A New Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Tilt-Shift Lens Coming? [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I've drooled over the 17 TS-E in the past and I'm sure I'll drool over this as well. I love so many of the images I've seen created with the current version I've debated whether or not it is worth it to buy one, but I just don't think it would get enough use to justify adding it to my camera bag.
Anyone in here actually own the current version? What room for improvement is there on the current version?
Anyone in here actually own the current version? What room for improvement is there on the current version?
Upvote
0
I’ll be disgusted if Canon don’t put IS in it.
But seriously I’ll be very curious about it.
I’d like if somehow the change in tilt could be finer especially over the first few degrees
I’m not sure really how they will improve it.
I went for the 24 mm over the 17mm
I’d find it hard to imagine an improvement in the 24mm.
But seriously I’ll be very curious about it.
I’d like if somehow the change in tilt could be finer especially over the first few degrees
I’m not sure really how they will improve it.
I went for the 24 mm over the 17mm
I’d find it hard to imagine an improvement in the 24mm.
Upvote
0
davidcl0nel
Canon R5, 17 TSE, RF35+85 IS, RF70-200 4 IS, EF135
I only miss one thing in the current 17 TSE... an builtin 1,4x TK. I have one separately and use both to do a "24mm"-Shift, but builtin would be nice... But I think, there is no place anywhere for it...
So it would be heavier than before (all current lenses are heavier than the older one...), so it might be not so interesting...
So it would be heavier than before (all current lenses are heavier than the older one...), so it might be not so interesting...
Upvote
0
amorse said:
I have owned a few copies of the 17mm. It is a fantastic lens, but it really isn't as sharp as the newer lenses. It isn't in the same league, so it would make sense to update the lens even if it was only with some new coatings and maybe a change in the elements.
Upvote
0
rrcphoto said:
I mean people that need it would pay for it. The new Nikon 19mm is about $4k I think. If Nikon came out with something wider than 17mm, architectural photographers like me would possibly switch. I'd love to replace the 11-24 with something wider than 17mm TS-E.
About the 17mm you could say it can get a touch soft in extreme corners, but for my own work I wonder if moving the focus up alittle would help that.
Upvote
0
ecqns said:
Of course, from your point of view you are right.
There are people who use TS-E lenses a lot more than any other but more people use EF lenses than TS-E. The 50mm 2.8L, the 90mm f/2.8L and the 135mm f/4L was released just a few months ago so I don't think that we need another TS-E right now replacing an almost perfect lens. In my opinion we need a fast standard zoom, a 50mm prime and a supertele macro with image stabilization and ring-type USM much better.
Upvote
0
It's interesting if you look at releases over the last five years to see what Canon's priority on lens mounts are:
EF Premium (L series, TS and DO lenses): 12 lenses released
EF-S: 7 lenses released (but mostly minor revisions)
EF-M: 5 lenses released (all new designs)
EF full-frame non L: 3 lenses, of which only one (the 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM) is a 100% new design, the 50mm f/1.8 STM is the old 1.8 with a new STM motor system, and the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS II USM is essentially an upgrade of the previous 70-300 lens.
So, in the last five years, non-L EF full frame got one new design (for a kit lens) and two very good but hardly significant updates to two of their most popular lenses.
No doubt there's a market for an improved 50mm f/1.4 non-L but I'm pretty much certain if they do a 50mm f/1.4 IS it will be a premium L lens, not a cheaper model.
EF Premium (L series, TS and DO lenses): 12 lenses released
EF-S: 7 lenses released (but mostly minor revisions)
EF-M: 5 lenses released (all new designs)
EF full-frame non L: 3 lenses, of which only one (the 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM) is a 100% new design, the 50mm f/1.8 STM is the old 1.8 with a new STM motor system, and the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS II USM is essentially an upgrade of the previous 70-300 lens.
So, in the last five years, non-L EF full frame got one new design (for a kit lens) and two very good but hardly significant updates to two of their most popular lenses.
No doubt there's a market for an improved 50mm f/1.4 non-L but I'm pretty much certain if they do a 50mm f/1.4 IS it will be a premium L lens, not a cheaper model.
Upvote
0
Thank you for that summary.jolyonralph said:
Seeing this and also adding what SigRon have implemented lately, I don't understand why some really, really old EF designs (esp. 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 ) stayed untouched for so many years.
Yes, they are relatively cheap, yes they deliver decent IQ and in summary good bang for the buck, so they will still sell good enough, but ... hey ... what is the decision background for that?
Best way for profit?
No real market?
No free recourses for development?
I don't get it because - at least - my money would go to Canon here.
Upvote
0
the 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 haven't been replaced yet because they still sell very well.
Making new lenses means major investment in production. So when these two lenses stop selling, or if Canon work out they can save money by producing a new design cheaper than the old one, they'll do it.
