June 22, 2018, 12:07:26 AM

Author Topic: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Camera  (Read 97702 times)

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6889
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
We must remember that 17-40mm was a success at the time of the APS-H sensor, when it was the only option for wide-angle zoom (22-52mm equivalent). Never was an exciting lens on full frame, it showed its weaknesses in poor corners, and low sharpness. If the new 16-35 F4 has much better quality, that will will make many people happy.

I used the 16-35 very happily on all my APS-H cameras, and given the lack of iso capabilities on the majority of APS-H cameras the 2.8 vs the 4 is way more important than the 5mm on the longer end.
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

canon rumors FORUM


ahsanford

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6895
  • USM > STM
It seems that the recent competition for Sigma has propitiated that Canon launch prices closer to market reality. If the picture is as good as it looks on the MTF chart, these two lenses are sales success.

Sure the EF-S looks a good price, but the 16-35 is a 17-40 replacement, at 150% the price. Not saying I feel the 16-35 is particularly expensive, and I very much doubt Sigma had anything to do with it at all, just pointing out it is 150% more than the lens it is replacing with less zoom range.

I liken this nearly exactly to the 24-70 F/4 IS when it was released.  From specs alone, it was deemed nothing other than a length takeaway from the #1 owned L lens, the 24-105 F/4 IS.  We all scratched our heads and asked (a) why did this lens happen and (b) why the hell did it cost so much (initially that lens was sold at $1,499 in the US).

And then we used it. It's sharper, has less distortion, and is slightly more compact and lighter to boot. 

This time, with the new 16-35, it appears that Canon didn't shoot for the moon with initial pricing.  $1,199 in the US is what you'd expect from a comprehensive upgrade to the 17-40 to cost (despite losing 5mm on the long end).

So I expect this lens to sell well.

- A

jeffa4444

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1321
16-35mm f2.8L   £ 1,214.00 / $ 2,039

16-35mm f4L         1,199.00 / $ 2,014

17-40mm f4L            629.00 / $ 1,056

For all its faults the 17-40mm f4L will continue to be the big seller because of price and its the 16-35mm f2.8II that may suffer if optically the f4 version is better with the prices this close. Over time the price of the 16-35mm f4L will likely drop midway between the two but right now at close to double the 17-40mm its no threat to that lens.
Canon 5DS, Canon 6D, Canon 6D MKII,16-35 f4L IS USM, 17-40 f4L USM, 28 f2.8, 24-70mm f4L IS USM, 24-105 f4L IS USM, 100mm f2.8L IS USM, 70-200 f2.8L IS USM II, 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM, 50 f1.8 STM, 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM II, 1.4EX III, EOS 760D, EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM & others.

sagittariansrock

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1689

I wasn't aware the difference is that marked, having never owned a 16mm lens on FF (or 14mm equivalent on APS-C). However, I do know the mm differences become a larger as you go wide in general, though.

This has a couple of good fov comparisons. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-14mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Interesting. Thanks!
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

Clik

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 6
Newbie for AWA . I just bought the 17-40 F/4 during the 15% off last week. I am not sure if I need to keep it or return based on this announcement or just buy a lens like Samyang 14mm (with manual focus).

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
16-35mm f2.8L   £ 1,214.00 / $ 2,039

16-35mm f4L         1,199.00 / $ 2,014

17-40mm f4L            629.00 / $ 1,056

For all its faults the 17-40mm f4L will continue to be the big seller because of price and its the 16-35mm f2.8II that may suffer if optically the f4 version is better with the prices this close. Over time the price of the 16-35mm f4L will likely drop midway between the two but right now at close to double the 17-40mm its no threat to that lens.
Your EU prices are painful to see, and I'm sure the 17-40 isn't going anywhere, but I bet Canon is going to sell a ton of these new lenses.  I'm really excited to get my hands on one and see it getting way more use than my 16-35 II.
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

jeffa4444

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1321
B&H Photo pricing

16-35mm f2.8LII  $ 1,699

16-35mm f4L          1,199

17-40mm f4L            839

Better spread than UK pricing
Canon 5DS, Canon 6D, Canon 6D MKII,16-35 f4L IS USM, 17-40 f4L USM, 28 f2.8, 24-70mm f4L IS USM, 24-105 f4L IS USM, 100mm f2.8L IS USM, 70-200 f2.8L IS USM II, 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM, 50 f1.8 STM, 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM II, 1.4EX III, EOS 760D, EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM & others.

canon rumors FORUM


Radiating

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 334
Here's my take on it. Before today there were 3 wide angle zoom lenses that didn't have noticeable image quality problems, between all first and third party lenses (the 17-40mm did have a few exceptionally sharp copies, if you were lucky like the one tested by DXO but most were bad and all copies had really really crazy harsh bokeh, which was a serious flaw).

