Even the current 35L is a significant upgrade to the 28/1.8.ablearcher said:
I've got the 35mm f/2 and can say that the reviews online are pretty accurate. The motor is slow and buzzy (but accurate). It can occasionally hunt a bit in low light, but will almost always lock on.ageha said:How is the AF of the EF 35mm f/2.0? Is it as slow as the 50mm f/1.8 mkII? What about the EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, is it considered to be a fast and sharp lens?
The point is that EF lenses are wasteful for crop cameras. EF-S can be made much smaller and cheaper. Just think of the G12 with its 28-140/2.8-4.5 lens and think how big it would be if the lens had to be EF compatible. More extreme, but same thing.Artisttt said:What is the point to make new EF-S lens??? Would be much better to renew EF 35mm f/2
I would guess that Canon sells more of any single current Rebel model than all of the current non-Rebel bodies combined. So, as Canon develops new lenses, they have two distinct groups of customers they are designing for - 'Rebel owners' and 'everyone else'. I think that in general, prime lenses do not appeal to the 'typical' Rebel owner, unless it's billed for a specific purpose like the 60mm macro lens. Therefore, I don't expect to see new EF-S primes coming out - they'll release consumer-level zooms for the Rebel owners, and EF (mostly L) lenses for the 'everyone else' group. The other factor is that I'd venture to say that many in that 'everyone else' group with an xxD or 7D body dream/hope/plan to get a FF body at some point, further reducing the interest for EF-S lenses in that customer group.epsiloneri said:Currently, the only EF-S prime is the EF-S 60/2.8 macro. I'm sure high-quality EF-S primes in a small form factor would find its audience. Most dSLRs are not FF anyway.
It is small but not that cheap (350$) the Nikon sells for 200$ !!!TBenson said:But the existing 35mm f2 is already small/cheap/light so I don't see why a new lens at that focal length would be EF-S.