|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
From an Email
The new Rebel will be launched June 23 along with a new EF-S prime. The lense will be a 30mm f/2 with an EF-S mount. Canon held off on the originally planned 500D release due to the economy and waiting to see what Nikon comes out with……… They have a couple designs of the camera ready to go.
I'm not sure if companies can afford to “wait” to see what's coming, so I'm not sure what to make of that. I'm going to CR2 this.
cr
CANON, ARTICULATING LCD WITH LIVE VIEW!!!
Arrrghh!! I just bought a Rebel XSi…
Well, at least they’ll come out with the 30mm f/2 lens. That would be AWESOME because it would truly be 50mm equivalent (taking into account the 1.6 crop factor).
“Arrrghh!! I just bought a Rebel XSi…”
Well – you should have bought a 5D II – a replacement will not be due before 2011 :-)
Heheh…. way too big and expensive for me. Well, at least I think the XSi would have a decent resell value if need be.
Its hard to believe that there is a demand for a 30mm EF-S lens.
Although there are users who would buy this, many, if not most buyers of the 500D are moving up from point and shoot cameras which have zoom lenses. They expect and want a zoom lens.
I believe that this is part of a plan to produce a ultra low cost DSLR. A very low cost lens is needed to hit the magic $300 mark. Canon can see this coming from Nikon, and, like in the past is playing catchup in fear of being left standing if Nikon launches a low cost Dslr.
>most buyers of the 500D are moving up from point and shoot cameras which have zoom lenses. They expect and want a zoom lens
Whether or not this is true is irrelevant, the EF-S mount will work just as well for the XXD range, where more serious amateurs and some pros come into the market.
On the contrary, most people I know moving from P&S to DSLR territory see a picture with beautiful bokeh from the large aperture lenses and then come to me asking how it’s done. I tell them to get the 50mm f/1.8 because it’s so cheap, and if the 30mm f/2 is similarly priced, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be a steal. I own a 50mm f/1.8 and would consider picking up the 30mm f/2 (considering I was thinking of picking up a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 if it weren’t so damned expensive).
but come one, f/2?! …I guess many will stick with the sigma 1.4 … and you can already buy the 28mm 1.8, I just don’t understand this move.
I hope this remains a rumor :p lol
I plan to get the 450d or this rumored 500d if it comes out before I travel around the world in august….but I will go with the canon 28mm f1.8 for my 50mm equivalent prime and not this ef-s 30mm one. Even if the 30 is cheaper, the 28 is slighty faster and future proof when I go full frame down the road.
f/2 would be a bit disappointing. Let’s hope it will at least have USM.
On the other hand: If it would be cheaper and optically better than the EF 28mm/1.8, then it could become quite interesting.
However: CR2, so…
30mm f2? Why? f1.8 or f1.4 perhaps but not f2. I doubt it is true.
+1
I guess if the lens is really only f2, I too would finally go for the Sigma 30 1.4 instead. I have been holding my breath on getting a “normal equivalent prime” for my 450D/XSi for a while now, hoping for an announcement of a contender for Nikon’s recent APS-C-only 35 1.8 by Canon.
The only thing that would make me reconsider an upcoming Canon would be if the Canon has a significantly better performance (corner sharpness!) at f2 than the Sigma after being stopped down to the same aperture. It should also have USM (IIRC the Nikkor does have the Nikon equivalent of USM, right?). But given that Canon already demonstrated the audacity to deny people paying 500€ for lens (EF-S 18-200) a USM drive, I have little hope. That, and Canon’s irrational product development decisions in recent times will likely make it end up as being a comparatively expensive, comparatively slow, plastic-fantastic, USM-less dud. Call me a pessimist if you like.
In most reviews the EF 28 1.8 did not perform too stellar, but about on par with the Sigma 30 1.4 (which of course is APS-C only).
35mm f/2.0 is not good enough, we could buy 17-55 f/2.8 EF-S IS and are only one step behind iff IS is off.
35mm f/1.4 EF-S IS would make sense to take pictures of a town in the night. Can’t one combine f/1.4 and IS ?
Yes, there are plenty of excellent lenses out there for a Canon DSLR. This one will likely be sharp enough, but bottom end construction. Canon needs a lens they can produce for $10.00 to put in low cost DSLR kits. The economy being what it is, people are looking for ways to save money, or convince themselves that they can afford a new camera.
The people who read and comment on Canon Rumors are not the average low end DSLR buyer, and normally have a much higher than average knowledge about Cameras and Lenses. If they purchase this lens, they will check it out first, and have a specific use for it.