These 3 good wide angle zooms were the following:

Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8
Nikon 16-35mm f/4.0 VR
Canon 11-22mm f/4.5-5.6 STM IS (EOS M)

These were basically the only wide angle zooms worth getting if you didn't want seriously noticeable flaws in your photos. That's why I have a nikon 14-24mm on my 5D3, as do many other pros.

Now there is a fourth option, the Canon 16-35mm IS. The 11-22mm for the EOS M is still sharper than this new 16-35mm IS based on the MTF data (removing the mirror enables incredible improvements in image quality for wide angle lenses, seriously the 11-22mm STM is insanely good, better than any of Canon's other full frame options), and the Nikon 14-24mm is still king hands down, but Canon now actually has a wide angle zoom lens for full frame that isn't too bad.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2014, 10:07:59 AM by Radiating »

ajfotofilmagem

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2222
Newbie for AWA . I just bought the 17-40 F/4 during the 15% off last week. I am not sure if I need to keep it or return based on this announcement or just buy a lens like Samyang 14mm (with manual focus).
Shoot her in F4 F5.6 F8 and see if the image is good enough for your use. If you want to print large sizes, I imagine it will be a little disappointing in F4, but must be sufficiently sharp in F11.

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
And the news keeps getting better :D.  As I had hoped, it comes with a much more compact lens hood than the 16-35 II - it looks very similar to the 24-70 II hood:


Source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1051478-REG/canon_9528b001_ew_82_lens_hood.html
« Last Edit: May 13, 2014, 10:35:48 AM by mackguyver »
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

dlleno

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 605
anyone pre-ordered yet to fill an anticipated need?  B&H has no availability info /  Amazon says first availability june 30th.  tempted.

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6895
  • USM > STM
As for me, I never purchased an UWA replacement for my EF-S 10-22 when I got the 5D3 two years ago.  So this is one worth looking at. 

This lens has a lot going for it as it pertains to what I shoot:

  • MTF charts claiming it is much sharper than Canon's alternatives in that focal length?  Check.
  • Front-filterable + 77mm front element = a seamless drop-in to my Lee 77mm ND Grad / 10 stop ND setup?  Check.
  • Weather-sealed?  Check.
  • Internal focusing and zooming?  Check.
  • USM?  Check.
  • Lightweight like one would expect an F/4 zoom to be?  Check.
  • Rounded aperture blades for sweet portraits of mountains in front of a lot of city streetlights?  Check.
  • Utterly useless L series lens pouch?  Check and fist pump.
  • Do I need this lens?  (Note from Canon: a check here is optional.)

Looks solid on paper.  Now I begin the fun game of 'do I pre-order now or or do I wait for data?'.

- A

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
anyone pre-ordered yet to fill an anticipated need?  B&H has no availability info /  Amazon says first availability june 30th.  tempted.
Yes, I pre-ordered this morning - B&H wasn't available to pre-order last night and Adorama & Amazon were, but Adorama wanted $10 to ship (vs. B&H free) and stupid Amazon started charging sales tax here in Florida last week  >:( :'(.

This lens is going to be perfect for me - I rarely bring my 16-35 II along because of the size and ridiculous hood and have almost never used f/2.8.  I don't really need IS, but I think that might be nice once I start using it.  The MTF curves and samples from the Canon Japan link showing sharp corners with no CA look amazing so I'm sold.  If I shoot in low light, I usually use my 24 f/1.4 II, so I can live without the single stop.  B&H tends to get the first shipment, so I guess it will be coming sometime in late June, and I can't wait.
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

canon rumors FORUM


Clik

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 6
Newbie for AWA . I just bought the 17-40 F/4 during the 15% off last week. I am not sure if I need to keep it or return based on this announcement or just buy a lens like Samyang 14mm (with manual focus).
Shoot her in F4 F5.6 F8 and see if the image is good enough for your use. If you want to print large sizes, I imagine it will be a little disappointing in F4, but must be sufficiently sharp in F11.

Thanks, will test it. I know its hard to avoid buyers remorse after return window, but at the same time don't want to keep an older version if its reasonable to get the new one which I can keep for years to come.

JonAustin

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 641
  • Telecom / IT consultant and semi-pro photographer
I just posted my 17-40 for sale on craigslist. I'll probably use the funds from the sale for the 35/2 IS I've been planning to buy during the current instant rebate period.

But I do plan to buy the new 16-35/4 IS later this year. My 17-40 hasn't gotten much use since I went full frame, due to its lack of IS, lackluster off-center performance and my possession of a good 24-105. A 16-35/4 with much improved optical performance and IS will give me more reasons to use it.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2014, 10:33:25 AM by JonAustin »
Canon cameras, lenses, speedlites, scanners & printers

canon rumors FORUM