List of rumored lenses

[rocketdesigner]

Plastic has improved shock absorbing qualities over metal, so I'd not be surprised if it actually did well in that respect.  It doesn't conduct heat as readily either, which is important too (i.e. preventing fogging and sweating).

This whole "metal versus polycarbonate" debate reminds me of people talking about handguns.  "I wouldn't buy one of the new plastic guns..." but of course they're used everywhere, and lighter too.

FWIW, Yes the Glock 9mm is virtually all plastic, and it is the most widely used handgun - including law enforcement (and yours truly). It is virtually indestructible.

[kubelik]

Plastic has improved shock absorbing qualities over metal, so I'd not be surprised if it actually did well in that respect.  It doesn't conduct heat as readily either, which is important too (i.e. preventing fogging and sweating).

This whole "metal versus polycarbonate" debate reminds me of people talking about handguns.  "I wouldn't buy one of the new plastic guns..." but of course they're used everywhere, and lighter too.

FWIW, Yes the Glock 9mm is virtually all plastic, and it is the most widely used handgun - including law enforcement (and yours truly). It is virtually indestructible.

I think that's exactly the point Edwin was trying to make.

I'm another who has no problem with the build quality and materials used in the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro.  I appreciate the reduced weight, not because I don't like carrying much weight around, but because it balances on the camera well.  the image quality is fantastic and the AF works extremely well, and that's the number 1  and 2 things I care about in my lenses.

[Nickbroberts]

Having studied materials at university, I would consider engineering polymers to generally be superior materials for lens barrel and camera construction to metals for most uses - and the 100 L macro certainly doesn't feel  insubstantial to me. The only L lens I've owned that does feel lighter than I would expect, but is not flimsy, is the 70-200 f4 L IS, and the only L lens I've had that's fallen apart is my ancient and metal-barrelled 20-35 f2.8 L, and that only after it was dropped - and it used to belong to a press photographer in its prime, anyway, so it's had a hard life.

[Joseph]

Since the lens rumors tend to pile up and get lost in the archives (apart from the fan favorite 24-70 f/2.8L IS), I thought I'd collect the lenses that get most mentions. Inspired by a post by user [Canon 14-24].

I haven't included some of the more obvious CR1 fakes. Feel free to contribute or correct my mistakes.

PS: Yeah I am bored & obsessed & love CR


Updated July 23, 2010
- Added EF/EF-S Mystery f/2 zoom. The information regarding this is sketchy at best but there are a number of posts about it. Thanks [pierlux].

Updated July 21, 2010
- Added EF 16-50 f/4L H-IS.
- Moved 14-24 f/2.8L to Zooms. Thanks [Justin].


Primes & Macros

EF Mystery prime
Last rumor: July 14, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/this-that/

EF/EF-S 30/35 f/1.8
Last rumor: May 20, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/new-30-f1-8-type-prime-cr1/

EF 35 f/1.4L II
Last rumor: April 24, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/ef-35-f1-4l-discontinued-2/

EF 50 f/1.2L II
Last rumor: May 28, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/50l-85l-135l-to-get-upgraded-cr1/

EF 50 f/1.4 II
Last rumor: June 19, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/backorders-telling-tales/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/lenses-cr2/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/03/ef-50-f1-4-ii-usm-cr2/

EF 60 f/2.8 IS Macro
Last rumor: July 6, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/lenses-lenses-lenses-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/more-60d-conflicting-information-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/ef-60mm-f2-8-is-macro/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/1ds-mark-iv-lenses-cr2/

EF 85 f/1.2L III
Last rumor: May 28, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/50l-85l-135l-to-get-upgraded-cr1/

EF 135 f/2L IS
Last rumor: May 28, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/50l-85l-135l-to-get-upgraded-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/ef-135-f1-8l-is-cr1/

EF 200 f/4L IS Macro
Last rumor: July 6, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/lenses-lenses-lenses-cr1/


Zooms

EF/EF-S Mystery f/2 zoom
Last rumor: February 16, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/canon-ef-s-17-55-f2-is-patent/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/01/predictions-for-2010-part-2-lenses/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/11/a-canon-first-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/09/from-the-archive/

EF 14-24 f/2.8L
Last rumor: April 14, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/ef-14-24-coming-in-2010-cr1/

EF 16-50 f/4L H-IS
Last rumor: July 20, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/new-f4l-ef-zoom-cr1/

EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS
Last rumor: July 6, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/lenses-lenses-lenses-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/more-60d-conflicting-information-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/a-tale-24-70-f2-8l-replacement/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/backorders-telling-tales/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/1ds-mark-iv-lenses-cr2/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/03/1ds4-5d3-lenses/

EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS
Last rumor: July 9, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/new-lenses-cr1/

EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II
Last rumor: June 3, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/making-sense-of-small-tidbits-of-info/

Beautifully built list !!!!

[Joseph]

Canon has developed a sub-L build quality with the L label (100mm f/2.8L MACRO).

How is the build quality of the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS 'sub-L'?  Mine feels quite solid, definitely a step up from my EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS.  The 100L Macro is weather-sealed, many of my other L lenses are not.  If you think it's 'sub-L' because the barrel is 'engineering plastic', well, most black L lens barrels are the same material.

the debunked rumor about Canon getting rid of the non-L EF-lenses.