Does EF-S 30mm f/2 makes any sense while there is already an EF 28mm f/1.8 USM on the market?
The 500D is already shipping, and has been for a long time:
http://www.adorama.com/CA77CU500D.html?searchinfo=500d&item_no=2
:)
I wondered if “500D” would be its actual name or if they’d skip to something else. I could see a numerical renaming of the Rebel line.
The 17-55 f/2.8 IS is a $900 lens. As the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 goes for $400, I think it’s safe to say a 30mm f/2 would go for less than $250, so there’s no reason Canon wouldn’t produce both.
I also wouldn’t expect to see IS on this less. It could be done, but a less that fast and relatively short wouldn’t justify the cost.
On contrary to many of you are saying I think it makes much sense to have a SUPER-cheap normal prime. I mean, it wouldn’t mase sense if this lens is a 30mm EF-s USM, well built and made to last long in the 300$ range. I think the point will be the opposite, making a lens in the 100$ range, able to give results as good as the 50mm 1.8. If it could perform correctly from f2 can be a super seller, taking pig piece of sales from the 50mm 1.8.
+2 ;)
Allthough Canon brought out a nFD 2/50mm as a kit lens back in 1980 (which is BTW a rather rare collector’s item by now), I can’t figure out a good reason to do this nowadays. The only reason could probably a very low price like Ed mentioned but that might easily result in very poor image qualitiy, making the lens obsolete compared to e.g. the 18-55.
Instead I would have expected a EF-S 30mm in the f/1.8 to f/1.4 range.
PS: Gruß nach Franken. ;-)
I’m sure that some products sometimes can be delayed by the companies for a while, to see what the competitors will release.
Maybe this is one of those cases.
If we (or you) get some leaks about Canon, it’s sure that Canon also gets some leaks about Nikon and others (although Nikon is the major competitor in this area), so Canon, with some margins, can adjust their plans sometimes with some products.
It would make sense if it they make it the new “plastic fantastic” normal lens for crop cameras and sell it for peanuts. The EF 50mm f/1.8 II is the cheapest lens they make, but it is a short telephoto on a crop body, so a similar price for a cheap and cheerful EF-S 30mm f/2 would fill a gap.
Everyone always justifies the lack of IS on medium to wide angle lenses. I’m not sure why. I happen to be better at balancing a longer heavier lens stably than I do a short one. For instance, my 85 1.8 is harder for me to handhold still than my 70-200 IS with the IS turned off.
I find that the lighter lenses just don’t balance in my hands as well. Maybe my technique could use work, but I get better shots from the heavier, physically longer glass.
If you want f/1.4, they make the EF 35mm f/1.4L.
There is an EF 35mm f/2 and EF 28mm f/1.8, so they must be releasing an EF-S that is much cheaper–otherwise, why bother?
Maybe they’ll upgrade the EF 35mm f/2 to be an EF 35mm f/1.4 (or f/1.8) and add USM. Then upgrade the “L” to f/1.2. That would give you something like the equivalent of the 50mm prime line-up with the EF-S 30mm corresponding to the ultra-cheap nifty fifty. They just need proper USM on the 50mm f/1.4 and they’ll have a nicely graduated range of lenses at these two popular focal lengths.
I guess you’re right…I didn’t look at that this way…
but still…I believe it’s for a small market, even the ‘starters’ are debating between a 50mm 1.8 and 1.4, they don’t buy a DSLR for nothing most of the times.
There is nothing magical about a focal length (or equivalent) of exactly 50mm. The EF 28mm and EF 35mm have the equivalent focal lengths on a crop sensor of 45mm and 56mm respectively, which are both near “normal”. In fact, technically the 28mm is nearer to “normal” than a 30mm would be on a crop sensor, as “normal” just means a focal length close to the diagonal size of the sensor (about 43mm on FF or about 27mm on a crop).
When I say “shorter,” I’m referring to focal length. We’re all familiar with the inversal-focal-length rule of thumb, which says that, without IS, you should have a shutter speed of at least the reciprocal of the focal length. So, 1/30 second should produce a number of keepers on a 30mm lens, but you’d want to shoot at 1/200 or faster on a 200mm lens. Thus, less need for IS.
Would it be nice to have IS on a 30mm lens? Sure, but is it worth the additional cost? Probably not, but it’s impossible to say for certain without knowing what the price of this hypothetical lens would be.
