Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Camera

[ajfotofilmagem]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

Can someone help me out. Why would I buy the new 10-18 and not the existing 10-22?
What might be the difference in iq?
I can only think I'd use it for landscapes (probably using a tripod, though even without I don't find too little light unless it's way before dawn or if I have a nd filter, in which case I doubt IS would be enough.). I find photomerge works pretty well with a 35mm (and is pretty hopeless at 18mm (my existing widest), and I can't imagine ever taking a picture which included people at less than 18mm due to the distortion.

Smaller, lighter, and costs less than half the price?
Someone who already own lenses covering 18 to 22mm?
Someone who needs STM and Image Stabilizer for video?

 

[sagittariansrock]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

My 50mm f/1.8 has IQ equal to the 70-200II at f/8. So what? How about at f/5.6 or f/4? That's different totally.

You still lose some edges and most importantly, you can't see your composition while you compose. It doesn't work for me but if it works for you, good for you. I won't buy a fish eye anytime soon.

I meant at f/2.8. And I certainly can see my composition while I compose. It's in the viewfinder.

Great work! These four images and the accompanying explanation completely rationalize the statement "no one asked for the 16-35 f/4 IS".
Look at the number of people within this forum itself who have countered your statement. That is a testament to how many did ask for it.

 

[Lee Jay]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

My 50mm f/1.8 has IQ equal to the 70-200II at f/8. So what? How about at f/5.6 or f/4? That's different totally.

You still lose some edges and most importantly, you can't see your composition while you compose. It doesn't work for me but if it works for you, good for you. I won't buy a fish eye anytime soon.

I meant at f/2.8. And I certainly can see my composition while I compose. It's in the viewfinder.

Great work! These four images and the accompanying explanation completely rationalize the statement "no one asked for the 16-35 f/4 IS".
Look at the number of people within this forum itself who have countered your statement. That is a testament to how many did ask for it.

Show me. I saw lots of people looking for a 14-24/2.8. I didn't see anyone looking for a 16-35 or a 10-18.

 

[tron]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

I wonder, will they introduce a 16-35mm f/2.8L III (without IS) in a year or so just to tease (and tempt) us? ;D

 

[tron]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

My 50mm f/1.8 has IQ equal to the 70-200II at f/8. So what? How about at f/5.6 or f/4? That's different totally.

You still lose some edges and most importantly, you can't see your composition while you compose. It doesn't work for me but if it works for you, good for you. I won't buy a fish eye anytime soon.

I meant at f/2.8. And I certainly can see my composition while I compose. It's in the viewfinder.

Great work! These four images and the accompanying explanation completely rationalize the statement "no one asked for the 16-35 f/4 IS".
Look at the number of people within this forum itself who have countered your statement. That is a testament to how many did ask for it.

Show me. I saw lots of people looking for a 14-24/2.8. I didn't see anyone looking for a 16-35 or a 10-18.

You didn't really search, did you?

 

[sagittariansrock]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

My 50mm f/1.8 has IQ equal to the 70-200II at f/8. So what? How about at f/5.6 or f/4? That's different totally.

You still lose some edges and most importantly, you can't see your composition while you compose. It doesn't work for me but if it works for you, good for you. I won't buy a fish eye anytime soon.

I meant at f/2.8. And I certainly can see my composition while I compose. It's in the viewfinder.

Great work! These four images and the accompanying explanation completely rationalize the statement "no one asked for the 16-35 f/4 IS".
Look at the number of people within this forum itself who have countered your statement. That is a testament to how many did ask for it.

Show me. I saw lots of people looking for a 14-24/2.8. I didn't see anyone looking for a 16-35 or a 10-18.

Just go through this thread and a couple of others announcing the pre-ordering availability.

But for arguments sake- let's consider you are accurate in saying "I saw lots of people looking for a 14-24/2.8. I didn't see anyone looking for a 16-35 or a 10-18".
That implies you don't know anyone who has asked for it. Very different from knowing no one asked for it.

Besides, why do you care? You are taking great photos using your fisheye and existing lenses, and have no reason for spending 1.2K. And who knows, the f/2.8 might be around the corner...

