July 31, 2014, 12:42:18 AM

Author Topic: List of rumored lenses  (Read 175177 times)

that1guy

  • Guest
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2010, 11:36:37 PM »
^the reason that I have heard (from Vincent Laforet) that the H-IS is better for video is that it is smoother when it activates and is a little less "jerky".  This isn't a problem shooting stills, but when you are shooting video constantly it can make a difference.  Hearing him talk about it was the thing that finally got me excited about H-IS.  As for the specific type of movement it helps alleviate, I couldn't tell you that.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2010, 11:36:37 PM »

Son of Daguerre

  • Guest
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #31 on: September 14, 2010, 07:52:33 PM »
The EF 24-70mm Æ’/2.8L USM is "only" 8 years old. 'Fraid it won't be replaced for a few years.

Flake

  • Guest
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #32 on: September 24, 2010, 08:14:27 AM »
The 24 - 70mm may only be 8 years old, but it has a significant defect in the field curvature it displays, this is especially noticable on FF.  This is Canons flagship standard zoom, it has the IS technology to hand and a redesign is badly needed, I think it's time for a better flagship product regardless of how old the design is.

kubelik

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 797
    • View Profile
    • a teatray in the sky
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #33 on: September 24, 2010, 10:58:38 AM »
approaching this slightly differently, it's not like Canon even has to officially declare a replacement for the 24-70 f/2.8 L ... they can go ahead a release a new IS version and continue to sell the original.  there's probably going to be a significant enough price gap that these will now serve different tiers of the market.  so the fact that the original has only been on market for 8 years is irrelevant

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13617
    • View Profile
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #34 on: September 24, 2010, 11:02:11 AM »
approaching this slightly differently, it's not like Canon even has to officially declare a replacement for the 24-70 f/2.8 L ... they can go ahead a release a new IS version and continue to sell the original.  there's probably going to be a significant enough price gap that these will now serve different tiers of the market.  so the fact that the original has only been on market for 8 years is irrelevant

Makes sense, analogous to their flagship telezoom series, the 70-200's, which are available with and without IS.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

rejames1

  • Guest
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #35 on: September 27, 2010, 01:23:35 PM »
What are the chances of us ever seeing an updated and faster version of the 28-300 L ?  I know it's a heavy beast, but I love it!

Flake

  • Guest
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #36 on: September 27, 2010, 05:24:21 PM »
Not a chance of replacing the 28 - 300mm IS L, it was only released in 2004 replacing the 35 - 350mm version, and is a good performer.  How on earth do you think they could improve it realistically?
IS is 3rd generation, and the amount of glass required and pro spec body means it's going to weigh quite a bit.
There are quite a few lenses I'd like to see replaced before this one, the 24 - 70mm f/2.8 L and a new decent performing wide angle too!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #36 on: September 27, 2010, 05:24:21 PM »

traveller

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #37 on: September 27, 2010, 06:15:25 PM »
CR Guy, I don't know how you manage to assign your CR ratings to all the rumours that you must be sent.  By this I mean that the level of 'background noise' in the rumour mill must be immense.  It doesn't take much to think up believable specifications for a possible new lens. 

About the only people who are posting truely whacky lenses are Canon themselves... 8-15mm fisheye; 70-300mm f4-5.6 L; and of course the superteles and 'extenders' desparately needed an update. 

Not that these lenses aren't welcome, but I'm sure that there are a lot of people who would have suggested other lenses as a higher priority. 

rejames1

  • Guest
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #38 on: September 27, 2010, 07:06:09 PM »
Not a chance of replacing the 28 - 300mm IS L, it was only released in 2004 replacing the 35 - 350mm version, and is a good performer.  How on earth do you think they could improve it realistically?
IS is 3rd generation, and the amount of glass required and pro spec body means it's going to weigh quite a bit.
There are quite a few lenses I'd like to see replaced before this one, the 24 - 70mm f/2.8 L and a new decent performing wide angle too!

I don't know how they could realistically improve it really.  I rented one for 30 days from lensrentals.com for my honeymoon to the Canadian Rockies and loved it, in spite of the weight.  I did find myself wishing many times that it was faster.

I am a simi-pro photographer and am looking into purchasing a good tele-zoom. 

I currently own the EF 50mm f/1.2L USM, EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM and the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM.  These lenses are mounted on a full frame 5d (mk1) and the 1.6 cropped Xsi.  (I'm waiting for the 5D III to be released before I upgrade bodies)

I found the 28-300 L to be a great "all around" lens.  I loved the reach of that 300mm (being that I was used to a reach of only 200) and 28mm was wide enough I didn't have to carry additional lenses.  I am seriously concidering the new EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM... I just wish it was a little wider to keep from having to swap out lenses mid shoot.  I could care less about the yet to be released 70-300 because of the slow speed.