It’s because the length of the lens magnifies the effect of any camera rotation. It’s basically a lever arm. If your wobble is such that for a given shutter speed, you get 10 pixels of blur on a 100mm lens, you will get 40 pixels of blur on a 400mm lens and only 1 pixel of “blur” on a 10mm lens with the same shutter. Thus, IS is more important on longer lenses and of very limited utility on wide angles.
Totally my thoughts. I will be all over this lens for my 40D if it’s a “APS-C normal” version of the 50 1.8.
Well possible, I have been working for Sony Digital Imaging and there were always models on the ‘waiting’ list. Also specs often were adapted to the latest market circumstances
Really? I thought that 50mm was the “gold standard” because it is the focal length that most closely resembles de human field of vision. Do you mean that this is achieved by having a focal length that is close to the sensor’s diagonal size?
Thanks
Yes, because the 28 f/1.8 is optical junk.
The recent $200 Nikon 35mm f/1.8 has a decent build quality with SWM (USM), though I haven’t seen any test data on the optics yet. I should hope Canon can do something equivalent.
Canon set the bar high for EF-S primes with the 60mm f/2.8. Maybe they can do it again.
I had hoped for a faster variant as well, 1.8 minimum. So lets hope that this rumor is right about a normal-equivalent EF-S prime actually coming from Canon, but is wrong about that particular spec.
PS: Not Franken, but Pfalz! :-)
No one seems to have commented much on the lack of new cameras so I will add my thoughts. The basic rule in tough times is nobody move – nobody gets hurt.
I think the next year or so will see very few announcements from all manufactures. They all have inventories which need to be sold, and in place production facilities which they want to be more cost effective. Starting up a new product means unused inventory and increased costs as new parts are ordered and the bugs worked out of the system. It is far cheaper and safer to just keep making the same stuff.
In addition to the above, it is also becoming apparent that improvement in image quality is slowing down. The 50D does have better IQ than the 40D, but is is substantially better? In these times many will be looking for value for their money. Yes Auto-ISO is very nice, but is it essential?
So I suspect the stratagy of all manufactures will be to pull back and wait and see. Unfortunately I think this means some novel photographic ideas such as Panasonic’s LX-3 with the f2 lens and the G1 with the small lenses but big sensor, will either die or take a very long time to reach maturity. The rumors certainly were strong that Nikon would introduce a new large sensor format. If that were true, they changed their mind in a hurry. It is far cheaper to give a free concert than to start a new production line.
So, what I expect to see are new products where the parts and production are too far along to stop or replacement of old models past their best before date.
A real shame. I was looking forward to a small Canon flash similar to the Nikon SB-400. Better still would be a range-finder style camera from Canon with small, light, fast lenses.
I guess you’re being sarcastic? I honestly don’t know, sorry if I’m being dense.
I really doubt that if that lens eventuates it will be as cheap as the nifty-nifty, actually I hope it will be more expensive and with better build quality. Come to think of it, I wish that Canon would come up with 50mm 1.8 Mark III – something twice the price (it would still be very cheap) but less toy-like quality and same goes for that lens – not that I actually think it’s needed, don’t see any advantage in a wide EF-S prime (unless it’s cheaper to manufacture for Canon).
Why would people be angry about the lens being f/2? f/1.8 is only 1/3 stop difference, so you wouldn’t notice a Dof difference and hardly any speed. F/1.4 would get a bit pricey (like the Sigma). A cheap 30mmf/2.0 would probably work well, but again, we’re seeing the beginning of the end for crop cams so it seems a bit late for Canon to be expanding the EF-S line. Anyhow, I’m sure it would sell fairly well, so I guess I won’t be too surprised, especially if it’s a pancake design.
I don’t believe this the beginning of the end for crop cameras. A vast majority of the cameras sold by Canon/Nikon are crop sensor, and sensor technology is only going to get better.
I have a FF camera which I love for IQ but hate for portability, which is what 80% of their customers want. Also agree with you that f/2 is irrelevant for the target market.
That’s a pity.
So I’ll may buy a 450D.
PS: Great site!
Regards from Germany
Jens
Well the canon xti is selling refurbished for 340 with free shipping. That’s dirt cheap, I have a filter more expensive then that.
