December 17, 2014, 08:24:34 PM

Author Topic: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]  (Read 45937 times)

mckay photography

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #135 on: January 14, 2014, 12:29:19 AM »
Very interested in a 14-24 style lens - fingers crossed!

http://www.mckayphotography.com.au

canon rumors FORUM

Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #135 on: January 14, 2014, 12:29:19 AM »

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1920
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #136 on: January 14, 2014, 04:46:56 AM »
Announcements in the fall

We’re told that two new wide angle zooms for full frame will be coming from Canon in the next 6-8 months. At least one of them could be announced in Q4 of 2013.
One of the lenses will be the 14-24 f/2.8L, that will complete Canon’s run of lenses covering 14mm to 560mm.

The other will be a replacement to both the 16-35 f/2.8L II and the 17-40 f/4L. We’re told one of the configurations in test is an EF 16-50 f/4L IS.

This comes from a source that has been correct in the past, although timing is always hit and miss with Canon lenses.
Sure, new wide angle lenses in 2013, announcement in the fall, etc...   ;D

GMCPhotographics

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
    • GMCPhotographics
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #137 on: January 14, 2014, 05:16:44 AM »
Very interested in a 14-24 style lens - fingers crossed!

http://www.mckayphotography.com.au

Don't be fooled by the Nikon trolls....many wedding photographers who migrated over to the D700 a few years back, rushed out to get the Nikkor version...only the be very disapointed with the results for groups. Many then sold their and swapped to a 16-35 equivelent. The angle of view is very wide and very distored for groups...and the lack of focal range at the long end is limiting. Sure it's sharp, but that is it's only saving grace. If you need to go wider, get a 8-15L fisheye :D

Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1319
    • View Profile
    • Zeeography (flickr)
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #138 on: January 14, 2014, 10:55:33 AM »
I really like the "normal" front end of the 16-35 and would rather Canon come out with a souped-up version of that lens vs. a 14-24 (or any other range) with a bulbous front-end.

Agreed. I'd rather have something I can walk about with that covers a good range. 14-24mm would be less than ideal for groups or street. I've used the 17-40 for street and general mucking about and it's quite useful with a CP-L and light enough that you can carry it about all day, wish it had IS though. A 16-50 f/4 IS would be just the ticket.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2014, 10:59:33 AM by Zv »
6D | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | SY 14 2.8 | Sigma 50 1.4

EOS M | 11-22 IS STM | 22 STM | FD 50 1.4

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 3048
  • Who Dares Wins
    • View Profile
    • My Personal Work
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #139 on: January 14, 2014, 11:12:14 AM »
A 16-50 f/4 IS would be just the ticket.
I like the idea of that, but would still love something really wide like the Sigma 12-24 II I used to own.  I fear that Canon considers our dreams of a super wide covered by the 8-15 f/4.  A lot of their articles have pitched it as a wide angle lens, but at least to me, I don't care for the fisheye distortion even if it can be minimized with a perfectly level shot. 

dlleno

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 605
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #140 on: January 14, 2014, 11:57:43 AM »
A 16-50 f/4 IS would be just the ticket.
I like the idea of that, but would still love something really wide like the Sigma 12-24 II I used to own.  I fear that Canon considers our dreams of a super wide covered by the 8-15 f/4.  A lot of their articles have pitched it as a wide angle lens, but at least to me, I don't care for the fisheye distortion even if it can be minimized with a perfectly level shot.

seems to me there is market pressure for Canon to produce a rectilinear 14(ish)-24.  its absense does seem conspicuous.

In addition,  I don't see the 16-35 II going away or replaced.  seems astonishing to me to suggest that, as the rumor has.  Given its success in the market, and the fact that Canon appears to stick by it no matter what weaknesses  the purests point out, suggests it is here to stay and probabably won't be updated any time soon.   It would really surprise me if we saw a 16-35 III this year.

I see  an 82mm mm 16-35 II, a 77mm 16-50 and a bulbous 14(ish)-24, all living happily together,  as they would target different specialties. The  extra FL, IS, and 77mm front end (I presume) of a 16-50 would be welcome advantages if f/2.8 isn't important , complementing the others, including the rumored 24-70 f/2.8 IS.  THe 16-35 II is too succesful (strategically) to update it now.   

BTW off the subject, but  its kind of amusing to see the tricks that retailers go through to get around MAP and that is happening to the 16-35 right now.  happens all the time I know, but its still amusing to think of the conversations among lawyers :-)

Sanaraken

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #141 on: January 14, 2014, 06:19:09 PM »
Im just waiting for Canon to come out with a 16-35mm f4 IS. I dont need to shoot at f2.8, but would love to have the IS.
5DIII | EOSM| 24-70L f2.8 II | 70-200L f2.8 IS II | 40 f2.8 | 100L f2.8 | 600EX-RT

canon rumors FORUM

Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #141 on: January 14, 2014, 06:19:09 PM »

dlleno

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 605
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #142 on: January 14, 2014, 07:01:07 PM »
Im just waiting for Canon to come out with a 16-35mm f4 IS. I dont need to shoot at f2.8, but would love to have the IS.

