List of rumored lenses

[M.ST]

I think (hope) we will see the 100-400 IS replacement, the 17-40 L replacement, the 14-24 2.8 L, the 24-70 2.8 IS lens, the 50 mm 1.4 replacement and the Tilt-Shift replacements.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I think (hope) we will see the 100-400 IS replacement, the 17-40 L replacement, the 14-24 2.8 L, the 24-70 2.8 IS lens, the 50 mm 1.4 replacement and the Tilt-Shift replacements.

Me too. The long rumored 100-400 replacement is a bit of a mythical unicorn....along with a 35mm f1.4 L replacement.
Personally, I'm not too fussed with a 24-70 L IS...I know some are looking forwards to it. But the mkII non IS is very very good. A 14-24L would be nice, a 12-24L would be better and not preclude the need for a 17-40 or 16-35.

 

[StudentOfLight]

I believe that I have read discussions (though not a rumor) that the 45 and 90 TS would be replaced. Or is this wishful thinking on my part?

I read on a website that the TS-E 90mm would be replaced by a TS-E 135mm but at the time it seemed like they were just pulling that FL out of their 4$$. Still no update announcement. A TS-E 90mm replacement (L-series) is the lens I most desire. The current 90mm loses IQ when shifting wide open. Unfortunately TS-E seems to be low on Canon's priorities.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I believe that I have read discussions (though not a rumor) that the 45 and 90 TS would be replaced. Or is this wishful thinking on my part?

I read on a website that the TS-E 90mm would be replaced by a TS-E 135mm but at the time it seemed like they were just pulling that FL out of their 4$$. Still no update announcement. A TS-E 90mm replacement (L-series) is the lens I most desire. The current 90mm loses IQ when shifting wide open. Unfortunately TS-E seems to be low on Canon's priorities.

I see the same thing with my TS-e 17L and TS-e 45mm. I guess it's a fact of such a large swing / shift movement. I've seen simular with the TS-e24IIL, although less pronounced. I have to confess, I've not tried the TS-e 90...it's not a lens I have a need for yet. I suspect that Canon are in no particular hurry to replace the 45 and 90, they are still selling as well as a TS-e is to be expected . A new version with have a inevitable double price hike...which will most probably kill the new sales. It's a lot of cash for a marginal increase in optical quality and the newer movement chassis. One would have a strong "need" to justify that kind of cost!

 

[ClayStevens]

A lot of interests in EF 35 f/1.4L II.

 

[CarlTN]

I think (hope) we will see the 100-400 IS replacement, the 17-40 L replacement, the 14-24 2.8 L, the 24-70 2.8 IS lens, the 50 mm 1.4 replacement and the Tilt-Shift replacements.

Me too. The long rumored 100-400 replacement is a bit of a mythical unicorn....along with a 35mm f1.4 L replacement.
Personally, I'm not too fussed with a 24-70 L IS...I know some are looking forwards to it. But the mkII non IS is very very good. A 14-24L would be nice, a 12-24L would be better and not preclude the need for a 17-40 or 16-35.

Do you ever use the Sigma 12-24? It's supposed to be decent.

 

[mackguyver]

Do you ever use the Sigma 12-24? It's supposed to be decent.

I had the lens for a while and really liked it. The 12mm rectilinear view is unlike anything you've ever used - it's nearly 1/3 wider than a 14mm lens! I sold it with half of my other lenses when I got the 300mm f/2.8 IS II, but do miss it sometimes. It wasn't super sharp, was rather distorted, and had bad CA in the corners, but if you kept it at f/11 and 12mm, it was pretty decent. Besides, you could hand hold it at 1/15s! I'd LOVE it if Canon released a 12-24L Here are some shots at 12mm to give you an idea of what that'd be like:

 

[waelelgendy]

It's interesting to see that the rumored lenses in 2010 remain as is in 2014!

 

[tron]

It's interesting to see that the rumored lenses in 2010 remain as is in 2014!

;D ;D ;D

 

[jeffa4444]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

A 24-105 II L really would be nice, especially mated with a 100-400 II L combo. Very versatile!

 

[transpo1]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

A 24-105 II L really would be nice, especially mated with a 100-400 II L combo. Very versatile!

+1 for the 24-105L II lens. This is the most versatile lens Canon makes.

Also, Canon- a 14-24 2.8 for under $2500 please.

 

[sengineer]

The Canon Camera Museum tech report for the EOS-M 55-200mm lens shows 5 lens in the family. http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/tech/report/2014/08/

 

[tron]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

A 24-105 II L really would be nice, especially mated with a 100-400 II L combo. Very versatile!

+1 for the 24-105L II lens. This is the most versatile lens Canon makes.

Also, Canon- a 14-24 2.8 for under $2500 please.

Can I order my 16-35 2.8 III please ? 8)

 

[c.d.embrey]

Canon already has an EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM Full Frame lens.

Canon already has an EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens for their Mirrorless APS-C camera.

Wouldn't it make more sense to make an EF-S 22mm f/2 STM for their non-mirrorless APS-C cameras.

BTW 24mm = 38mm FF and 22mm = 35mm FF

An EF-S 22mm f/2 STM lens would be a good reason to replace my heavy EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM with a light EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM

 

[Rocky]

The Canon Camera Museum tech report for the EOS-M 55-200mm lens shows 5 lens in the family. http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/tech/report/2014/08/

The first one on the left is a EF to EF-M adapter. Therefore there are only 4 EF-M mount lens.

 

[Mitch.Conner]

I feel like the most anticipated, mainstream lenses that are rumored are the least likely to come out, while lenses that people say "wtf?" to (ie: the new cheaper 24-105 non L which costs just $100 less than what white box 24-105 f/4L lenses are currently going for) are likely to continue to pop up.

Maybe I'm just losing hope. I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

 

[Efka76]

Maybe I'm just losing hope. I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

I also can not understand why Canon is not updating its popular lenses, e.g 50 mm 1.4, 50 mm 1.2, 100-400 mm and others. Now Canon released USD 7000 (in Europe such lenses cost GPB 7,000). I and many other photographers will never have such lenses. However, Sigma and Tamron are able to release very high quality and affordable lenses. I think that Canon will have to revise its lens pricing strategy. Why we should pay for marginally better quality lenses for double price

 

[dolina]

Still disappointed that the 35/1.4L, 135/2L, 180/3.5L Macro and 400/5.6L are not replaced yet.

 

[Viggo]

Still disappointed that the 35/1.4L, 135/2L, 180/3.5L Macro and 400/5.6L are not replaced yet.

+1