For the price yes. According to the reviews and testing I’ve seen, it’s just not up to the standards of a modern prime, esp. border sharpness and CAs. More is expected of modern prime lenses. The 60mm, for example, costs the same or less and has stellar optics in comparison.
as always i HATE the creation of efs – I haven’t seen much to show me that it’s that much cheaper to build an efs lens (which is the argument usually)
Why not build a 35/2 or 1.8 built like the 50 1.8 but that would still work on all cameras?
arghhh
JC
A 35 f/2 with a FF image circle would cost a lot more and will be bigger, which contradict the two major reasons why they are making it in the first place. For everyone else there’s the f/1.4
Let’s not forget that this is a FF wide-angle lens, those are substantially more difficult to produce with desirable optical characteristics than a normal lens for APS-C. It is also much older in design, and the speed is actually quite extraordinary for a FF wide-angle lens of its cost. comparing a 60mm EF-S lens to a FF wide-angle that is 7 or 8 years its predecessor is not a reasonable comparison.
I also do not thing that the crop cam will die out any time soon. Even if FF bodies drop significantly below the 1500€/2000$ barrier, a crop body will always retain a price advantage. Not forgetting an advantage regarding cheaper lens designs and smaller body sizes which many people prefer (although I think you could do a FF in the size of a xxxD/Rebel).
So the “threat” for EF-S does IMO not come from FF bodies, but from approaches like Micro Fourthirds: We will sooner or later see a broad move away from the classical mirror-based design. I firmly believe that Canon, Nikon and the other systems vendors will sooner or later present their own version of a Micro Fourthirds-like mirror-less camera system. Whether this will remain compatible to the current EF(-S) system… well I sure hope it does. But I fear compatibility will be limited here, as Canon already has a disadvantage with its EF-S lenses being mechanical incompatible to full-frame bodies, while Nikon users can still user their APS-C-only lenses on full-frame in “crop mode”.
yes, and the current 35mm f/2 is not able to present details for a 15MP crop camara at f/2. 15MP crop camaras are needing exelent lenses and I like my ef-s 60mm macro as well as ef-s 55-250 and ef-s 17-55 f/2.8. I never used my 35mm f/2.0 since I have the 17-55 f/2.8 since this is much sharper and has IS.
If they create 35mm f/1.4 I would like to see MTF at 60 lines per mm to have an idea of the image quality with 12MPixel. EF-S 50-150 f/2.8 would also a good idea.
ef-s 35 f2 will be a super bad choice
no new lens for ff user?
7 or 8 years? The optical formula of all of these superfast wide primes is from the 60s. They were designed with the constraints of film speed in mind – B&W ISO160 was high-speed film back then.
The 35/1.4 is a long outdated superspeed design back from the days when color film was ISO25. A new, sharp and distortion-free 35/2 would be a very welcome addition.
It may be true as now the 35/2 is either out of stock or back ordered in the majority of big US stores.
When the focal length is the same as the diagonal dimension of a 3:2 sensor, the diagonal angle of view is 53 degrees (regardless of the actual sensor size). For 35mm systems, this is a focal length of 43mm; for a 1.6x crop, it’s about 27mm.
The human eye has a much, much wider angle of view than 53 degrees, but it is the objects in the central 40-60 degrees of our angle of view that have the most impact on our perception of a scene. (At the periphery, we mostly perceive movement.) The 53-degree figure is roughly in the centre of this range, so a camera lens with a 53 degree angle of view will capture approximately that to which we, using our eyes, will be paying the most attention.
In 35mm terms, the 40 to 60 degree diagonal angle of view range is covered by focal lengths from 60mm to 38mm respectively (or about 38mm to 24mm respectively for a 1.6x crop). Anything in that range is approximately “normal”; anything slightly shorter is “wide angle” and anything slightly longer is “short telephoto”.
So, it’s all a bit fuzzy and 50mm is not a magical focal length, just one with a diagonal angle of view of 47 degrees, which puts it comfortably within the typical range of angles of view that are important for human visual perception.
Why not? Not everyone who likes using primes wants or needs a lens any faster than f2.
For me, this lens is long overdue and a very welcome addition, provided it performs well right across the frame and isn’t just the EF-S equivalent of the mediocre 28/1.8. Yes, I would prefer it not to be an EF-S so I can also use it on my film camera, but that would increase the weight and cost just like a faster aperture would.
so…we just hope Nikon’s DSLR comes out…
That’s a great explanation! I had always wanted to understand this. Thanks a lot.
of course it does make sense! for the price of 35f2 or cheaper… If it has a good optical performance for that price and better build quality than 50f1,8II – it will sell well! 28f1,8 isn’t that good wide open and it’s a bit pricey when compared to 35f2 and 50f1,8… it’s not a lens targeted for a person that uses 17-55f2,8IS, but it’ll be a fast alternative for 18-55 or 17-85 (is will not stop the movement!) Thus this lens has to cost not more than 35f2 (the less the better, but not for the cost of quality) – that’s my opinion and that’s the market I think Canon is targeting… Of course a version for FF would be better choice, but you can’t have everything…
There has been a test of this lens on optyczne.pl… http://nikonrumors.com/2009/02/16/nikon-af-s-nikkor-35mm-f18g-dx-detailed-review.aspx
I’m hoping the f2 is in order to keep size small (and maybe IQ up). I really liked the size of the 50/1.8II on the Rebel XT as a small, almost pocketable setup. 30mm would be a better FL for this.