I don't see that happening, but what do I know... If they produce an UWA F4 IS, I would say it would be the rumored EF 16-50 f/4 IS, which I agree would be wonderful for landscapes, especially if it is an L.   

 

Ricku

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 494
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #143 on: January 14, 2014, 07:56:18 PM »
Whatever the FL is, I think its strange that these lenses were "CR2-rumored" for 2013, never showed up, and now the rumor mill is all quiet.

If 2014 is "the year of the lens", I think we should have some solid info floating around by now. But then again, Canon has always been boringly good at keeping their stuff from leaking out.

Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1319
    • View Profile
    • Zeeography (flickr)
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #144 on: January 14, 2014, 08:50:43 PM »
A 16-50 f/4 IS would be just the ticket.
I like the idea of that, but would still love something really wide like the Sigma 12-24 II I used to own.  I fear that Canon considers our dreams of a super wide covered by the 8-15 f/4.  A lot of their articles have pitched it as a wide angle lens, but at least to me, I don't care for the fisheye distortion even if it can be minimized with a perfectly level shot.

Oh totally! They need something in that ultra wide range other than the costly 14L. Their foolin no one with the 8-15 fisheye! I opted for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 instead as I got fed up waiting. It's a pity I can't use filters with it though. Blasted bulbous ends! Haha!

What is the widest you can get without going bulbous end? Is it 16mm? I imagine a 12-24 or 14-24 would be quite expensive anyway and wouldn't take filters.
6D | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | SY 14 2.8 | Sigma 50 1.4

EOS M | 11-22 IS STM | 22 STM | FD 50 1.4

dlleno

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 605
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #145 on: January 14, 2014, 09:02:59 PM »
What is the widest you can get without going bulbous end? Is it 16mm? I imagine a 12-24 or 14-24 would be quite expensive anyway and wouldn't take filters.

exactly. imho  this is why the 82mm 16-35 f/2.8 II isn't going away, and why a  77mm 16-something f/4 IS would go over well.

Random Orbits

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1405
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #146 on: January 14, 2014, 09:29:22 PM »
Oh totally! They need something in that ultra wide range other than the costly 14L. Their foolin no one with the 8-15 fisheye! I opted for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 instead as I got fed up waiting. It's a pity I can't use filters with it though. Blasted bulbous ends! Haha!

What is the widest you can get without going bulbous end? Is it 16mm? I imagine a 12-24 or 14-24 would be quite expensive anyway and wouldn't take filters.

Zeiss' 15mm takes filters -- 95mm filters.   :o

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2837
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #147 on: January 14, 2014, 09:35:49 PM »
Oh totally! They need something in that ultra wide range other than the costly 14L. Their foolin no one with the 8-15 fisheye! I opted for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 instead as I got fed up waiting. It's a pity I can't use filters with it though. Blasted bulbous ends! Haha!

What is the widest you can get without going bulbous end? Is it 16mm? I imagine a 12-24 or 14-24 would be quite expensive anyway and wouldn't take filters.

Zeiss' 15mm takes filters -- 95mm filters.   :o

The TS-E 17 takes filters, 145mm filters.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #147 on: January 14, 2014, 09:35:49 PM »

Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1319
    • View Profile
    • Zeeography (flickr)
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #148 on: January 15, 2014, 12:52:30 AM »
Oh totally! They need something in that ultra wide range other than the costly 14L. Their foolin no one with the 8-15 fisheye! I opted for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 instead as I got fed up waiting. It's a pity I can't use filters with it though. Blasted bulbous ends! Haha!

What is the widest you can get without going bulbous end? Is it 16mm? I imagine a 12-24 or 14-24 would be quite expensive anyway and wouldn't take filters.

Zeiss' 15mm takes filters -- 95mm filters.   :o

The TS-E 17 takes filters, 145mm filters.

You say that like you can just buy those at the dollar store! I mean sure I bet the Hubble space telescope takes filters too!  ;D

(I meant what regular folk consider a filter - 77mm / 82mm max.)
« Last Edit: January 15, 2014, 12:57:03 AM by Zv »
6D | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | SY 14 2.8 | Sigma 50 1.4

EOS M | 11-22 IS STM | 22 STM | FD 50 1.4

Cali_PH

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 166
    • View Profile
Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #149 on: January 15, 2014, 02:07:36 AM »
I opted for the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 instead as I got fed up waiting. It's a pity I can't use filters with it though. Blasted bulbous ends! Haha!

Actually, there is a (very expensive) Hitech Lucroit Filter Holder.  It was originally designed for the Nikon 14-24, but they made adapter rings for other lenses, including the Samyang.  It can be found on their site and places like B&H, Adorama, & Amazon.  You'll also probably need to buy new large, expensive filters to go with it of course.

http://lucroit.com/SHOP/category.php?id_category=5

Also I believe Samyang posted something on their FB page about working on their own filter holder for it.  As I recall they were hoping to release it around now. 

There are also a number of home-made filter holders I've seen, you can google them and see if they look like something you'd like to try to duplicate.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #149 on: January 15, 2014, 02:07:36 AM »