 

[sagittariansrock]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

I wonder, will they introduce a 16-35mm f/2.8L III (without IS) in a year or so just to tease (and tempt) us? ;D

I don't think Canon will bring out another f/2.8 unless it is something amazing, like the 200-400 1.4x to counter the 200-400 Nikkor.
Now what could that awesomeness be?
1. An amazingly sharp lens wide open. (very likely)
2. A very wide FL, at least 14 but maybe even 12. (quite likely, 12mm possible)
3. IS on a fast lens. (unlikely, IMO)
4. A 12/14mm that takes filters. (very unlikely, IMO)
5. Any other suggestions?

 

[CANONisOK]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

Might just have to get the 16-35/4L IS. Selling the 16-35/2.8L II would cover the cost. Less than 15% of my 16-35L shots are wider than f/4, and of those a reasonable fraction are of static subjects where 3-4 stops of IS would be of more benefit than 1 stop of light. Sharper would be welcome, too.

Bummer (for me) about the 77mm filter size, as the 24-70/2.8L II and TS-E 24L II both use 82mm, as does the 16-35/2.8L II. I have the needed filters in 77mm (B+W Käsemann CPL, 10-stop ND, and the Lee WA adapter), it just means carrying them, too.

No, just get a 77 to 82 step up ring and use the 82mm filters you are carrying on the 77mm lens.

Smacks the side of my head. Already have a 77→82mm ring, actually, and it'll likely go on after the hood just fine.

+1. That's the setup I've been using for a while (82mm expensive filters + step up rings as needed). In fact, I think it was you Neuro who recommended the brass B+W step up rings that I ended up buying and using!

 

[sagittariansrock]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

Might just have to get the 16-35/4L IS. Selling the 16-35/2.8L II would cover the cost. Less than 15% of my 16-35L shots are wider than f/4, and of those a reasonable fraction are of static subjects where 3-4 stops of IS would be of more benefit than 1 stop of light. Sharper would be welcome, too.

Bummer (for me) about the 77mm filter size, as the 24-70/2.8L II and TS-E 24L II both use 82mm, as does the 16-35/2.8L II. I have the needed filters in 77mm (B+W Käsemann CPL, 10-stop ND, and the Lee WA adapter), it just means carrying them, too.

No, just get a 77 to 82 step up ring and use the 82mm filters you are carrying on the 77mm lens.

Smacks the side of my head. Already have a 77→82mm ring, actually, and it'll likely go on after the hood just fine.

+1. That's the setup I've been using for a while (82mm expensive filters + step up rings as needed). In fact, I think it was you Neuro who recommended the brass B+W step up rings that I ended up buying and using!

The B+W filters are made of brass, the step up rings are anodized aluminum.
Keep a filter wrench handy

 

[EchoLocation]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

My 50mm f/1.8 has IQ equal to the 70-200II at f/8. So what? How about at f/5.6 or f/4? That's different totally.

You still lose some edges and most importantly, you can't see your composition while you compose. It doesn't work for me but if it works for you, good for you. I won't buy a fish eye anytime soon.

I meant at f/2.8. And I certainly can see my composition while I compose. It's in the viewfinder.

Great work! These four images and the accompanying explanation completely rationalize the statement "no one asked for the 16-35 f/4 IS".
Look at the number of people within this forum itself who have countered your statement. That is a testament to how many did ask for it.

Show me. I saw lots of people looking for a 14-24/2.8. I didn't see anyone looking for a 16-35 or a 10-18.

December 26th, 2011.... one of my first posts on this forum was me specifically asking for a replacement for the 17-40. One of the main reasons I sold my Canon gear was the 17-40 I used was crazy soft, and the 2.8 didn't get very good reviews.

What about a 17-40L II? I want a wide walk around lens with a bit of zoom for my 5D. I am considering buying the 17-40 I, but they just don't seem to sharp and this is a very old lens. When's the refresh coming?

