Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

[willis]

Looking for 14-24 F2.8L

[Viggo]

an f/1.4 wide-angle lens is NOT about speed. It is about the chance to get at least some halfway decent  bokeh at wide-angle focal lengths. An f/1.4 lens therefore can never be substituted by a slower lens with IS.

The real issue however is not IS or not IS, it is the fact, that all of Canon's current 1.4 lenses deliver SUB-PAR IQ wide open. NB matter whether they have a red ring or not. 24 L II, 35 L I, 50 non L. And the 50/1.2 L is a sub-par piece of cr*p as well by todays standards. A Sigma 50/1.4 runs circles around it. 

As far as 35mm fixed focals are concerned,  currently the only 35/1.4 in the entire market which is fully usable at f/1.4 is the Sigma 35/1.4.  At a street price wich is lower than the totally useless Canon 24 /2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS and it beats the Zeiss Distagon 35.

And btw, I come from an entirely different usage situation:
* when I shoot handheld in low light, I ALWAYS shoot moving targets ... that is ... PEOPLE in motion ... 1/60s needed, nothing less. IS useless. :-)
* when I shoot static targets in low light, I ALWAYS use a tripod. IS useless. :-)

Wow.. does it hurt to be so wrong?

And besides, not all moving people are like the elderly and very cold, you apparently shoot.

[Marek Truchlik]

an f/1.4 wide-angle lens is NOT about speed. It is about the chance to get at least some halfway decent  bokeh at wide-angle focal lengths. An f/1.4 lens therefore can never be substituted by a slower lens with IS.

The real issue however is not IS or not IS, it is the fact, that all of Canon's current 1.4 lenses deliver SUB-PAR IQ wide open. NB matter whether they have a red ring or not. 24 L II, 35 L I, 50 non L. And the 50/1.2 L is a sub-par piece of cr*p as well by todays standards. A Sigma 50/1.4 runs circles around it. 

As far as 35mm fixed focals are concerned,  currently the only 35/1.4 in the entire market which is fully usable at f/1.4 is the Sigma 35/1.4.  At a street price wich is lower than the totally useless Canon 24 /2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS and it beats the Zeiss Distagon 35.

And btw, I come from an entirely different usage situation:
* when I shoot handheld in low light, I ALWAYS shoot moving targets ... that is ... PEOPLE in motion ... 1/60s needed, nothing less. IS useless. :-)
* when I shoot static targets in low light, I ALWAYS use a tripod. IS useless. :-)

I do agree totally on performance of 1.4 or 1.2 lenses from Canon, definitely could be better.
It will be difficult to beat current Sigmas.

[neuroanatomist]

the 50L is CRAP.. .. the 85L is the only sub 100mm L that kicks some serious ass..

Interesting.  So, you owned the 50L and, what...chucked it in the bin?  Better bokeh than any Sigma lens and most Canon lenses, but sure...crap.  Maybe intended use, portraits, for example, should be considered?  Naah, you're right it's crap.

You're right about no other sub-100mm L lenses except the 85L being any good, either.  My TS-E 24L II must be crap, too.

[Dylan777]

Wow.. does it hurt to be so wrong?

And besides, not all moving people are like the elderly and very cold, you apparently shoot.

a better question would be.. does it hurt you.. to be so ignorant? the 50L is CRAP.. the 24L and 35L are kinda ok (you heard me! if they were in the sigma 35/1.4 price range.. they would almost kick ass.. but for double that? forget it!).. the 85L is the only sub 100mm L that kicks some serious ass..

Just another no budget talker. I wonder, what kina lenses do you have?

I'm sure you think 1D X is crappy camera too

[nightbreath]

the 50L is CRAP.. .. the 85L is the only sub 100mm L that kicks some serious ass..

Interesting.  So, you owned the 50L and, what...chucked it in the bin?  Better bokeh than any Sigma lens and most Canon lenses, but sure...crap.  Maybe intended use, portraits, for example, should be considered?  Naah, you're right it's crap.

You're right about no other sub-100mm L lenses except the 85L being any good, either.  My TS-E 24L II must be crap, too.

+1. 50L is a great tool for an artist, not the best one for making test chart shots. It's all about who you want to be 

[roimund]

Just another no budget talker. I wonder, what kina lenses do you have?

I'm sure you think 1D X is crappy camera too

28/1.8 and a 50/1.4 - mostly carry it with me on the streets in the bag whilst walking about during my commute in the city where i study.. so yeah.. i don´s have the money for a noctilux..

the 1D X is an excellent camera for sport shooters.. why on earth would i say it were crappy?

[Daniel Flather]

ef 14/2.8LII here we come, cuz teh 12-24 will be $3000+.  I just need the validation. 

[Daniel Flather]

the 50L is CRAP.. .. the 85L is the only sub 100mm L that kicks some serious ass..

Interesting.  So, you owned the 50L and, what...chucked it in the bin?  Better bokeh than any Sigma lens and most Canon lenses, but sure...crap.  Maybe intended use, portraits, for example, should be considered?  Naah, you're right it's crap.

You're right about no other sub-100mm L lenses except the 85L being any good, either.  My TS-E 24L II must be crap, too.

The 24/1.4L II is teh blowz0r too, and the 85/1.8, 35/1.4 et al.

[RS2021]

ef 14/2.8LII here we come, cuz teh 12-24 will be $3000+.  I just need the validation.

I was thinking more like $2400 to 2500? Optimistic ? 

[neuroanatomist]

I wonder, what kina lenses do you have?

28/1.8 and a 50/1.4

In that case, on what are your scathing comments on the 50L based?  Rented it a few times, perhaps?  Or have you just read lots of reviews?  Personally, I've never used the 28/1.8, but reviews call it soft and 'disappointing' (and the 'kinda ok' 24L II and 35L are certainly sharper). How does that match up with your real-world experience with the 28/1.8? 

[Viggo]

Wow.. does it hurt to be so wrong?

And besides, not all moving people are like the elderly and very cold, you apparently shoot.

a better question would be.. does it hurt you.. to be so ignorant? the 50L is CRAP.. the 24L and 35L are kinda ok (you heard me! if they were in the sigma 35/1.4 price range.. they would almost kick ass.. but for double that? forget it!).. the 85L is the only sub 100mm L that kicks some serious ass..

The TS 17 was so soft I had to sell it, the af didn't work on three copies !! Useless...

[RS2021]

The TS 17 was so soft I had to sell it, the af didn't work on three copies !! Useless...

Er... Sorry..TS E 17 is a manual lens ...trying to auto focus it is like trying to milk a bull?

[neuroanatomist]

The TS 17 was so soft I had to sell it, the af didn't work on three copies !! Useless...

Damn, the AF on my TS-E 24L II doesn't work, either.  Canon's QC sucks!!! 

[Viggo]

The TS 17 was so soft I had to sell it, the af didn't work on three copies !! Useless...

Er... Sorry..TS E 17 is a manual lens ...trying to auto focus it is like trying to milk a bull?

Did you actually think I owned the TS17 on a 1d X not knowing it's MF? Irony in writing is sometimes lost, apparently...