- Status
Here is a Roadmap that was previously shared:
*********************
I received what appears to be some kind of lens roadmap. I only ever remember seeing a communication like this one once in the past. There are definitely some interesting concepts listed. Take all of this with the grain of salt.
*********************
I received what appears to be some kind of lens roadmap. I only ever remember seeing a communication like this one once in the past. There are definitely some interesting concepts listed. Take all of this with the grain of salt.
- EF 50 1.8 IS, status “prototype”, has tag “spring 2013″
- EF 50 2.5 macro was tagged with “to be replaced”
- EF 200 2.8 L IS macro is tagged with “testing”, “patents pending”, and “autumn 2013″
- EF 24-70 2.8 L II tagged “final”, “winter 2011″
- EF 100-400 4-5.6 L IS tagged “final”, “autumn 2012″
- EF 35 1.4 L II tagged “prototype”, “winter 2012″
- EF 60 L IS lens tagged “prototype”
- EF-S 20-65 IS
- EF-S 45-105 IS status “development”
- EF-S 55-70 IS “testing”
- EF-S 70-400 IS “prototype”
Upvote
0
You should pick-up the current version. It is amazing and is fairly cheap for what it is. It will also retain its value. In a recent lens rumor post, Graig mentioned something about a 135 1.8L IS which would be the replacement of the current version but this was not a 2012 possibility. 2013 at best and you could expect the price to be at least double of the current version.
That's why I say pick-it up now and start shooting buddy!
Jacques
That's why I say pick-it up now and start shooting buddy!
Jacques
Upvote
0
The only way I see they could improve that lens is by adding IS and weather sealing, which would likely double the cost.
I LOVE mine... and it's a very, very high value right now. I doubt I'd upgrade, even given the choice.
My recommendation: Buy now.
I LOVE mine... and it's a very, very high value right now. I doubt I'd upgrade, even given the choice.
My recommendation: Buy now.
Upvote
0
Dude just go for it and buy the damn thing, it's an awesome lens and you can always resell it if a new one comes out. And it's very cheap for an L lens, so all the more reason to go for it. If you keep waiting on new equipment you'll never get anything, as there is always something new in the works.
Upvote
0
The 135mm really shines at f/2.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75059479@N00/6805450549/#in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75059479@N00/6805450549/#in/photostream
Upvote
0
Great composition!
I keep saying that I got mine for $850, and it was a fairly new (2006 or 2008) copy; complete and in great shape. No regrets whatsoever.
If Canon were to release a new model, I'd probably not bother picking it up unless it was demonstrated to have some useful improvement, like an even shorter minimum focus distance, markedly better microcontrast at f/2 (as noted, this is already one of the best lenses, so that would be really something) and IS. As it stands, you get a lot of value from the lens, and it is about as wide aperture as a lens can be while still being useful for low-light applications on the current crop of DSLRs.
Out of Canon's entire lineup of older designs, this is one that stands out as being worthy of a purchase without any thought to possible future improvements.
I keep saying that I got mine for $850, and it was a fairly new (2006 or 2008) copy; complete and in great shape. No regrets whatsoever.
If Canon were to release a new model, I'd probably not bother picking it up unless it was demonstrated to have some useful improvement, like an even shorter minimum focus distance, markedly better microcontrast at f/2 (as noted, this is already one of the best lenses, so that would be really something) and IS. As it stands, you get a lot of value from the lens, and it is about as wide aperture as a lens can be while still being useful for low-light applications on the current crop of DSLRs.
Out of Canon's entire lineup of older designs, this is one that stands out as being worthy of a purchase without any thought to possible future improvements.
Upvote
0
Plus, there are rumors of a 200mm f/2.8 L. So the opportunity cost might be getting a little higher this year!
Upvote
0
F
fsu_dan17
Guest
I was also looking at this lens but I already have the 100mm f/2.8 Macro. I was debating on this lens or the 200mm f/2.8 L. I think I would be better served by the 200mm but I see on the latest roadmap that a newer version is to be released. Does anyone recommend purchasing the 200mm? I have seen prices for around $500-$600.
Upvote
0
L
Leopard Lupus
Guest
@ Anyone and everyone debating the purchase of this lens:
TAKE THE PLUNGE. It really is one of the best bangs-for-your-buck in regards to Canon glass. IQ and build quality really shine on this lens. If a version ll were to come out, it would not be soon considering how recent the rumor is. For the price and all around quality, the current version is superb. Don't waste your time waiting for a lens not currently in existence, start shooting!
