September 02, 2014, 09:32:20 AM

Author Topic: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]  (Read 8450 times)

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4489
    • View Profile
erggg what is with all the underwhelming slow aperture lenses! why not a 16-35 f2.8 IS? really c'mon canon
f4 wow awesome... NOT

room to fit in IS, $1300 instead of $2300 perhaps, potential to make it perform a touch better stopped down to landscape DOF where this focal range is most often (although yes not always) used when used on FF, makes it smaller and lighter by a lot, also nice, since you might want to hike around with it paired with one or two other lenses.

One of the main reasons i use the 16-35 f2.8 II is to shoot it wide open. Although I do understand the reason for cheaper slower lenses but cmon how about giving the top end some love canon lets have a 16-35 f2.8 IS L that sharp corner to corner like the 24-70 II.

APS-H Fanboy

canon rumors FORUM


ahsanford

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 849
    • View Profile
Also, from PR at the bottom of the pics I linked:

"The official announcement should be in few hours."

That's a CR2.9 in my book, people.  As Thom Yorke once said, "This is really happening."

- A

RGF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1264
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
    • View Profile
erggg what is with all the underwhelming slow aperture lenses! why not a 16-35 f2.8 IS? really c'mon canon
f4 wow awesome... NOT

room to fit in IS, $1300 instead of $2300 perhaps, potential to make it perform a touch better stopped down to landscape DOF where this focal range is most often (although yes not always) used when used on FF, makes it smaller and lighter by a lot, also nice, since you might want to hike around with it paired with one or two other lenses.

One of the main reasons i use the 16-35 f2.8 II is to shoot it wide open. Although I do understand the reason for cheaper slower lenses but cmon how about giving the top end some love canon lets have a 16-35 f2.8 IS L that sharp corner to corner like the 24-70 II.

It would nice if canon would swallow it pride and license Nikons incredible 14-24 lens.

Random Orbits

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1317
    • View Profile
It would nice if canon would swallow it pride and license Nikons incredible 14-24 lens.

That is assuming that Nikon would even consider licensing it to their biggest rival.

Hjalmarg1

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 157
  • Photo Hobbyist
    • View Profile
Now the 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS are available for preorder at B&H for US$299 and US$1,199 respectively. You can press the keyboard now.
For those with APS-C sensor, the 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM in this price is quite reasonable for an UWA lens. I don't think I would buy the FF EF 16-35 f/4L IS, since I have the f2.8L II version but time will tell.
The MTF charts are very promissing in terms of IMO, it indicates huge improvement in sharpness from mid-frame to borders.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2014, 01:05:35 AM by Hjalmarg1 »
Body: 5DIII. Prime Lenses: 15mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8L IS, 35mm f2 IS, Extender EF 2X III.
Zoom Lenses: 16-35mm f4L IS, 24-70mm f2.8L, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II. Others: Flash 580EX II, 270EX II & MR-14EX II

GMCPhotographics

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 705
    • View Profile
    • GMCPhotographics
erggg what is with all the underwhelming slow aperture lenses! why not a 16-35 f2.8 IS? really c'mon canon
f4 wow awesome... NOT

room to fit in IS, $1300 instead of $2300 perhaps, potential to make it perform a touch better stopped down to landscape DOF where this focal range is most often (although yes not always) used when used on FF, makes it smaller and lighter by a lot, also nice, since you might want to hike around with it paired with one or two other lenses.

One of the main reasons i use the 16-35 f2.8 II is to shoot it wide open. Although I do understand the reason for cheaper slower lenses but cmon how about giving the top end some love canon lets have a 16-35 f2.8 IS L that sharp corner to corner like the 24-70 II.

It would nice if canon would swallow it pride and license Nikons incredible 14-24 lens.

Yeah, it's really incredible at shooting lens charts and brick walls....not so good for landscapes or groups of people. The difficulty in using front filters is a serious deficiency. Most landscapes require stopping down for Depth of Field....so at f11, there is little difference between the sharpness of a 16-35IIL and this Nikkor lens...so I often wonder why I would bother with the size, bulk and cost of such a lens which really only has advantages wide open.

canon rumors FORUM