How and when was the idea that Canon is done with non-L EF lenses debunked?  The only non-L EF lens released since the launch of the first Canon APS-C camera was the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS lens, and it's pretty well known that the cost savings from EF-S telephoto lenses are a diminishing return.  There hasn't been a new non-L EF prime lens since well before the D30.

I'm curious to hear how the 100L is sub L quality too.

It's funny how something can be perceived as "cheap", or as stated above, "sub L" quality based on build material and weight alone. The truth is, as 95% of the photographers on this site will tell you, a lens doesn't gain it's classification into the "L" series based on build quality alone. Otherwise you could take the components from a 18-55 f/4.5-5.6 and assemble it within a 2lbs. weather sealed housing, and call it an "L"....

In my opinion, its the physics behind the optics and the image that it can produce in combination with rigidity and build quality that classifies the lens. Don't get me wrong... the build quality is most definitely important in a L - series lens, being their professional line and all. I just find that what they did with the 100mm 2.8L is perfectly adequate.
Can you drop it from 5ft onto concrete and still use the lens? Probably not, and i'm most certainly not willing to test that. BUT - it does have some nice weather sealing that has held up to light/moderate rain on my 7D just fine, and that in combination with the fantastic images I can capture classify it as an "L- Series" lens for me.

You know , there are several metal alternatives out that are more durable than the current metal housings on some of the L series lenses - I love the lighter weight on some of the newer lenses -

CANON LISTEN UP !!!!  It would be awesome for Canon to put serious consideration into making alternative L series lenses , built around higher quality , lighter weight materials . I would pay more for a light weight version of my 24-70mm 2.8L , that damn things torques down on my fingers and wrist like crazy in a long day of shooting - which I have to do all hand held with a 1D body , flash frame and a 580 on top of it.

Think about it !

[Joseph]

lot of people shooting pretty happily with 50 f/1.4s with no problems, and I'm one of them.  definitely shoot plenty with it, and plenty with it in AF mode.  considering it costs just over 3 times as much as the f/1.8, the question is really, is it 3 times better.  between the image+bokeh quality and the build quality and the extra 2/3 stop of light, I'd say definitely yes.

I've never used the 1.8 or 1.4 , but I have read so many articles of photojournalist using the 1.4 in the field - they say that it can take an incredible beating , and shoot amazing images in harsh situations - I only own all L series lenes , but I really considered getting one of these from the stories I have heard !

[Leopard Lupus]

I have used the 50mm 1.4 for the last year, and have only taken it off my camera body a few times to switch out for an 85mm.  It is by far my favourite, well priced, durable lens that is only slightly under the L version in IQ. I highly recommend this nifty-fifty.

[psycho5]

Having studied materials at university, I would consider engineering polymers to generally be superior materials for lens barrel and camera construction to metals for most uses - and the 100 L macro certainly doesn't feel  insubstantial to me. The only L lens I've owned that does feel lighter than I would expect, but is not flimsy, is the 70-200 f4 L IS, and the only L lens I've had that's fallen apart is my ancient and metal-barrelled 20-35 f2.8 L, and that only after it was dropped - and it used to belong to a press photographer in its prime, anyway, so it's had a hard life.

LOL, totally agree with you. Same reason why soldiers perfer using MAGPUL pmags over the traditional 'metal' mags... THEY LAST LONG ENOUGH TO NOT ONLY CARRY YOU THROUGH ONE FIGHT BUT MANY MORE THEREAFTER.

However, the only issue with polymers is getting the tight tolerances and consistentcy that metals can offer. This is one reason why Apple sticks with Aluminium

[Edwin Herdman]

Canon still uses metal for the parts of lenses where those tight tolerances matter, however.

Apple is just...Apple.  You pay for that image, and image is really all that the aluminum cases offer (well, that and perhaps some insignificant benefit for cooling since the cases don't have heat-dissipating ridges that I can see - they still use fans, as far as I can tell, on everything that doesn't have an iPhone class of CPU inside).  Admittedly, my old Motorola Razr has a lot of metal on the shell.

[scottsdaleriots]

Apple marketing has done a brilliant job marketing that little white apple logo. Seriously, everyone wants an apple product. I've that the next gen of macbook pros might not be aluminum, can't remember exactly what it's going to be but something like liquid steel or something.

I wonder if Canon would consider changing how it builds its lenses - perhaps not using liquid steel or whatever, but forgo the metal within the next 50 years.

I kinda wish it was 2012 already so we'd have MORE info/specs/confirmation on the next 24-70!! 

[GeorgeMaciver]

Er, nope, I've never wanted an apple product :p  Don't think I ever will either

[xROELOFx]

Er, nope, I've never wanted an apple product :p  Don't think I ever will either

haha, i'm with you. i'm totally allergic of apple and it's marketing strategy.

but hey, let's get back on topic.
i hope they will announce the 200-400mm soon. can't wait to see what this baby can do and how much it will cost

[EchoLocation]

What about a 17-40L II? I want a wide walk around lens with a bit of zoom for my 5D. I am considering buying the 17-40 I, but they just don't seem to sharp and this is a very old lens. When's the refresh coming?

[AcinonyxJG]

Is there any more about the new Canon 100-400mm?  I am keen to know what kind of price it will bee going for...

[briansquibb]

What about a 17-40L II? I want a wide walk around lens with a bit of zoom for my 5D. I am considering buying the 17-40 I, but they just don't seem to sharp and this is a very old lens. When's the refresh coming?

My 17-40 is very sharp on the 5D - what makes you think they aren't??