A New L Zoom is Coming [CR2]

[StudentOfLight]

Surprise me Canon; something like a 18-35mm f/2 L USM.

A 16-24/2L would complement the other ultra wide L zooms. Just a thought.

It is interesting to see people suggesting Canon develop f/2.0 zooms now that Sigma has one Proves Sigma has delivered something of a game changer/winner

It's not necessarily that only now that Sigma's offering an f/2 zoom that I'm wanting a faster zoom... look at my signature: There are a whole bunch of crazy lens ideas down there. Kudos to Sigma for pushing the envelop on wide aperture performance, but the same could be said of Canon in other areas of lens design with the 11-24/4, 400/4DO-II, 100-400L-II, 16-35L IS, 200-400L (1.4xTC int)... I could go on.

p.s. What I'd most want is a 35-85mm f/1.8 (or f/2) lens for portrait work. An image-stabilized, optically-strong lens in this range will have my 35L, 50/1.4 and 24-70/2.8 shaking in their lens-caps.

 

[PureClassA]

Yeah Sigma MAY have exposed a useful market. Sales have yet to truly determine if their gamble and research will pay off. What it definitely DOES illustrate is how flippin' difficult it is to produce a FF zoom with a constant ap of f2. If they could have made a 24-50 or 24-70 with the same parameters, you can bet they would have. But if they did that lens would have been enormous and cost triple. In Canon's world that would be a $4k+ lens easy.

I think f2.8 gives the ideal balance between functionality and width of zoom range in those wider to standard focal lengths. Tamron has shown they can build a very good lens just like Canon's but with IS. Canon can clearly build a sharper lens to the corners (where the Tamron loses the battle to canon). So if Canon puts IS in that lens... Winner. the 24-70 f2.8 Mk II has gotten some pretty good recent price drops down to 1899. Perhaps Canon (apart from currency exchange rates) is making room at the $2500 price point again for a new version with IS, keeping the non-IS between 1500-2000.

That's my hope anyway

 

[StudentOfLight]

I think f2.8 gives the ideal balance between functionality and width of zoom range in those wider to standard focal lengths.

On the functionality side, with the standard focus screens, at f/2.8 what you see is what you get.

 

[adventureous]

Looks like there is quite a demand for wide angle as Canon is "remodeling" them. I am very hopeful for a 16-35 III as my 16-35 II has a lot to be desired, but is the focal length I use quite a lot.

 

[IglooEater]

A 16-24/2L would complement the other ultra wide L zooms. Just a thought.

+1
I'd kill for that!

 

[Sabaki]

A 16-24/2L would complement the other ultra wide L zooms. Just a thought.

+1
I'd kill for that!

I seriously would not mind this focal range.

The minute I read your post, I was thinking that this abbreviated focal length may allow for an IS mechanism too, along with an f/2.8 aperture!

Yup IglooEater, I'd buy your lens

 

[westcoastcanon]

A 16-24/2L would complement the other ultra wide L zooms. Just a thought.

+1
I'd kill for that!

Could a 16-20mm or 16-24mm F2 lens take a screw-on front filter for landscapes?

Obviously not the first choice for a landscape lens, but if someone wanted one lens to do astro, landscapes and events, and were complementing a 24-70, such a lens would be pretty perfect. A 16mm F2 prime wouldn't be bad for that matter.

 

[andrewflo]

Nikon Rumors just translated a post from Digicame-info showing leaked images and a $2.2k price point of a Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 VR said to be released August 27th.

http://nikonrumors.com/2015/07/29/first-pictures-of-nikon-24mm-f1-8g-24-70mm-f2-8e-vr-and-200-500mm-f5-6e-lenses-leaked-online.aspx/

If Canon already had this intel, could they actually be preparing to launch their own 24-70 f/2.8 IS in the next year?

 

[zim]

Two more sleeps ;D