December 03, 2016, 11:25:55 PM

Author Topic: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM  (Read 32686 times)

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3848
  • USM > STM
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #120 on: May 14, 2014, 01:30:53 PM »
with that tag price of 300 usd.. i'd rather spend a little more and get the tokina 11-16 ( $420)

yeah i know the 10-18 comes with IS.. but still, useless for a wide angle

[hand to face]  I believe the end of your statement was missing the phrase "...for what I shoot."  Tons of people want IS on wide angles. 

I am formally nominating "IS or no IS on Wide Angles" to the CR Forum's We Are Never Going To Agree On This Hall of Fame.

It's right up there with:

  • The decision to use / not use UV filters
  • Any debate about dynamic range
  • IQ of a 1.6x cropped FF image versus a full APS-C image

In that there are two camps that will never agree with each other.   :P

- A

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #120 on: May 14, 2014, 01:30:53 PM »

Skirball

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #121 on: May 14, 2014, 01:41:31 PM »
I am formally nominating "IS or no IS on Wide Angles" to the CR Forum's We Are Never Going To Agree On This Hall of Fame.

I don't know if there's ever been a single thing of substance that the people of CR have agreed on.  Hell, we could discuss why the sky is blue and it'd digress into arguments of Pantone colors, monitor calibration and why anybody would ever shoot jpg.

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4547
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #122 on: May 14, 2014, 06:36:54 PM »
I am formally nominating "IS or no IS on Wide Angles" to the CR Forum's We Are Never Going To Agree On This Hall of Fame.

I don't know if there's ever been a single thing of substance that the people of CR have agreed on.  Hell, we could discuss why the sky is blue and it'd digress into arguments of Pantone colors, monitor calibration and why anybody would ever shoot jpg.

Not to mention if a cpl was used and if it was used on an Uwa
But I agree I laugh so hard when I read the bs of IS is useless on an Uwa
So funny....
APS-H Fanboy

Azathoth

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 38
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #123 on: May 15, 2014, 01:18:37 PM »
yeah i know the 10-18 comes with IS.. but still, useless for a wide angle

Useless, why is that? How about the ability to shoot with a lower speed handheld? Want a real word scenario? You are a turist and you are visiting the Palace of Versailles near Paris. You'll need a very wide lens because the space is limited. And you can't use a tripod because there are lots of people and you need to take the pictures quickly. With IS, you can use a lower speed, this means you can use a lower iso, so you'll get less noise.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2014, 01:20:43 PM by Azathoth »

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1687
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #124 on: May 15, 2014, 01:58:14 PM »
with that tag price of 300 usd.. i'd rather spend a little more and get the tokina 11-16 ( $420)

yeah i know the 10-18 comes with IS.. but still, useless for a wide angle

[hand to face]  I believe the end of your statement was missing the phrase "...for what I shoot."  Tons of people want IS on wide angles. 

I am formally nominating "IS or no IS on Wide Angles" to the CR Forum's We Are Never Going To Agree On This Hall of Fame.

It's right up there with:

  • The decision to use / not use UV filters
  • Any debate about dynamic range
  • IQ of a 1.6x cropped FF image versus a full APS-C image

In that there are two camps that will never agree with each other.   :P

- A


I think people develop tunnel vision from years of staring through the viewfinder. :)
EOS 5DIII, EOS 6D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 85mm f/1.2L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

rrcphoto

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1211
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #125 on: May 15, 2014, 02:31:03 PM »
with that tag price of 300 usd.. i'd rather spend a little more and get the tokina 11-16 ( $420)

yeah i know the 10-18 comes with IS.. but still, useless for a wide angle

I can bet that there will be tons more that purchase the much smaller and much lighter 10-18 and cheaper.  perhaps you fail to grasp the market in which it's targeting.

Zv

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1677
    • Zeeography (flickr)
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #126 on: May 16, 2014, 11:13:31 AM »
with that tag price of 300 usd.. i'd rather spend a little more and get the tokina 11-16 ( $420)

yeah i know the 10-18 comes with IS.. but still, useless for a wide angle

I love this logic - so you want to pay MORE money for LESS range, a bulkier and heavier lens without IS (which is apparently useless anyway)?  :o

Yeah, I mean like who would ever buy a wide angle lens with IS? Deja-vu ... Didn't we do this when the 24mm f/2.8 IS and 28mm f/2.8 IS were announced? Remind me what 18mm is on a crop?  ::)

They scoffed at the notion then but it seems to be selling quite well so it can't be all that useless, can it?

Oh .... and hands up who here would love to have the little EF-M 11-22mm lens? On many peoples wish list, and why is that? Super small compact UWA lens with IS? Oh yes please!  ;D
« Last Edit: May 16, 2014, 11:18:17 AM by Zv »
Move along nothing to see here!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #126 on: May 16, 2014, 11:13:31 AM »

hemidesign

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #127 on: May 16, 2014, 12:42:31 PM »
16-35 f4 IS?.. this lens IMO is useless.. WTF!!!

and who uses IS on wide angle lens?.. where's the 14-24 2.8?... we need something good, not stupid!

tron

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2838
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #128 on: May 16, 2014, 01:19:33 PM »
16-35 f4 IS?.. this lens IMO is useless.. WTF!!!

and who uses IS on wide angle lens?.. where's the 14-24 2.8?... we need something good, not stupid!
16-35 f4 IS is not stupid! I would like a 2.8 version but that does not mean that the specific lens is not
useful. In fact if it sharp up to the corners then it is the ideal landscape zoom (small, sharp, taking filters)...

Jack56

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 135
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #129 on: May 16, 2014, 02:11:26 PM »
Is there any "evidence" that this will be a lens that's sharp up to the corners?

