New EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Around the Corner? [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

<p>We’re told that Canon will replace the EF-S 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 IS with a new version soon, and it will come as an EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. This lens has been rumoured for a while now.</p>
<p>There was no word if this was coming for CP+ next month.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[trulandphoto]

<p>We’re told that Canon will replace the EF-S 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 IS with a new version soon, and it will come as an EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. This lens has been rumoured for a while now.</p>
<p>There was no word if this was coming for CP+ next month.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

If it improves on the previous version as much as the other STM lenses I might just pick one up. Imagine carrying just the 10-18mm and this lens and all the options it would cover - as long as speed or image quality didn't need to be exemplary.

 

[Lee Jay]

All these lenses need to start at 15mm Canon! Even most of your compacts start at 24mm-equivalent, why not your much more expensive SLRs?

 

[Maximilian]

EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

Hm... I am always puzzled, if people who need/want such an "one for all" lens better should buy a good bridge camera.
But such lenses get sold.

 

[Lee Jay]

EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

Hm... I am always puzzled, if people who need/want such an "one for all" lens better should buy a good bridge camera.
But such lenses get sold.

Not many bridge cameras with APS-c sensors and for which you can quickly exchange the range for, say, a 10mm fisheye, a 600/4, or an 85/1.2.

 

[Slyham]

Depending on the cost and IQ, I will sell my 18-135 STM and pick this one up for my all-around/travel lens.

 

[Maximilian]

EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

Hm... I am always puzzled, if people who need/want such an "one for all" lens better should buy a good bridge camera.
But such lenses get sold.

Not many bridge cameras with APS-c sensors and for which you can quickly exchange the range for, say, a 10mm fisheye, a 600/4, or an 85/1.2.

Yeah, right!
But how many 18-300 owners might also own/lend/use a 10mm fisheye or a 600/4?
And how many 10mm fisheye and 600/4 owners need/want a 18-300?
Honestly? ???

 

[Lee Jay]

EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

Hm... I am always puzzled, if people who need/want such an "one for all" lens better should buy a good bridge camera.
But such lenses get sold.

Not many bridge cameras with APS-c sensors and for which you can quickly exchange the range for, say, a 10mm fisheye, a 600/4, or an 85/1.2.

Yeah, right!
But how many 18-300 owners might also own/lend/use a 10mm fisheye or a 600/4?
And how many 10mm fisheye and 600/4 owners need/want a 18-300?
Honestly? ???

An 18-300 style lens can be very useful as a video lens or as an all-in-one travel lens when you can't take the big stuff with you, such as on a hike, rock climb, or in a canoe or kayak.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I think the bigger and more appropriate question is...

Will this Canon lens compete with and surpass the ever popular Tamron 16-300 SuperZoom?

http://dustinabbott.net/2014/08/tamron-16-300mm-vc-pzd-review/

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

There is not a lens for me. But I know some people who want to travel with a single lens that allows you to see the Statue of Liberty, whole and then and do the detail of a pigeon perched on the head of the statue.

For video, it makes perfect sense to have a zoom of 16X.

 

[jefflinde]

I think that those of you who are poo-pooing this lens and lenses like this forget that a large percent of DSLR camera owners only have the kit lenses. There are also those that may have a 600/F4 but don't want to carry all that with them when they go to the zoo with their kids/grand-kids. That is who this lens and the Tamron and sigma equivalent are for. Pro's were not who this was intended for. So to say this is a dumb lens and how many will buy it is very short sighted and ignorant. Pro's don't keep the DSLR market afloat, average Joe that buys a Txi and some kit lenses is who keeps it afloat. the same argument could be used for a $12K + 800mm lens. how many does canon sell in a year? 100? who would actually buy one? /s

It is all what you want and need. Clearly Tamron/Sigma proved that there is a market for these lenes and Canon wants a piece of the pie.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I agree with jefflinde. I'm not a "Pro" per se but I shoot a LOT of images and like many on this forum, I probably spend more than a "Pro" on gear. So it's not about money. The best tool for the job is what is needed at the time. That isn't always a Canon L lens.

I shoot many types of images at different types of events and venues. Sometimes, a superzoom like this is ideal and more than adequate for my needs, esp when I am at a dusty hot summer camp during the day and I am walking 10 - 20 miles all over the place all day long in the heat and the images are intended primarily for the web.

So for those who would dismiss this or other superzoom lenses, keep in mind that sometimes it's not always about the absolute best IQ, sometimes other factors will dictate what compromises are acceptable. And sometimes it pays to have a less expensive but versatile lens on a less expensive DSLR body to get decent images but be able to better absorb a loss in a high risk situation. Or not remove a lens repeatedly in a dirty environment.

