17-40 f4 L discontinued???????

[WPJ]

So I have been looking at this lens and Blacks Canada said they no longer have any in stock and that it is marked as discontinued, I asked for the manager not accepting the kids on the phone the manager of tue square o,e store said the same thing he thought it was weird and said he would call Canon.

I got a voice mail back from him an hour later saying that the lens is discontinued by Canon Canada and they can no longer order it in.

wtf???

 

[STEMI_RN]

I seriously doubt it. It's one of Canon's best selling lenses.

 

[kennephoto]

Well that's pretty lame for you if you wanted to buy it!

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Very strange

 

[WPJ]

And I do, as a can't afford the 16-35.... I think I have one though

 

[Harv]

I find that hard to believe. This lens is a cash cow for Canon. One of the most popular 'L' series lenses.

Here you go. This is where you should buy it. In stock, on sale and free shipping.....

http://www.adencamera.com/product-overviewer.asp?ProdID=121&Category=7

 

[brad-man]

I also doubt it, but if true there will need to be a replacement. Image Stabilized perhaps?

 

[JPAZ]

Still on the Canon USA website

 

[alphajim]

Maybe I got a bad copy, or I had higher expectations coming from medium format primes, but I just don't think it's all that special. It's a nice range, but I've got a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for crop bodies that's easily it's equal or better from an image standpoint. Now you do have to factor in the "L features" like internal focusing and very smooth/quiet operation and maybe that makes up the price difference. Not bad at f/8 and 11 and falls off quickly on either side.

I still feel it's overhyped by people who are comparing it to kit lenses.

 

[paul13walnut5]

I actually sold mine when I got a good copy of the IS 18-55, was using it less and less. Great solid lens, nice speedy focus. Looks great on camera. Wasn't blown away by images. When I committed to cropped sensor fully (swithered before buying my 7D, the 5D2 didn't have a PAL mode at the time) I decided to shell up for a f2.8 zoom instead.

 

[Snook]

I doubt it and sure hope not. It's on my radar for my next lens in the future.

 

[Menace]

I recently added this lens to my kit - got a good price from my Canon dealer. There seem to be plenty of stock around over here atleast.

If its discontinued, it's replacement is likely to be a lot more expensive imho

 

[Rienzphotoz]

I find that hard to believe. This lens is a cash cow for Canon. One of the most popular 'L' series lenses.

+1

 

[Marsu42]

Maybe I got a bad copy, or I had higher expectations coming from medium format primes, but I just don't think it's all that special.

It's special when you use a L lens outdoors in bad conditions and it still goes on shooting when other non-sealed lenses fail and need an expensive repair. Imho the iq is ok when stopped down, peaking @f8 - and considering the price I can live with that.

 

[Tanja]

i had nothing against it.

i would love to see a 17-40mm II with better optical performance.
the borders on the curent version suck, to be honest.

 

[Deleted member 20471]

I would also like to see an updated 17-40/4L (or a 16-35/4L), hopefully with IS, but most imported with high optical quality.

 

[Marsu42]

I would also like to see an updated 17-40/4L (or a 16-35/4L), hopefully with IS, but most imported with high optical quality.

IS versions usually require a larger filter size (front element), that's supposedly why the 24-70/4 has IS and the 24-70/2.8 hasn't. For the 17-40L with 77mm now this might still work, but for the 82mm 16-35L it could be tricky.

In any case if the corner iq is also improved you'd probably see more weight and certainly a massively "improved" price tag. The question is if the 17-40L mk2 could still be the L budget choice - and if you want heavier and better, you can get the current 16-35L right now.

 

[Dylan777]

Prepare for 14-24 f2.8 IS guys ;D

 

[Tanja]

I

In any case if the corner iq is also improved you'd probably see more weight and certainly a massively "improved" price tag. The question is if the 17-40L mk2 could still be the L budget choice - and if you want heavier and better, you can get the current 16-35L right now.

the 16-35 is sure faster.... optical better... not really.

 

[Marsu42]

the 16-35 is sure faster.... optical better... not really.

It is if at least some corner sharpness on widest setting & ff is important to you w/o stopping down too much - but certainly not enough for me to pay double the price and carry more weight and bulk...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=100&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=412&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2