Most requested lenses for replacement?

[photophreek]

Does someone know if the 85mm 1.2 will be updated soon?

Why do you need this lens to be updated?  It's sharp at all apertures, unreal bokeh and very accurate AF.  It really isn't as slow as what you read in reviews IMHO and the "focus-by-wire" is not sometng you need to get used to at all...tremendous lens.  To answer your orginal query, the lens was released in 2006, so an update is a long way away.

[westr70]

135II would get better contrast. IS is a complication/weight that is not needed.

Thats what I said until I tried and bought the 70-200 2.8 IS II. Now I can't live without the IS.

Canon's latest image stabilizing tech is truly remarkable.

Who doesn't want to be able to shoot 1/10 - 1/20 sec handheld at 200mm?

All lenses should come with IS, even wide angle ones.

Here, here..... Love my 200 mm. 

[bdunbar79]

Does someone know if the 85mm 1.2 will be updated soon?

Why do you need this lens to be updated?  It's sharp at all apertures, unreal bokeh and very accurate AF.  It really isn't as slow as what you read in reviews IMHO and the "focus-by-wire" is not sometng you need to get used to at all...tremendous lens.  To answer your orginal query, the lens was released in 2006, so an update is a long way away.

I've shot sports with the 85 f/1.2L.  It's amazing and I didn't notice it being slow.  I had a lot of keepers with it.  My requested update would be a 50mm lens, but that isn't going to happen because the 1.2L is too new.  I don't see a 1.4 II coming out, even though I'd personally like one. 

I'd like a 35L II perhaps, maybe a 100-400L II IS, or some other odd prime focal length, like a 70L.  That'd be cool.  Oh well I'm not contributing here, just wishing, sorry.  (20L and 28L too )

[pwp]

I don't own a 135 f/2 at the moment but it's a brilliant piece of glass which feels very last century now that I've been spoiled by IS in the brilliant 70-200 f/2.8ISII. My 135 f/2 wasn't getting any use so was traded. I don't hold as steady as some photographers who can hand-hold at insanely low shutter speeds. I do value IS! The 135 f/2 lens would be a popular candidate for upgrade. I'd like to see it presented at the design level of the L100 f/2.8is macro. Even with the inevitable price boost, this would be a great seller.

EF50 f/1.4 would be another welcome upgrade, as would an optically improved 16-35 f/2.8III. Lessons learned in the redesign of the 24-70 f/2.8II may flow through to the 16-35.

There will always be time lapses in the development cycles, but that's life. But overall I see Canon's lens set as offering brilliant choices for just about any shooting style or special project.

PW

[EOBeav]

Folks, they're not going to update the 135mm f/2 SF just so that it can compete with the current 135mm f/2 L. Remember, and updated version isn't going to come out at ~$500USD where the current one is. The hypothetical lens would come out more like ~$1000USD, where the 135mm f/2 L currently sits. It's just not gonna happen.

[pwp]

Folks, they're not going to update the 135mm f/2 SF just so that it can compete with the current 135mm f/2 L.

I assume you're talking about the 135 f/2.8SF, an old design with film era relevance which will probably quietly disappear from Canon's inventory sometime soon. I wonder how many they sell per year? It's the venerable 135 f/2L which also hales from last century, April 1996 to be exact which I'm hoping to see upgraded.

PW

[sharka23]

the entire world is just waiting for brand new TS-E 45mm and the TS-E 90mm .

[nicke]

A 16-35/2.8L, still with 82mm filter size, but with a better edge and corner sharpness. And not extending (like the present 16-35) when zooming.

[JoeDavid]

How about a new version of the 400/5.6L adding IS.  Also, now that Canon has boosted the price of the big white lenses to beyond reason, maybe a 500/5.6L with IS also...

[Marsu42]

I'd like to see it presented at the design level of the L100 f/2.8is macro.

Well, the 100L certainly has a nice design, but it's still just a plastic lens. Maybe I should be grateful because sturdier build would double the price, but I wouldn't mention it as a prototype what to expect from a lens.

[paul13walnut5]

the entire world is just waiting for brand new TS-E 45mm and the TS-E 90mm .

Is it?  These are very very specialist lenses, the 90 in partucular is an exceptionally high performer as it is.

Could use free rotating shift position (relative to the tilt) like the 24 II and 17 got, but most folk who have the problem do the simple home modification anyway.

[RC]

35L II with WS, and please keep the price increase reasonable.   

[Marsu42]

35L II with WS, and please keep the price increase reasonable.   

That sounds like the next offer for extended flame wars after the 5d3 :-p ... what would you consider "reasonable" for added sealing & the same iq (which can get hardly any better)?

[EOBeav]

Folks, they're not going to update the 135mm f/2 SF just so that it can compete with the current 135mm f/2 L.

I assume you're talking about the 135 f/2.8SF, an old design with film era relevance which will probably quietly disappear from Canon's inventory sometime soon. I wonder how many they sell per year? It's the venerable 135 f/2L which also hales from last century, April 1996 to be exact which I'm hoping to see upgraded.

PW

I stand corrected: The 135mm "Soft Focus" lens is an f/2.8.  My point is that there were some calls on here to upgrade that lens, and I just don't see it happening. Personally I'd like to see the 135mm f/2 L get upgraded AFTER I buy this current version. A new one will undoubtedly be out of my price range.

[friedmud]

After just trying to purchase a 16-35 f/2.8L and coming up with two duds (see here: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6391.0 ) I feel like an upgrade is in order there.

The Nikon offerings are much sharper, and the 16-35 has quite a bit of CA and distortion... Definitely a lot of room for improvement!