Plus, I would rather be able to use a high quality DSLR camera with an All-In-One lens and shoot Full Frame or APS-C images in RAW than use a small sensor bridge camera in JPG that is an even bigger compromise in all aspects of the system.

 

[Tripod]

I'm very much Rusty & jeff on this one. I bought this very lens for the convience it offers.

I have the Tamron 16/300mm for about about 4 weeks now,( it was my Christmas present to myself ) and it has not been off my 70D since and that included a two week trip to Spain.

Yes I could have packed my full kit and brought along my 100/400L, my 10/24mm ultra wide, my 90mm Macro and even my 18/50 2.8. But to be very honest I needed to travel light as I was flying on a local budget airline and as I was travelling with "Boss" I knew I be dragging her large suitcase behind me for most of the way. On top of this I knew that I would not be attending any major events to which I would normally bring my full kit along to.

I now use my 16/300mm as my walk around lens and I am more happy with the end products.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

So we get back to the question I think is most relevant... is this new Canon lens better than the new Tamron? I haven't purchased the 16-300 from Tamron yet and according to Dustin's fine reviews, it sounds like I should wait a bit. Although I still wouldn't mind gaining the extra 2mm on the wide end, FWIW.

I wasn't as impressed with Tamron's older 28-300 Full Frame lens and Dustin thinks the new one is MUCH improved so that will likely be a sure buy very soon.

 

[Etienne]

It would be a good lens to turn the C100 into a Run and Gun ENG camera.
Keep the IQ decent, and I'd probably buy one

 

[preppyak]

I think that those of you who are poo-pooing this lens and lenses like this forget that a large percent of DSLR camera owners only have the kit lenses.

Yep, even my friends that are into photography own lenses like the 18-200 currently, so, they no doubt have their market. In this forum, a lot might not buy it. But, in the real world, the most purchased lenses beyond the 18-55 kit are the 55-250 and the 18-XXX superzooms.

Otherwise every lens brand wouldnt have its own variation

 

[Maximilian]

I think the bigger and more appropriate question is...

Will this Canon lens compete with and surpass the ever popular Tamron 16-300 SuperZoom?

http://dustinabbott.net/2014/08/tamron-16-300mm-vc-pzd-review/

Of course, as the price with be north of the Tamron (pretty sure) and they'll lack that extra 2 mm on the wide end, they should really come close to or past that one concerning IQ.
If they just make a so-so lens maybe they should have stayed in the dev dep then, because they'll only deliver a marketing argument for Tamron.

 

[Maximilian]

EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

Hm... I am always puzzled, if people who need/want such an "one for all" lens better should buy a good bridge camera.
But such lenses get sold.

Not many bridge cameras with APS-c sensors and for which you can quickly exchange the range for, say, a 10mm fisheye, a 600/4, or an 85/1.2.

Yeah, right!
But how many 18-300 owners might also own/lend/use a 10mm fisheye or a 600/4?
And how many 10mm fisheye and 600/4 owners need/want a 18-300?
Honestly? ???

An 18-300 style lens can be very useful as a video lens or as an all-in-one travel lens when you can't take the big stuff with you, such as on a hike, rock climb, or in a canoe or kayak.

So then in this case I am absoutely contrary to "the market" as even in the described cases I'd take at least two lenses with me. Otherwise I wouldn't choose a system camera. But that's just me (someone odd, that takes IQ over convenience).
I know that there is a market for such lenses, but as I said in my initial post this market gets me puzzled.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

<p>We’re told that Canon will replace the EF-S 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 IS with a new version soon, and it will come as an EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. This lens has been rumoured for a while now.</p>
<p>There was no word if this was coming for CP+ next month.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

When Canon is going to produce a quality EF 28-200/300mm lens for FF cameras? Nikon counterpart delivers very good IQ despite the narrow aperture.
Tamron one is also a good option but I'd prefer something from Canon.

 

[Lee Jay]

<p>We’re told that Canon will replace the EF-S 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 IS with a new version soon, and it will come as an EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. This lens has been rumoured for a while now.</p>
<p>There was no word if this was coming for CP+ next month.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

When Canon is going to produce a quality EF 28-200/300mm lens for FF cameras? Nikon counterpart delivers very good IQ despite the narrow aperture.
Tamron one is also a good option but I'd prefer something from Canon.

Canon already produces the best one available the 28-300L.