Re: 1Ds Mark IV & 5D Mark II Merry-Go-Round
It's interesting that "known sources" are giving different information to different websites. I've said before that if you had the option of arbitrarily putting one camera launch ahead of the other that it would make sense to put the 1Ds out before the 5D on the theory that you don't want the cheaper camera cannibalizing sales or upgrades. But I also think that this is just the theory and most people are going to buy the more expensive camera (or not) based on their needs and the prices - ultimately it shouldn't make much difference one way or another. In practice, I think Canon simply will want to get their cameras out on schedule. I don't think the release of the A77 is anywhere close to putting Canon into a "panic release" mode, and we haven't seen anything from Nikon either.
Lenses: "Massively popular" - could this be a new 50mm f/1.4?
(But as I've said before, Canon wants me to buy the f/1.2L, so...) - I agree with afira though, a zoom is much, much more likely. I immediately thought of the 50mm for some reason.
On the "specialized" lens front:
J. McCabe said:
I'm with pgabor, as in my guess is the "2 more specialized lenses" are TS-E 45mm & 90mm. The TS-E 24mm has already got a mkII, and Canon has competition from such lenses as the Schneider Keuznach 90mm lens.
I didn't see that Schneider Kreuznach made any 90mm perspective correction lens, or even that they made a 90mm f/2.8 lens. I see a lot of 4x5 camera lenses on sale, little (actually nothing - it might be there and I missed it) for 35mm format. More information?
While those lenses could be updated, I think a TS-E 120mm f/4 Macro (following the lead of the Hartblei Superrotator 120mm f/4 Makro, obviously) would be highly useful. The TS-E 90mm gets close but perhaps not enough. There will be some limits to the usability of tilt at macro distances, though, unless they finally start allowing focus past infinity or dramatically increase the amount (degrees) of tilt available (which would seem to require yet more glass though). On the plus side, f/4 would allow them to make a still reasonably sized lens.
I also have said that the TS-E 90mm could perhaps be improved in some ways but it's actually a very fine lens and I can see why some people call it "Canon's sharpest lens." I like to use it wide open - resolution there is already good enough that I have few worries. There is just a bit of color fringing (something an APO redesign would help of course).
afira said:
Massively popular: No doubt a zoom of some description, probably the 24-70mm. I'd actually almost consider a 100-400 for this slot and a release in late 2012. A 50mm f/1.8mm would also fit in with a massively popular lens, but I don't see the need to replace it or the 1.4 version yet. How do you feel about a 70-200 f/4.0 IS II?
The 7-200mm f/4 IS still has a great reputation for sharpness and is five years old, and was the first IS lens with four stops claimed shake reduction - so in terms of headline specs there's little to be improved there. I'd say that the 24-70mm and 100-400mm receive much more negative attention for their perceived antiquity. I also have to disagree on the 50mm f/1.4 - sure, it's still a perfectly serviceable lens and not that bad at all, but it could be dramatically improved. The only thing the new fat-element Sigma is lacking, strangely, appears to be constant illumination - lots of vignetting reportedly (very strange). Canon ought to watch this or they will lose more and more of their lens market to Sigma.
Of course, mere upgrades to current offerings aren't the only possibility - aside from the very likely possibility it will be something totally new, perhaps Canon is going way back into their historical EF lineup and resurrecting the
100-300mm "L" range, except making it a f/2.8 zoom now. This would indeed be massively popular, as all the sales of the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS (including to me) show. It is actually a pretty significant hole in Canon's lineup, IMO; a lot of close-range field sports shooters (especially those on a budget) would get a lot more utility out of a 100-300mm range than they would out of a prime or a 100-400mm that is limited to f/5.6 at the tele end.
I could potentially see a redesign of the 50mm Macro.
It would almost have to be an L because there's already a EF-S 60mm macro at the lower end. Not voting that this is a likely upgrade.
Backtracking a bit: Another contender (I suppose) for a new "specialized" lens would be a long macro - the 180mm f/3.5L macro is a lens that should benefit from lighter-weight materials and especially IS.
