No More New Photographic Gear From Canon in 2017 [CR3]

[Canon Rumors]

<p>Earlier this <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/new-unreleased-canon-gear-has-appeared-for-certification/">week we posted new Canon gear that had appeared for overseas certification</a>, this lead to some speculation that we’d be seeing more new cameras and lenses in 2017.</p>
<p>I have confirmed that this is not the case. There will however be a lot of gear coming in early 2018 for CES in January and CP+ in February.</p>


<p>We’re still trying to nail down without a shadow of a doubt what the new lenses and flash will be. We were told that the new flash was scheduled to be released in 2017, but ended up being pushed into 2018.</p>
<p>I don’t want to speculate on the two new lenses, so I’ll let you know what they are as soon as I can [CR3] them.</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[slclick]

There is more than enough to chose from and too many folks need to work on their skillset instead of feeding the GAS troll. Like me!

 

[ahsanford]

There is more than enough to chose from and too many folks need to work on their skillset instead of feeding the GAS troll. Like me!

Unless one of the new lenses is an EF 50 prime. I will feed that troll all day.

And it's not quite a gear 'syndrome' if there are just two things you want (that lens and spot metering at any AF point in a non 1-series body). It's more obsessive behavior than a systemic buy-to-be-happy or 'hoarding everything new' problem.

- A

 

[Mikehit]

There is more than enough to chose from and too many folks need to work on their skillset instead of feeding the GAS troll. Like me!

Unless one of the new lenses is an EF 50 prime. I will feed that troll all day.

And it's not quite a gear 'syndrome' if there are just two things you want (that lens and spot metering at any AF point in a non 1-series body). It's more obsessive behavior than a systemic buy-to-be-happy or 'hoarding everything new' problem.

- A

https://youtu.be/8CtjhWhw2I8

 

[djack41]

600mm F4 DO would be fantastic.

 

[aceflibble]

Well there's only really the 7D3 left in terms of the definite-for-sure-100%-totally-coming releases, and that was always expected for 2018. With only two months left and no time to ship any new products to stores before the primary purchasing season, it would make no sense for Canon to announce anything new from now until the new year.

600mm F4 DO would be fantastic.

I swear you're a goddamn bot.

 

[pokerz]

where is FF mirrorless?

 

[slclick]

No 4k? I'm leaving for Sony

No new camera models to counter every other new camera model by another manufacturer? I'm selling it all to Keh.com

No digifilm? I'm joining the Yashica kickstarter

Top ranked customer service and solid dependable products? I'm too cool for that!

 

[Talys]

No 4k? I'm leaving for Sony

Just so's you don't run off to Sony, Canon made a 4k announcement ;D

 

[transpo1]

No 4k? I'm leaving for Sony

Just so's you don't run off to Sony, Canon made a 4k announcement ;D

Aww...they do love 4K!

 

[Antono Refa]

There is more than enough to chose from and too many folks need to work on their skillset instead of feeding the GAS troll. Like me!

Unless one of the new lenses is an EF 50 prime. I will feed that troll all day.

After the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM, I expect Canon to release a 50mm f/1.4L IS USM soon, only priced way beyond what I'm willing to pay.

At this point my wish list starts & ends with the 16-35mm f/2.8L mkIII, which I'm saving to buy in a few months.

 

[hne]

No more gear from Canon this year? Good, my economy can't handle more G.A.S at the moment!

 

[James Larsen]

I really hope they put out a 135 IS in 2018. That would be one killer lens.

 

[mb66energy]

There is more than enough to chose from and too many folks need to work on their skillset instead of feeding the GAS troll. Like me!

Unless one of the new lenses is an EF 50 prime. I will feed that troll all day.

And it's not quite a gear 'syndrome' if there are just two things you want (that lens and spot metering at any AF point in a non 1-series body). It's more obsessive behavior than a systemic buy-to-be-happy or 'hoarding everything new' problem.

- A

I am really in the need of sth. wider than 70mm to combine with the 70-200 4.0 IS and I really want a larger aperture + IS. The 50 1.4 IS would give me 7 stops more light without tripod (with 4 stop IS).
Two things are essential: moderate footprint of the lens and good max reproduction ratio of 1:4 or 1:5 to make it a good universal lens.
Price wise? 1000 bucks would be o.k. if it is "small", has a small close focus distance and gorgous IQ.

 

[ahsanford]

I am really in the need of sth. wider than 70mm to combine with the 70-200 4.0 IS and I really want a larger aperture + IS. The 50 1.4 IS would give me 7 stops more light without tripod (with 4 stop IS).
Two things are essential: moderate footprint of the lens and good max reproduction ratio of 1:4 or 1:5 to make it a good universal lens.
Price wise? 1000 bucks would be o.k. if it is "small", has a small close focus distance and gorgous IQ.

So, if I heard you right:

f/1.4
IS
Max mag 0.20x - 0.25x
Small design
Gorgeous IQ

Methinks you won't get all five of those in a non-L instrument. I think future 50s are likely to be one or two of the following three directions:

Stay small --> it's a non-L 50 f/1.4 USM replacement

Go for sharpness --> it'll be huge pickle jar a la Otus or Art (this would be an L lens, see attached)

Go for magic --> heavy but compact ball of glass; sort of a straight sequel to the current 50L

But I do not believe you can shoot for the moon on sharpness, bokeh and in a compact format. Small size would limit how much magic or sharpness you can deliver without requiring Hubble telescope-like tolerancing and cost.

- A

 

[BillB]

I am really in the need of sth. wider than 70mm to combine with the 70-200 4.0 IS and I really want a larger aperture + IS. The 50 1.4 IS would give me 7 stops more light without tripod (with 4 stop IS).
Two things are essential: moderate footprint of the lens and good max reproduction ratio of 1:4 or 1:5 to make it a good universal lens.
Price wise? 1000 bucks would be o.k. if it is "small", has a small close focus distance and gorgous IQ.

