New Canon Lenses Availability - Updated

[Canon Rumors]

Share

Updated – May 25, 2011 @ 9:00PM EST

Canon added dates of December 2011 for the 500 f/4L IS II and 600 f/4L IS II.

thanks Paolo

Update to sales start for EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM, EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM and EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM lenses

London, UK, 25th May 2011 – Following the announcement of delays to the sales start to the following lenses : EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM, EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM and EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM, Canon can now provide an update on the planned start dates for these lenses:

• EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM   Late August, 2011


• EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM   Late August, 2011


• EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM   Late July, 2011


• EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM   December 2011*


• EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM   December 2011*

Canon would like to apologise to any customers who have been inconvenienced by these delays.

*Any sales start dates will be communicated as soon as they become available.

[source] thanks Eyal

cr

[dstppy]

"EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM Late July, 2011"

Being that this is *just* far off enough to not be totally implausible . . . I'm going to hold back on a full-fledged 'when bacon gets wings' comment . . . but seriously, this thing has been Canon's campaign promise that we've heard a lot about but are still waiting for

Here's hoping.

[Flake]

The big question will be if Canon honestly thinks it can announce any other products when it hasn't even begun to ship the ones from the previous announcement?

Who will take a company seriously in those circumstances?  My feeling is that no new lens announcements will be made until they've sorted this mess out.

[dstppy]

I agree, but it really depends on the scope/demand of the lens.

A new 50mm 1.4 has a lot less going on inside vs (as an example) the zoom fish-eye.

Also, motivation would be high to produce something like a new kit lens 24-105 replacement, I'm looking at you . . .

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a new body come to market before the 8-15 

[Justin]

The big question will be if Canon honestly thinks it can announce any other products when it hasn't even begun to ship the ones from the previous announcement?

Who will take a company seriously in those circumstances?  My feeling is that no new lens announcements will be made until they've sorted this mess out.

Right, I agree. If Canon does make additional lens announcements they would look very foolish indeed unless they chose to make the lens(es) available immediately.

[DJL329]

I can't wait for the comments from the folks wondering 'Why wasn't the 200-400mm w/1.4x TC included in this updated announcement?'

(In case you are wondering, that lens is a P-R-O-T-O-T-Y-P-E, not a product ready for release.)

[unfocused]

My feeling is that no new lens announcements will be made until they've sorted this mess out.

Generally, I'm not one to second-guess Canon (or Nikon). I can't argue with their success. But, I do admit this whole lens thing has me wondering.

I didn't pay much attention when these lenses were first announced because lenses that cost thousands of dollars aren't likely to show up in my camera bag anytime soon. I never really understood why they felt the need to upgrade these Big Whites and assumed it had more to do with market positioning than anything else.

But, as the months go by without the product actually being delivered, it sure does seem that it's got to be a little embarrassing. And, I agree that it's a little hard to announce and deliver other lenses while these announcements gather dust.

[DJL329]

My feeling is that no new lens announcements will be made until they've sorted this mess out.

Generally, I'm not one to second-guess Canon (or Nikon). I can't argue with their success. But, I do admit this whole lens thing has me wondering.

I didn't pay much attention when these lenses were first announced because lenses that cost thousands of dollars aren't likely to show up in my camera bag anytime soon. I never really understood why they felt the need to upgrade these Big Whites and assumed it had more to do with market positioning than anything else.

But, as the months go by without the product actually being delivered, it sure does seem that it's got to be a little embarrassing. And, I agree that it's a little hard to announce and deliver other lenses while these announcements gather dust.

1.  As megapixels increase, the dSLRs start to out-resolve the lenses.

2.  New technology, including the newer IS modes.

3.  Competition.  If you sit still, you fall behind.

4.  Part of the delay has been caused by the natural disasters in Japan, which is where the bodies and lenses are produced.

[UncleFester]

Also: optimized for video/weight reduction for the new supers.