Redoing the 50mm f/1.8 was a special case, the existing lens was by far the best selling non-kit lens that Canon did, but they were losing sales in the vlogging market because their 50mm was too old and noisy. The STM version solved that problem with a relatively inexpensive redesign (same optical formula, better body, blades and electronics). The 50mm f/1.4 isn't such an important lens for them, but it is VERY old so it'll probably be replaced when it no longer becomes economically viable for them to produce them.
Making new lenses means major investment in production. So when these two lenses stop selling, or if Canon work out they can save money by producing a new design cheaper than the old one, they'll do it.
Redoing the 50mm f/1.8 was a special case, the existing lens was by far the best selling non-kit lens that Canon did, but they were losing sales in the vlogging market because their 50mm was too old and noisy. The STM version solved that problem with a relatively inexpensive redesign (same optical formula, better body, blades and electronics). The 50mm f/1.4 isn't such an important lens for them, but it is VERY old so it'll probably be replaced when it no longer becomes economically viable for them to produce them.
Upvote
0
amorse said:
IMO not much, sharpness wise, you don't need much more (I use it on a 5DSr) the extreme corners when fully shifted could be better, but I think we are already close to the limit of what's possible for such a focal length. Distortion is close to zero, which is amazing. The only thing that would be a great improvement for me is a better internal /surface treatment, since the weak point of the lens is clearly flare. When you do interior photography, any light coming through a window in the frame will inevitably produce either ghosts (can be removed most of the time in post) or haze on a good part of the image that is much more difficult if not impossible to deal with in Photoshop.
Upvote
0
amorse said:
Honestly it's a great lens. But nobody is perfect of course. What could be improved:
- Vignetting is really bad when shifted, specially in portrait orientation "looking up" to reduce this, it must be stopped down significantly
- Mechanical it could be better. My one is working fine, but the shift gear seems quite weak, has flexible and fragile feel. Upwards, i alwas shift it on the body to not break it
- sharper is better and can be always. But compared to the 24-105 and the 50L it's tack sharp, the 24mm is reviewed to be better, and the newly released seems to be even better. but this i dont know from own expierience.
- maybe it could be produced cheaper and be sold more expensive, if it's "new"
- Maybe it's for mirrorless. It could be one of the lenses profiting from a shorter flange distance. But Yeah, it's the first lens a new mount needs
Upvote
0
jolyonralph said:
I got this as my kit lens with the 6D2. The purchase was enough of a financial stretch for me at the time, and from the reviews I didn't see any real advantage to the L except for the extra stop on the long end, and the STM version has its own useful virtues. I've been pleased enough with it that I don't feel the need to duplicate focal lengths in that range with primes any time soon. I had just three EF lenses at the time of purchase. Instead, I will add wider and longer zooms than it is. I'm not sure which to do first. I know which ultra wide I want, but not which telephoto. And if I need an ultra wide all of a sudden, I can get out my T3i and 10-22mm lens. My 75-300mm lens is the lowest quality one in my bunch, and so would be the obvious first candidate for replacement.
The kit zoom works exceedingly well with the 6D2, especially in terms of fast and accurate autofocus. It may not sell as well as the L version, but Canon did well to design it and add it as an option.
Upvote
0
ecqns said:SkynetTX said:I would really be surprised if Canon released some useful lenses this year like a 24-70mm f/2.8L IS or 50mm f/1.4L IS or 250mm f/4 IS Macro with ring-type USM motors.
Useful to who? Those lenses are useless to me. You can pick get a nice sigma 50 if you like. Canon has people like me still in their lens system because of these TS-Es.
Same
I joined the Canon system mostly because of the 17mm TS-E and the fact that the 24mm is about the sharpest 24mm lens around... The Sigma 50 Art is doing me more than fine for a 50mm prime.
Saying that, it would be interesting seeing what gets improved in the 17 TS-E - its a damn impressive lens already. I cant see myself upgrading any time in future anyway.
Upvote
0
Don't expect one soon. Canon has teams which are assigned a lens development project, and there are very few teams, most of which are designing RF lenses. Canon has said they are using R&D people to help with the lens design. I suspect that any such lens will never happen as a EF lens, maybe a RF lens next year or the one after, since the RF line will need shift lenses when it gets a set of the most common L lenses.
Upvote
0
Yeh I'd put the chances of a MkII any time soon as close to zero. Nikon didn't best it with their PC-E 19 so what would drive a MkII other than internal costings/profitability? The lens is very good, though far from perfect especially when shifted, but it has no competition other than stitching (which often gives a superior end result) if you have the time to invest in the shot.
Upvote
0
It will be interesting to see how they improve it. I went for the 24 TSE as I didn't fancy the bulbous front and the fact filters weren't an option before Wonderpana. It's a pity the current lens can't tell the camera the degree of tilt or shift the lens is at.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
