Rumored 10 new lenses, 5 of which (CR) mentioned...

[Wrathwilde]

The other 5 though...

What are the chances we'll see a new 85mm f/1.2L, and a new 135mm f/2L?

I realize that the 85mm f/1.2L II is only 6 years old, but looking at the MTF chart - I think Canon could do astoundingly better today if it wanted to... not only with the image quality (chromatic aberrations/fringing), but also with the auto-focus, which a fair number of people complain is fairly slow compared to other L lenses.

The 135 f/2L, though, is 16 years old and could definitely use an update on all fronts.

These are two lenses I'm hoping to see updated in the near future, what lenses would you like to see updated?

(Note - we all know lots of you wanted a 24-70mm f/2.8L IS, so let's just take that off the table for now.)

The 5 lenses (CR) mentioned were...

- EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS II
- EF/EF-S 40 f/2.8 Pancake
- EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4X TC
- EF 35 f/1.4L II
- EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS II

 

[shtfmeister]

a 50 1.4 mkII with USM

 

[Loswr]

L-series versions of the TS-E 45mm and 90mm lenses.

 

[Deeohuu]

L-series versions of the TS-E 45mm and 90mm lenses.

+1 for the 90mm. That would make life complete.

 

[dr croubie]

How about the EF 500mm f/4 L IS II? Or the 600mm? Are they real products or just one step above 'rumour'?

50mm f/1.4 (II or real USM) should come (eventually), as should EF-s 30-35 f/1.4-1.8 (anywhere in that range would be nice).

Why don't we have an EF 12-24 or 14-24 yet?

135/2 is old, but is there anything wrong with it? 100mm f/1.8? 150mm f/2.2?

17-40 f/2.8-4 is a nice concept, i doubt we'll see it though.

A new something to replace the EF-s 10-22? The market is saturated with other-brand alternatives, canon could trump the lot if they tried.

 

[Pyrenees]

The 135 f/2L, though, is 16 years old and could definitely use an update on all fronts.

A bit surprised at that comment. I know that it is has some LoCa issues at the wide end, for instance, but, based on the feedback/reviews I have read and the samples I have seen, this is one hell of a lens - both objectively and subjectively. Great bokeh, very sharp across the whole plane from f/2.8 (check out samples and the mtf graph/figures), and of course, fantastic color rendition. Then again, if it needs to work on a 45MP monster.....

 

[squarebox]

A new something to replace the EF-s 10-22? The market is saturated with other-brand alternatives, canon could trump the lot if they tried.

the 10-22mm is a relatively new EF-S lens at the top tier of EF-S. I:d be surprised if they released a new version of that. And the other 2 lens on the market all have their own trade-offs.

What i see is a new set of cheap primes being released with the new rebel, like the 50mm 1.8.

I:d expect a mk2 of the 35L or the 24L as both lens are near the bottom of the L barrel in image issues or mechanics.

 

[photophreek]

squarebox wrote:

I:d expect a mk2 of the 35L or the 24L as both lens are near the bottom of the L barrel in image issues or mechanics.

There is a 24L II already. It was released in 2008. The 135L was released in 1996.

 

[t.linn]

L-series versions of the TS-E 45mm and 90mm lenses.

+1

 

[marekjoz]

No matter how good they are right now. They must be refreshed because of inflation/exchange rates/profit margin just like 24-70. They will be better but more expensive.

 

[ehud.eshet]

I own a Canon EOS 60D.
All I have is EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS.

I would like to have an EF-S 45-135 F2.0 IS (Make it F2.8 if bigger than the 17-55 F2.8 IS).

If Canon do not provide high end lenses for cropped bodies, we have to use EF lenses.
Then, EF 85 F1.8 and EF 135 F2.0 primes must have an IS version.

 

[marekjoz]

I would like to have an EF-S 45-135 F2.0 IS (Make it F2.8 if bigger than the 17-55 F2.8 IS).

Such a 3x zoom @f2.0 would be bigger than 400f2.8...