 

[rrcphoto]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

I wonder, will they introduce a 16-35mm f/2.8L III (without IS) in a year or so just to tease (and tempt) us? ;D

I don't think Canon will bring out another f/2.8 unless it is something amazing, like the 200-400 1.4x to counter the 200-400 Nikkor.
Now what could that awesomeness be?
1. An amazingly sharp lens wide open. (very likely)
2. A very wide FL, at least 14 but maybe even 12. (quite likely, 12mm possible)
3. IS on a fast lens. (unlikely, IMO)
4. A 12/14mm that takes filters. (very unlikely, IMO)
5. Any other suggestions?

I don't know .. i see the 16-35/2.8 II as the only weak link in what is a pretty nice 2.8 and 4.0 three lens set.

you have the 16-35/4, 24-70/4, and the 70-200/4 - all pretty darn good lenses, modern and should scale up well with higher res senors.

the 2.8's are the same . but what this.. oh yeah the ugly duckling .. the 16-35/2.8 II

I wouldn't be surprised to see this updated if/when the hi rez body comes out.

 

[JustMeOregon]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

Might just have to get the 16-35/4L IS. Selling the 16-35/2.8L II would cover the cost. Less than 15% of my 16-35L shots are wider than f/4, and of those a reasonable fraction are of static subjects where 3-4 stops of IS would be of more benefit than 1 stop of light. Sharper would be welcome, too.

Bummer (for me) about the 77mm filter size, as the 24-70/2.8L II and TS-E 24L II both use 82mm, as does the 16-35/2.8L II. I have the needed filters in 77mm (B+W Käsemann CPL, 10-stop ND, and the Lee WA adapter), it just means carrying them, too.

No, just get a 77 to 82 step up ring and use the 82mm filters you are carrying on the 77mm lens.

Smacks the side of my head. Already have a 77→82mm ring, actually, and it'll likely go on after the hood just fine.

+1. That's the setup I've been using for a while (82mm expensive filters + step up rings as needed). In fact, I think it was you Neuro who recommended the brass B+W step up rings that I ended up buying and using!

The B+W filters are made of brass, the step up rings are anodized aluminum.
Keep a filter wrench handy

+1 on the filter wrenches suggestion...

The only brass step-up rings that I know of are the ones from Heliopan -- more expensive then the B+W's, but way cheaper then gear with damaged threads... I've used nothing but the Heliopan's for awhile now, and I honestly can't recall ever having them stick.

 

[dslrdummy]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

So do we have an approximate date that these will be available? I know "June", but I'm leaving on a trip June 28th and would love to have the 16-35 with me.

DigitalRev in HK often have new products before the main outlets, so worth keeping an eye on them. I bought a teleconverter for my X100s and had it delivered while Amazon and others were still taking pre-orders. Have bought a lot of gear from DigitalRev over the years and never had a problem. Good luck with it.

 

[dlleno]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

In case it matters.... I've asked for this one since the 16-50 rumor and I'm somebody so therefore it is not true that nobody asked for it. Oh And available June30 per Amazon

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

Ahsanford, how do you like your Arca Swiss double pan head?
I have the sp and I am wondering if I should get the dp...
Ta

It's been a pleasure to use -- I take for granted how easy things are when I can pan above the ball head.

But I am not remotely good enough at landscape work to warrant such a tool. I've just overclubbed all of my landscape gear purchases lately so that they will last a long time and never say 'sorry, I can't do that' as I develop into a better photographer. It's a lame excuse to amass nice tools, but I'll ride that as long as I can. 8)

- A

 

[sagittariansrock]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

Ahsanford, how do you like your Arca Swiss double pan head?
I have the sp and I am wondering if I should get the dp...
Ta

It's been a pleasure to use -- I take for granted how easy things are when I can pan above the ball head.

But I am not remotely good enough at landscape work to warrant such a tool. I've just overclubbed all of my landscape gear purchases lately so that they will last a long time and never say 'sorry, I can't do that' as I develop into a better photographer. It's a lame excuse to amass nice tools, but I'll ride that as long as I can. 8)

- A

Nice planning though. I have an AS sp Z1. I tried using a Sunwayfoto panning clamp, which doesn't work. RRS has very kindly stopped making a panning clamp that can go directly on a ballhead stem. And Arca Swiss doesn't sell the dp clamp separately. Maybe you want to switch your AS dp clamp for something else and sell me yours

I think the advantage you are getting is in having a pan above AND below the ball. Having it only above the ball makes it very restrictive.