TAKE THE PLUNGE. It really is one of the best bangs-for-your-buck in regards to Canon glass. IQ and build quality really shine on this lens. If a version ll were to come out, it would not be soon considering how recent the rumor is. For the price and all around quality, the current version is superb. Don't waste your time waiting for a lens not currently in existence, start shooting!
Upvote
0
What I think makes the 135mm f/2 L so useful and rewarding is that it's really solid at its widest aperture (unlike the 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.8 ). Plus, the 135mm f/2 L has a great price and it's faster, smaller, lower-profile, and waaay less expensive than a 70-200mm f/2.8 L II.
I'm in the inverse situation of "fsu_dan17"... I've got the 135mm L, and thus I'm reluctant to get the 100mm L. And I doubt I'll have the $$$$ necessary for a 200mm f/2.8 L macro if/when it comes out.
Bottom line: the 135mm f/2 L is a reasonably sized $1000 lens with IQ and bokeh to match almost any lens out there. It's probably the best deal on a no-compromises lens. Admittedly, the 100mm L macro also sounds like an incredibly good value. But since I already have the decent 85mm f/1.8, the 135mm is a better complement to extend my range its current outer limit of 135mm.
I'm in the inverse situation of "fsu_dan17"... I've got the 135mm L, and thus I'm reluctant to get the 100mm L. And I doubt I'll have the $$$$ necessary for a 200mm f/2.8 L macro if/when it comes out.
Bottom line: the 135mm f/2 L is a reasonably sized $1000 lens with IQ and bokeh to match almost any lens out there. It's probably the best deal on a no-compromises lens. Admittedly, the 100mm L macro also sounds like an incredibly good value. But since I already have the decent 85mm f/1.8, the 135mm is a better complement to extend my range its current outer limit of 135mm.
Upvote
0
dirtcastle said:The 135mm really shines at f/2.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75059479@N00/6805450549/#in/photostream
Awsome shot!!!
I am throwing in one of mine too, taken with the 135 (my favorite lens if I might add).
Attachments
Upvote
0
L
LACityPhotoCom
Guest
The current model is as good as a lens can GET. Razor sharp corner to corner wide open. Ever so slightly sharper at f/2.8 and stopped down beyond it stays the same (excellent)
Other than a weather seal, there's really no incentive to update this lens. It's absolute perfection. I will never ever sell mine (and I usually find ANY reason to get rid of a lens!)
Some of my favorite pictures were shot on the 135.
Other than a weather seal, there's really no incentive to update this lens. It's absolute perfection. I will never ever sell mine (and I usually find ANY reason to get rid of a lens!)
Some of my favorite pictures were shot on the 135.
Upvote
0
I rented a 135 f/2.0 to handle some evening holiday events - just awesome, the bokeh, the focus, the low light performance.
A couple notes tho - The narrow DOF and prime, especially on a crop (effectively 216mm), makes it a bit of a challenge to learn. Easier to use on a Full Frame no doubt. And I noticed it gets a bit ghosted when you aim near the sun or other strong light source - not a flare but just generally 'frosted over'. I don't know the technical term - sorry.
So my shopping list ranking - I was having fits this winter about buying that or going for the non-IS 70-200 f/2.8 for the versatility - and trying to stay within a rough budget. Then I finally opened my wallet up and got the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II on rebate -- wow! The 135 f/2.0 remains on my shopping list but now its behind my 2.8 mm upgrades in the wide (16-35) and medium range (new 24-70); and probably the 100 macro. Still, quite memorable and definitely will be in my bag when I need to do low light event work - even as a rental.
A couple notes tho - The narrow DOF and prime, especially on a crop (effectively 216mm), makes it a bit of a challenge to learn. Easier to use on a Full Frame no doubt. And I noticed it gets a bit ghosted when you aim near the sun or other strong light source - not a flare but just generally 'frosted over'. I don't know the technical term - sorry.
So my shopping list ranking - I was having fits this winter about buying that or going for the non-IS 70-200 f/2.8 for the versatility - and trying to stay within a rough budget. Then I finally opened my wallet up and got the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II on rebate -- wow! The 135 f/2.0 remains on my shopping list but now its behind my 2.8 mm upgrades in the wide (16-35) and medium range (new 24-70); and probably the 100 macro. Still, quite memorable and definitely will be in my bag when I need to do low light event work - even as a rental.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
