More Wide Angle Lens Speculation [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

Tweet

We’re told that there are two wide angle zoom lenses coming from Canon. One we’re told would be an 11-24 f/4, though it wasn’t mentioned whether or not this would be a full frame or APS-C only lens. Though the source did say the lens would be expensive, which leads me to believe it would be full frame compatible. The same source also says a new 16-35 f/4 wide angle with IS is also on tap and would be quite pricey. However, if they perform in the corners, people will pay nearly anything for a great wide angle Canon offering. I do find it a  bit odd that neither of the mentioned lenses are f/2.8, but perhaps that’s coming down the road.

There was another mention of a new Canon 100-400 being priced in the $3000 range also coming.

This info is not coming from known sources, so treat it accordingly. More to come…

cr

[neuroanatomist]

There was another mention of a new Canon 100-400 being priced in the $3000 range also coming.

The high price bit was tacked on to lend legitimacy to this rumor of the unicorn lens. 

[TrabimanUK]

11-24?  Well there was a rumour of "the widest ever full frame lens" a few months ago. 11mm is wider than Sigma's 12mm, so possibly real, but at fixed f4, out of my price range.  I'll stick with my 12-24 Sigma and tweak the pictures in Lightroom.

[Antono Refa]

Between the EF-S 10-24mm f/3.5-5.6 and the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6, I don't see where an EF-S 11-24mm f/4 would come in. Maybe if it had IS, STM, or amazing IQ.

An EF 11-24mm f/4, on the other hand, I would buy.

[lycan]

I think I'm starting to believe more on this "unknown sources" 

[tron]

Not even a 16-35mm f/2.8L III lens ? 

[tron]

There was another mention of a new Canon 100-400 being priced in the $3000 range also coming.

The high price bit was tacked on to lend legitimacy to this rumor of the unicorn lens. 

Do you know how expensive are unicorns these days? 

[Dylan777]

Performs as good as Nik 14-24 or better + IS + screw on filter = I'm in

[unfocused]

...the source did say the lens would be expensive...a new 16-35 f/4 wide angle with IS is also on tap and would be quite pricey...a new Canon 100-400 being priced in the $3000 range also coming.

Okay, I've lost interest.

[tron]

I believe Canon should introduce a 16-35 f/2.8L III, a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 14-24 f/2.8L. Then we would be OK as far as UWA FF zooms are concerned (before asking for an IS version of 16-35 2.8L with IS that is) 

Is that too much to ask ?   

P.S OK feel free to add other variations, price ranges, APS-C UWA zoom ranges, etc... After all it is a rumor site 

[candyman]

I believe Canon should introduce a 16-35 f/2.8L III, a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 14-24 f/2.8L. Then we would be OK as far as UWA FF zooms are concerned (before asking for an IS version of 16-35 2.8L with IS that is) 

Is that too much to ask ? 

P.S OK feel free to add other variations, price ranges, APS-C UWA zoom ranges, etc... After all it is a rumor site 

yes!


And what would be the speculated prices for:
- 16-35 f/2.8 MKIII = ?
- 16-35 f/4 IS = ?
- 14-24 f/2.8 = ?


Who give up the 16-35 f/2.8 MKII for a 16-35 f/4 IS?
 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Ultra wide-angle zoom lens, is the only type of lens that I did not like constant aperture. After all, I use my 10-20mm in 10mm only, 99% of the time.

[tron]

I believe Canon should introduce a 16-35 f/2.8L III, a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 14-24 f/2.8L. Then we would be OK as far as UWA FF zooms are concerned (before asking for an IS version of 16-35 2.8L with IS that is) 

Is that too much to ask ? 

P.S OK feel free to add other variations, price ranges, APS-C UWA zoom ranges, etc... After all it is a rumor site 

yes!


And what would be the speculated prices for:
- 16-35 f/2.8 MKIII = ?
- 16-35 f/4 IS = ?
- 14-24 f/2.8 = ?


Who give up the 16-35 f/2.8 MKII for a 16-35 f/4 IS?

- 16-35 f/2.8 MKIII = 2300
- 16-35 f/4 IS         = 1500
- 14-24 f/2.8          = 2300

Prices randomly speculated of course. I based them somehow on 24-70 2.8 II to 24-70 4L IS price comparisons and I wanted to create confusion between the  16-35 f/2.8 MKIII and 14-24 f/2.8  models 

P.S I do not say I would like these prices, it is just a speculation which is different...

[candyman]

I believe Canon should introduce a 16-35 f/2.8L III, a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 14-24 f/2.8L. Then we would be OK as far as UWA FF zooms are concerned (before asking for an IS version of 16-35 2.8L with IS that is) 

Is that too much to ask ? 

P.S OK feel free to add other variations, price ranges, APS-C UWA zoom ranges, etc... After all it is a rumor site 

yes!


And what would be the speculated prices for:
- 16-35 f/2.8 MKIII = ?
- 16-35 f/4 IS = ?
- 14-24 f/2.8 = ?


Who give up the 16-35 f/2.8 MKII for a 16-35 f/4 IS?

- 16-35 f/2.8 MKIII = 2300
- 16-35 f/4 IS         = 1500
- 14-24 f/2.8          = 2300

Prices randomly speculated of course. I based them somehow on 24-70 2.8 II to 24-70 4L IS price comparisons and I wanted to create confusion between the  16-35 f/2.8 MKIII and 14-24 f/2.8  models 

P.S I do not say I would like these prices, it is just a speculation which is different...

ouch, ouch, ouch....my 16-35 f/2.8 MKII currently costs 1250 euro
Luckely this rumorpost is a CR1    so I have time to save up more money. Tomorrow I will first spent 850 euro on the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART

[ewg963]

Performs as good as Nik 14-24 or better + IS + screw on filter = I'm in

+1