The micro contrast, color rendition and sharpness are already top notch.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: danfaz on December 09, 2017, 06:40:55 PM
So....back to the focal length at hand, the 135mm lens rumored to be refreshed...

What BESIDES image stabilization are you looking for in an update to this lens?

Vignetting correction? Minimizing flare? The micro contrast, color rendition and sharpness are already top notch.

Thanks for getting us back on track! Aside from IS, I am looking forward to weather-sealing. While not a huge factor, I have been caught in sudden rain showers that made me pack up. The 135mm is ideal for outdoors, but lack of any weather-sealing is a weakness.
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: neuroanatomist on December 09, 2017, 07:22:36 PM
So....back to the focal length at hand, the 135mm lens rumored to be refreshed...

What BESIDES image stabilization are you looking for in an update to this lens?

Vignetting correction? Minimizing flare? The micro contrast, color rendition and sharpness are already top notch.

Thanks for getting us back on track! Aside from IS, I am looking forward to weather-sealing. While not a huge factor, I have been caught in sudden rain showers that made me pack up. The 135mm is ideal for outdoors, but lack of any weather-sealing is a weakness.

Indeed.  With apologies and at the risk of again diverging from the topical focal length, we had our first real snowfall of the season today (still ongoing, in fact), and I was able to take some nice portraits of the kids in the snow with the 85/1.4L IS, whereas I wouldn't have taken the 85/1.2L II out in the snow. 
Title: Re: Another Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS USM Mention [CR2]
Post by: slclick on December 09, 2017, 08:12:56 PM
So....back to the focal length at hand, the 135mm lens rumored to be refreshed...

What BESIDES image stabilization are you looking for in an update to this lens?

Vignetting correction? Minimizing flare? The micro contrast, color rendition and sharpness are already top notch.

Thanks for getting us back on track! Aside from IS, I am looking forward to weather-sealing. While not a huge factor, I have been caught in sudden rain showers that made me pack up. The 135mm is ideal for outdoors, but lack of any weather-sealing is a weakness.

Indeed.  With apologies and at the risk of again diverging from the topical focal length, we had our first real snowfall of the season today (still ongoing, in fact), and I was able to take some nice portraits of the kids in the snow with the 85/1.4L IS, whereas I wouldn't have taken the 85/1.2L II out in the snow.

Only a mere segue flesh wound, you kept to weather sealing and I agree with two posts above, that would be quite welcome on the 135L 2 (I know I know, if it's the 135L IS, it's not a Mk2.)