 

[funkboy]

The 85L's AF is slow because it's an f/1.2 telephoto with a huge hunk of glass to move around. Not much getting around that; I don't think it'd be updated any time soon.

I'd love IS on my 135L, but otherwise it's hands down the best performing optic of Canon's older lineup. Likely not a big seller for them though, so don't expect an update any time soon.

IS and an optical revision of the 85 f/1.8 would be brilliant. Probably also the same price as the new 24 & 28...

But what's still sorely missing from the lineup is an under-$500 fast "normal" EF-s prime from this century, à la Nikon, Pentax, Sigma, Sony, 4/3, etc...

 

[Tijn]

I'd love an EF 24-105mm f/4L II. (Corner sharpness boost, IS update, coatings)
It's not in dire need of replacement, but as it is the most-used full-frame lens (and it would be by me also once I go fullframe), the upgrade would be worthwhile.

 

[Tijn]

I would like to have an EF-S 45-135 F2.0 IS (Make it F2.8 if bigger than the 17-55 F2.8 IS).

Hehehe. I'd also love an EF 8-800mm f/0.7L (don't forget the red ring) IS USM with the latest in helium technology causing it to weigh only 600g, now that you mention it.

 

[photogaz]

135/2 is old, but is there anything wrong with it?

Exactly, Canon aren't going to replace a lens that can't be improved because its so great. The only thing would be f1.8 or IS. It's fairly lightweight and I just can't see them doing it.

 

[jwong]

135/2 is old, but is there anything wrong with it?

Exactly, Canon aren't going to replace a lens that can't be improved because its so great. The only thing would be f1.8 or IS. It's fairly lightweight and I just can't see them doing it.

Agreed. Will people still think it's great if Canon doubles the price for marginal increase in IQ?

 

[jwong]

I own a Canon EOS 60D.
All I have is EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS.

I would like to have an EF-S 45-135 F2.0 IS (Make it F2.8 if bigger than the 17-55 F2.8 IS).

If Canon do not provide high end lenses for cropped bodies, we have to use EF lenses.
Then, EF 85 F1.8 and EF 135 F2.0 primes must have an IS version.

There isn't much of an advantage in size for EF-S when focal lengths get longer; the max focal length over max f/stop is much larger than the FF sensor already. If Canon were to make an EF-S 45-135 f/2, and would be more expensive than the existing 135L. How big of a market is there for a 2k lens that would only work on crop bodies?

 

[Loswr]

135/2 is old, but is there anything wrong with it?

Exactly, Canon aren't going to replace a lens that can't be improved because its so great. The only thing would be f1.8 or IS. It's fairly lightweight and I just can't see them doing it.

What was 'wrong' with the 300mm f/2.8L IS or the 500mm f/4L IS? Not a helluva lot. But Canon would rather sell you the MkII versions costing 50% more. If nothing else, the 135L lacks weather sealing. But consider...Canon developed a zoom lens (70-200 II) that pretty much equals that excellent prime for IQ. A prime should be better, and with modern design the 135L could be better. A 135L II would not surprise me at all.

 

[frisk]

What was 'wrong' with the 300mm f/2.8L IS or the 500mm f/4L IS? Not a helluva lot. But Canon would rather sell you the MkII versions costing 50% more. If nothing else, the 135L lacks weather sealing. But consider...Canon developed a zoom lens (70-200 II) that pretty much equals that excellent prime for IQ. A prime should be better, and with modern design the 135L could be better. A 135L II would not surprise me at all.

True, but....

I have a fair collection of lenses (including 9 "L" lenses), and while I am very happy with some of them, there are a few where I wouldn't mind getting an improved version. Now, in my case, the 135mm lens is one of those I am very happy with - I do not consider the lens to be limiting me in any way, and even if there was an upgrade, I probably would not switch...and I don't think I'm alone in having that opinion.

Sure, some people might be tempted, if Canon introduced a 135mm II version with IS, but otherwise...well, I just don't see this making any sense. Old or not, it is just a top-notch lens.