Too good to be true?
A cryptic message today said Canon is developing their first f/2 zoom. The broken english of the email said the lens would be a “short zoom range”. There was no focal length given.
cr
Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.
72 Comments
Read Joseph S Wisniewski’s comments on the 35-100 here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=31614459
Essentially it’s a 70-200 f/2.8 with a built-in wide converter, so you get 35-100 f/2 for the size, weight and price of a 35-100 f/1.4.
The 70-200 f/4 on FF gives identical results (total light, DoF etc.) on FF as the 35-100 f/2 does on 4/3, all while costing about 2/3 less.
To answer your question (comparing to Canon APS-C), equivalent lenses would be f/2.5 at the focal lengths you’ve calculated.
That would be trememdous…
…ly expensive.
Constant f/4 would have been nice, but there you go. When its price eventually settles down it should be fairly reasonably priced.
I bet it is a video lens.
Canon are working on a Compact Flash based video camera, so it could be for this and not for a stills camera at all.
I’m not sure the sensor size for this camera, but it may have a smaller sensor, so a fast zoom would be much easier to make.
Talk about fanboyism…
Unfortunetly Canon is not publishing distorion charts. Only the software has the data inside to correct images. Once I asked Canon support what lens to buy if distorsion should be minimal but they don’t have any answer.
One should buy lenses from Zeiss to get full technical information from the manufacturer.