[NXT1000]

that is so great, almost 1 year delay, and meanwhile there are no stock of the old version I lens. The version I was almost perfect already, the new lens should be better, but much more expensive. They must have encounter massive technical problem trying to improve perfection.

[Flake]

1.  As megapixels increase, the dSLRs start to out-resolve the lenses.

2.  New technology, including the newer IS modes.

3.  Competition.  If you sit still, you fall behind.

4.  Part of the delay has been caused by the natural disasters in Japan, which is where the bodies and lenses are produced

1.  This an oft quoted urban myth!  megapixels would need to increase an awful lot more to even start to outresolve lenses, and even then different colours resolve differently , due to the wavelendth of light.

In resolution terms an 8MP camera has 3456 by 2304 pixels the 5D MkII has 5616 x 3744  an increase of nearly 2.5x the number of MP but resolution hasn't even been doubled - just a 60% increase.  This becomes even harder to increase as the numbers get bigger to double the resolution of the 5D MkII the sensor would need to be an incredible 84MP !

What will happen as resolution increases on FF cameras is the flaws in lenses such as corner & border resolution will become even more noticable, and it does beg the question as to whether that is a price worth paying.

2.  Are you referring to the new H-IS mode?  WHat would be the point in putting that into new lenses when it's designed for the lateral movement seen in macro photography?  It makes no difference at all when it's in a normal lens, unless it's used in close up.

[Bob Howland]

I can't wait for the comments from the folks wondering 'Why wasn't the 200-400mm w/1.4x TC included in this updated announcement?'

(In case you are wondering, that lens is a P-R-O-T-O-T-Y-P-E, not a product ready for release.)

Talk about arguing with a strawman!! Incidentally, I very much want to use the 200-400. The way that I shoot, it would be a natural partner for my 40D or a 7D or its successor.

[Flake]

When & if the Canon 200 - 400mm f/4 is released you can expect it to carry a price ticket of around £5000 Nikons version is slightly less than this but it doesn't have the 1.4 TC built in.  It's a ridiculous amount of money unless you have money to burn, or you're using it as a professional and it's paying it's way.

The latest Sigma 120 - 300mm f/2.8 OS with a 1.4 TC will give you the same focal length at half the price, and if you're wondering about the image quality it's well up to the mark check out the recent review on Photozone.

[Bob Howland]

When & if the Canon 200 - 400mm f/4 is released you can expect it to carry a price ticket of around £5000 Nikons version is slightly less than this but it doesn't have the 1.4 TC built in.  It's a ridiculous amount of money unless you have money to burn, or you're using it as a professional and it's paying it's way.

The latest Sigma 120 - 300mm f/2.8 OS with a 1.4 TC will give you the same focal length at half the price, and if you're wondering about the image quality it's well up to the mark check out the recent review on Photozone.

That's what I love about these forums, having the same discussions with the same people, over and over and over again.

You're probably right about the price, but calling it "ridiculous" is a bit extreme. I don't want a 120-420, where I have to remove the lens from the camera to add or remove a TC. That's the situation I'm in with my 300 f/2.8 now. I want a 200-560 that I can leave on the camera all afternoon. (If Sigma introduced a 200-500 f/4 or, better yet, f/2.8-4, I'd seriously consider that, especially if the maximum aperture was f/2.8 between 200mm and 350mm.) And, oh yes, my Sigma 2X TC is pretty bad.

[Justin]

I can't wait for the comments from the folks wondering 'Why wasn't the 200-400mm w/1.4x TC included in this updated announcement?'

(In case you are wondering, that lens is a P-R-O-T-O-T-Y-P-E, not a product ready for release.)

Talk about arguing with a strawman!! Incidentally, I very much want to use the 200-400. The way that I shoot, it would be a natural partner for my 40D or a 7D or its successor.

So why wasn't the 200-400 included in the announcement? I too want to know more about the lens.