I seriously doubt an EF-s Prime……
Once again Canon plans to hand over the market leading position to Nikon: waiting to see what Nikon does? They’ve lost already and don’t even know it.
obviously the two possible designs are with and without articulating lcd – the d5000 is now rumored to have one which probably means canon will follow – good choice —uhhh Nikon !
Again probably leading the market .
It is true that not many people will buy their first DSLR with a 30mm prime lens. Many will go for the kit with the EF-S 18-55mm IS. However, if there is a reasonably priced (under $200) EF-S 30mm f/2, this could be a next lens purchase for kit owners who are looking for a faster lens for indoor shooting. It may not be as popular as the EF-S 55-250 IS, but it could easily become the third most popular lens for Rebel/EOSXXD owners.
All the more reason to update it. Making it EF-S requires less glass, so you have the potential for great optics at a relatively low price.
I noticed this also. I’ve been checking it for a couple weeks now.
An EF-S 30/2 is a smart move. I speculate it’ll be similar to the 50/1.8 – similar optical design, similar build, similar limitations (basic AF, no distance scale, MF cumbersome).
And I speculate it’ll cost less than $100. Like the 50/1.8 it’ll give newbies a taste for the clarity and speed that comes with primes. Then you run into its limitations and you end up spending more money on better gear.
Smart move.
The main factor in compatibility is the distance from the rear element of the lens to the sensor. Basically, a short-distance lens can work with a longer distance mount by simply adding a simple spacer, while the opposite is impossible without the addition of complicated optics. Given that removing a mirror-box will allow for an extremely short lens-to-sensor distance (which is the whole point) it should be simple enough to make a cheap adapter to utilize EF and EF-S lenses (whether they keep the electronics compatible is another matter, but there’s no reason why they have to change it.)
Lost what? Have you seen how many people are complaining in Nikon forums?
i went with the 35mm f/2 from canon. the design is PRE-HISTORIC! it’s small, light, about the right focal length, takes an ok picture, but WTF is with the buzzy little focus motor?
now i have the 30mm sigma, it’s fast, sharp, perfect focal length, silent motor, f/1.4 gives me more room to move in low light, but it’s too heavy. especially for the 400D. it’s a tiny SLR, so i would still be interested in tiny lens to compliment it. f/2 is enough. ef-s 30mm would be friggin’ PERFECT!
as for the 500D? i’m chomping at the bit for it. i love my 400D but desperately want video capture with shallow DOF. can’t go to 5DmII, too expensive, too big. can’t go to can’t go to nikon, i have to many canon lenses.
COME ON 500D!! COME ON EF-S 30mm f/2!!!!
i think they’ll just upgrade the 35 f2 to have usm and better optics. that way, they’ll have a normal prime for the 1.6ers, and an alternative 35mm for the full framers that won’t pony up for the 35L (and are forced to give their business to sigma). one upgrade, two markets are appeased.
Part of the desingns yes, but the EOS system only dates back to 1987 and all the lenses were at least partially redesigned to be put in EF mount. Most of these updates were simply coatings, but those make a big difference.
Not quite so, Olympus has already announced the E-620 which not only feature a 2.7″ articulating screen but also a glass fibre reinforced plastic body.
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympuse620
EF-S 30/2 would be lovely! Give it the optical quality of the 50/1.8 but improve the build and AF. Price it at around $200, and that should be a winner!
I would definitely buy such a lens!
I couldn’t have stated it better myself…Started with the Original Digital reber, and cheap kit lens, bought the 50mm 1.8, quickly thereafter sold the camera and the lens, moved to the 30D and 50mm 1.4. And not much later, picked up the 35mm “L”, and absolutely can’t wait until I have my 5D Mk II to truly use this spectacular Lens, and also add the 50mm “L”. Nearly EVERYBODY passes along their humble beginnings…Well Put.
When the hell does Canon release 500D??
I’m gonna buy 450D!