Chuck Alaimo

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1045
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #130 on: May 16, 2014, 03:22:39 PM »
Notice how these new lenses are SUPER SLOW?  The lie we're being sold is that IS makes up for the 1-stop loss.  I predicted this trend years ago--that Canon's lens development will go in the direction of slower-aperture, IS designs that are more profitable because they don't need tighter tolerances or more expensive optical designs, but the price tag is "justified" because, oh, wait, it's got IS, as if that will totally make up for the slowness.

I'm frankly sick of this.  Especially in light of how even a company like Sigma can make a sub $1000 50/1.4 lens that beats the pants off of anything Canon or Nikon has *ever* made at that focal length, and has people comparing it to a $3500 MF lens from Zeiss.

These new lenses will be overpriced (the L being at least $2100, I guarantee it), and will still under-perform even though it will be a little better in the corner sharpness over its predecessors.  At such short focal lengths, almost any IS advantage is nullified by the fact that unless you're shooting something that's completely stationary, the shutter speeds at which IS would be relevant would result in subject motion blur.

It's dangerous to make predictions man! You are off on a quite a few here.  We now know the price - $1199.  And we do have a CR2 letting us know that a 2.8 UWA is on the way.

Now as to all lenses being slow?  This one is pretty false, Canon is filling gaps in it's lineup, and yeah that does include a few slower lenses with IS - why, mostly to satiate the video folks out there (and yes, some still shooters want it) - and - it fills a few more price points too.  Those on a budget now have a trinity of f4, this doesn't eliminate the 2.8 trinity by any means (the 70-200 2.8v2 is still fairly new, and the 24-70 2.8v2 is very new - so now the question mark is will the 16-35 get it's v3 or will it become a 14-24?) 

The part you are right on is your $2100 figure, but it's for the wrong lens.  The new UWA 2.8 will probably be at around $2100, like the other new 2.8's....

As to sigma - apples and oranges.  Sigma mostly specializes in lenses, they don't have anywhere near the overhead as canon does - or nikon for that matter.  Also, while the ART series is the start of a change for sigma from cheap low quality glass to moderately priced better IQ glass, they still have issues, mainly in their AF systems.  Reading through the forums I see lots of mixed messages about the 35 and the 50 ---they beat the pants off the canon offerings when the AF hits, but AF consistency is a big issue that sigma needs to fix.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2014, 03:32:29 PM by Chuck Alaimo »
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

Chuck Alaimo

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1045
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #131 on: May 16, 2014, 03:49:45 PM »
Like I said in an earlier topic: This may be a dealbreaker for 17-40 F/4 owners who value the added flexibility of the  40mm focal length if the new lens isn't a 17-40 F4 IS.

Even if it delivered a crappy 40-45mm I really wish they had extended it anyway!

Except that then the reviews would can it because the longer section of the zoom is crap.

also, gotta point out the obvious...better IQ and sharper images give you way more room to crop - which potentially means you could crop that long end shot from the new lens to a 70mm FOV and still get better IQ that you would have at 40mm on the 17-40...
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

Chuck Alaimo

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1045
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #132 on: May 16, 2014, 04:01:09 PM »

People do buy long super teles. A 1200mm with IS would be welcome to a lot of people.



while a 1200mm IS would be welcome by many, like me, I'd welcome it but would never ever ever buy such a thing.      who here could afford such a thing?  Hell, I wouldn't even be able to cover the 3 day rental cost on such a thing.... 
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #132 on: May 16, 2014, 04:01:09 PM »

Chuck Alaimo

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1045
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #133 on: May 16, 2014, 04:05:13 PM »
You do realize that was a 38lb lens that cost around $120,000 ... right?

I'm sure the list of people that would welcome it would be close to nil.
20+ years of R&D can significantly lessen the weight and what people can and cannot afford really isnt any of our business.

yes, it could lessen the weight, and yeah, ok, take the price down a notch or 2...so maybe they could make one now for a retail of $80,000... eho can afford such a lens????

And what people can and can't afford may not be our business - it certainly is canon's...why wouldthey devote time, money, resources into making a thing no one would buy because the price tag is outrageous and it's use is very very very much niche....
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

scyrene

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1497
    • My Flickr feed
Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #134 on: May 18, 2014, 06:46:41 AM »
16-35 f4 IS?.. this lens IMO is useless.. WTF!!!

and who uses IS on wide angle lens?.. where's the 14-24 2.8?... we need something good, not stupid!

I'll assume this is a genuine question and not just trolling. I'll give you a couple of scenarios. First, taking photographs inside a dark cathedral. Few would allow the use of a flash (and flash probably wouldn't light the space attractively or effectively), many would discourage a tripod/monopod, and most are very dark. I was shooting in Southwark Cathedral last year and even at f/1.2 I needed ISO 6400-12800 for some shots. These were static subjects and therefore IS would have helped massively (and allowed a more useful narrower aperture). Second, I often hike for long distances with lots of equipment (for birds mostly), but occasionally I also want to photograph landscapes I see along the way. I rarely want to carry a tripod because it's extra bulk and mostly I don't need it. Stopping down for landscape shots to f/10 say, IS helps with handholding for the longer exposures required. It depends on the light, of course, but this is what I do with the 24-104, and it works for me. So there's two examples.
Current equipment: 5Ds, 5D mark III, 50D, 24-105L, MP-E, 70-200 f/2.8L II, 100L macro, 500L IS II; 1.4xIII + 2x III extenders; 600EX-RT.
Former equipment includes: 300D; EOS-M, EF-M 18-55, Samyang 14mm f/2.8, EF 35 f/2 IS, 70-200L f/4 non-IS, 85L II, Sigma 180 macro, 200L 2.8, 400L 5.6

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« Reply #134 on: May 18, 2014, 06:46:41 AM »