So, if I heard you right:

f/1.4
IS
Max mag 0.20x - 0.25x
Small design
Gorgeous IQ

Methinks you won't get all five of those in a non-L instrument. I think future 50s are likely to be one or two of the following three directions:

Stay small --> it's a non-L 50 f/1.4 USM replacement

Go for sharpness --> it'll be huge pickle jar a la Otus or Art (this would be an L lens, see attached)

Go for magic --> heavy but compact ball of glass; sort of a straight sequel to the current 50L

But I do not believe you can shoot for the moon on sharpness, bokeh and in a compact format. Small size would limit how much magic or sharpness you can deliver without requiring Hubble telescope-like tolerancing and cost.

- A

In the stay small category there would seem to be four variables: f 1.4 max aperture, USM, IS and lowish price. I am pretty sure that more than two of these four would likely be a stretch.

 

[ahsanford]

In the stay small category there would seem to be four variables: f 1.4 max aperture, USM, IS and lowish price. I am pretty sure that more than two of these four would likely be a stretch.

If you throw 'best possible sharpness' and 'magical bokeh' out the window then I think you absolutely can do any/all four of those on a sliding scale for the right price.

First, I drop small/large entirely out of the equation as a question. If it will be non-L, I presume it will be a smaller double gauss design and not a retrofocus pickle jar like the Art/Otus. A retrofocus non-L will outresolve the pants off the double gauss 50L, and I just don't see Canon upstaging its pro gear with enthusiast gear like that. That's decision #1 for a non-L 50, and I think that decision was made long ago. (Canon may go retrofocus someday, but that would be an L lens.)

So that leaves three choices -- [Max Aperture], [AF tech], [IS or no IS] -- and the price will reflect the outcome of those choices:

f/1.4 IS Ring USM = $899 --> I would buy this
f/1.4 IS Nano USM = $699 --> I would buy this
f/1.4 Nano USM = $499 --> I would buy this
f/1.4 STM = $399 --> No sale, I'd grab a 50L in defeat (I'd only take first party AF only for this kind of lens)

Make it f/1.8 above and possibly drop each of those by 20-30%, but I don't think they'll do that to argue for more premium/differentiation space with the stripped down nifty fifty 50mm f/1.8 STM. I believe the latest rumors have locked in on the red one above.

- A

 

[BillB]

In the stay small category there would seem to be four variables: f 1.4 max aperture, USM, IS and lowish price. I am pretty sure that more than two of these four would likely be a stretch.

If you throw 'best possible sharpness' and 'magical bokeh' out the window then I think you absolutely can do any/all four of those on a sliding scale for the right price.

First, I drop small/large entirely out of the equation as a question. If it will be non-L, I presume it will be a smaller double gauss design and not a retrofocus pickle jar like the Art/Otus. A retrofocus non-L will outresolve the pants off the double gauss 50L, and I just don't see Canon upstaging its pro gear with enthusiast gear like that. That's decision #1 for a non-L 50, and I think that decision was made long ago. (Canon may go retrofocus someday, but that would be an L lens.)

So that leaves three choices -- [Max Aperture], [AF tech], [IS or no IS] -- and the price will reflect the outcome of those choices:

f/1.4 IS Ring USM = $899 --> I would buy this
f/1.4 IS Nano USM = $699 --> I would buy this
f/1.4 Nano USM = $499 --> I would buy this
f/1.4 STM = $399 --> No sale, I'd grab a 50L in defeat (I'd only take first party AF only for this kind of lens)

Make it f/1.8 above and possibly drop each of those by 20-30%, but I don't think they'll do that to argue for more premium/differentiation space with the stripped down nifty fifty 50mm f/1.8 STM. I believe the latest rumors have locked in on the red one above.

- A

Fair enough. I forgot about nano USM. I was thinking ring USM

 

[ahsanford]

Fair enough. I forgot about nano USM. I was thinking ring USM

Last EF + non-L + ring USM lens was the 24/28/35 IS triumvirate about 5 years ago.

I think mid-grade non-L EF lenses are possibly done getting L-level AF technology. I think the non-L 50 may very well get nano USM.

- A

 

[mb66energy]

@ ahsanford & BillB

Thanks for your remarks, you can't get the OTUS, Sigma Art or
Tamron 45mm IQ in a small package at the current state of
art.

I think I had to explain what I meant with gorgeous IQ:
Good center sharpness + contrast @ f/1.4 + excellent IQ from f/2.0 on -- at
25mm aperture diameter there shoudn't be too much spherical aberration any
longer.

Then, I think, the other specs are possible at e.g. 1000EUR/USD.
Small design doesn't mean it has to be slightly larger than the forty shorty
- based on the existing 50mm 1.4 a +10mm length & +10mm diameter increase
would be very acceptable (for me).

f/1.4
IS
Max mag 0.20x - 0.25x
Small design

With the OTUS they started retrofocus for longer focal lenghts (at least at ZEISS) but in my
opinion there must be a way to heal double gauss deficiencies with
(1) advanced lens surface design = aspherical lenses
(2) special glass variants with exotic dispersion curves (maybe including some organic compounds)
(3) modern mechanical enginieering which enables more complex movements of lens groups.

At the moment there is a strong movement in the lens industry / the customer demand that points
into the direction of excellent correction of all aberrations under all conditions - the compromise
is large footprint, large mass and high price. Maybe there is no room for a very usable lens
without the maximum possible correction of optical aberrations at the moment?

And the decision if it is an "L" lens or not isn't easy too ...