So... I was in "wishfull thinking land" hoping that there might be a faster version of the 28-300 in the works.  But I guess that's just a pipe dream.  I'll probably end up buying the new 70-200 with an extender...  I'll still need something for that mid-range though.  I guess I'll worry about that if and when they release a new 24-70.

As for your decent wide angle hopes... I know it's only 16mm, but I really enjoy my EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM.

Keep on clicking...


kubelik

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 797
    • View Profile
    • a teatray in the sky
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #39 on: September 27, 2010, 08:10:31 PM »
rejames, you are one strong individual if you're hoping for a faster version of the 28-300 ... that thing is already a monster of a lens

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13617
    • View Profile
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #40 on: September 28, 2010, 11:14:09 AM »
rejames, you are one strong individual if you're hoping for a faster version of the 28-300 ... that thing is already a monster of a lens

It's no bigger and not much heavier than the 100-400mm, which is fine to carry around for the day (for me, at least).  But, take that 28-300mm and make it a constant f/4 - now you're talking about a beast of a lens!
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

ronderick

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #41 on: September 28, 2010, 11:32:54 PM »
rejames, you are one strong individual if you're hoping for a faster version of the 28-300 ... that thing is already a monster of a lens

It's no bigger and not much heavier than the 100-400mm, which is fine to carry around for the day (for me, at least).  But, take that 28-300mm and make it a constant f/4 - now you're talking about a beast of a lens!

Read somewhere that this lens targets photojournalists, but I guess so far I haven't seen any local media people lugging one of these around  ;D

Which brings up another question: how is it possible that Nikon is introducing a lens with similar specs for half the price? ($2,500 vs. $1,000)
Canon EOS 1D MKIV, EF 24-105mm F/4L, EF 70-200mm F/2.8L, TS-E 17mm F/4L, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro
FujiFilm FinePix X100

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13617
    • View Profile
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #42 on: September 30, 2010, 07:23:49 AM »
Which brings up another question: how is it possible that Nikon is introducing a lens with similar specs for half the price? ($2,500 vs. $1,000)

The white paint that Canon uses is a very costly component of the manufacturing process.  In fact, the only more expensive component that Canon uses to make lenses is the special green paint they use for the rings on their two DO lenses...

 :P
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #42 on: September 30, 2010, 07:23:49 AM »

kubelik

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 797
    • View Profile
    • a teatray in the sky
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #43 on: September 30, 2010, 09:12:55 AM »

The white paint that Canon uses is a very costly component of the manufacturing process.  In fact, the only more expensive component that Canon uses to make lenses is the special green paint they use for the rings on their two DO lenses...

 :P

nice one neuro.  +1

joking aside ... looking at the MTF charts, there does appear to be a difference in the quality of the optics delivered by the nikon and canon 28-300 zooms.  I suspect there are differences in build quality, too; I don't know for certain if the nikkor is a plastic fantastic, but the canon L lens definitely isn't

Edwin Herdman

  • Guest
Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #44 on: October 04, 2010, 03:49:22 AM »
it's not like Canon even has to officially declare a replacement for the 24-70 f/2.8 L
Are any Canon retirements anything but stealth ones?  Meaning that, sure, it might get mentioned that one lens is discontinued, somewhere near the bottom of an email from somebody who works at Canon, but not in an actual press release...speaking of approaching the question differently.
The white paint that Canon uses is a very costly component of the manufacturing process.  In fact, the only more expensive component that Canon uses to make lenses is the special green paint they use for the rings on their two DO lenses...
You're lucky they just used that non-toxic paint (it makes it safe to dance on, unlike the wings of a B2 bomber - you see the government can only afford the toxic variety), instead of opting for a recessed ring of pure, highly polished synthetic turquoise stone.

In all seriousness, after my previous huge post, I'm more interested in whether the 70-300mm L stands up that much better to abuse (and scores well enough on the other bullet points) than the new Tamron to be worth the price premium.  (Don't tell me that Canon's "price high, aim kind of high" problems are affecting ALL their products...) It's obviously worth more, but $1100 more?  Guess I've already signed away on the image quality end of the spectrum...man, the one thing of Ken Rockwell's that I need to keep in mind is that lenses are tools, not coture objects.  *shakes fist at Canon*
« Last Edit: October 04, 2010, 03:53:03 AM by Edwin Herdman »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: List of rumored lenses
« Reply #44 on: October 04, 2010, 03:49:22 AM »