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

Can someone help me out. Why would I buy the new 10-18 and not the existing 10-22?

What might be the difference in iq?
I can only think I'd use it for landscapes (probably using a tripod, though even without I don't find too little light unless it's way before dawn or if I have a nd filter, in which case I doubt IS would be enough.). I find photomerge works pretty well with a 35mm (and is pretty hopeless at 18mm (my existing widest), and I can't imagine ever taking a picture which included people at less than 18mm due to the distortion.

Why would you buy the 10-18 over the 10-22 (listed in order of the most to least important reasons):

• Cheaper, and considerably so.
• IS for stills. Very useful for low light handheld situations with non-moving subject, indoor without a flash, etc.
• IS and STM for video. Less shake, quieter focusing, etc.
• Newer + shorter zoom range might give it a chance to be sharper, but I haven't looked at the MTF charts.
• Lighter and shorter -- more likely to go with you in your bag.
• If you have neither lens' diameter filter already and have to buy, a smaller filter diameter will be cheaper.
• Less total EF-S money invested if you ever move to a FF body.

Why would you buy the 10-22 over the 10-18 (listed in order of the most to least important reasons):

• Faster max aperture -- better for moving subjects when light is challenging. (I'd say the normal adage of 'faster lens = better bokeh' is not a real consideration for this FL unless you like to shoot cows' noses from comically short distances.)
• USM focusing speed obliterates STM focusing speed -- vital if your targets are people, animals, sports, etc.
• Undoubtedly a better build quality -- that EF-S 10-22 is 'high end for APS-C' build like the EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS. It's not a tank-like L lens, but it's well assembled and solid feeling.
• If you have neither lens' diameter filter already and have to buy, 77mm filter thread is far more common for nicer lenses you might buy someday, esp if you ever migrate to FF. Your 'going to use that diameter again' likelihood is a 99% certainty with 77mm.
• The 10-22 internally zooms (i.e. doesn't change length while zooming), which is a nice feature -- less moving surfaces to let dirt/sand/junk into the lens, it won't suddenly open up and change length in your bag, it would likely be a more rigid/stable construct in the wind, etc.
• Slightly more reach on the long end -- the 10-22 was made to the be APS-C equivalent of the 16-35. In my hands, when I owned the 10-22, I used the 22 end quite a bit as serviceable walkaround FL option. (The 10-18 might make you feel a bit limited in that regard, but it depends on what's in your bag -- there's a really good chance if you get the 10-18, there is a 15-, 17-, 18-something lens also in there, I'd guess.

And if you really want to get nerdy and compare, ask Mr. Carnathan:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Specifications.aspx?Lens=950&LensComp=271&Units=E

- A

 

[AvTvM]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

16-35/4 L IS is a great addition to Canon's stabilized f/4 lineup. It does replace the 17-40. MTFs look good enough to justify launch price. I expect it to sell very well.
It is not a replacement for a 14-24 or the 16-35/2.8 II. Canon will have to come up with a truly superb ultra-wide lens matching or besting nik 14-24. hard to predict whether they will bring both - a huge and expensive 12/14-24/2.8 and a more compact, suitable to regular filters 16-35/2.8 L IS more targeted at event/pj or just one f/2.8 uwa lens. It'll likely be announced with a future high-rez body.

EF-S 10-18 IS STM is clearly positioned to come in somewhat below the 10-22. don't know how many rebel users will pick it up though, despite its low price. Most likely video oriented folks looking for a small and cheap ultrawide with silent STM AF drive.
Personally i wpilf hsve preferred an EF-S 10/4.0 pancake with stellar IQ but still at a decent price. I'd buy that in a moment to replace my 10-22 which i use at 10mm most of the time.

 

[Zv]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

I wonder, will they introduce a 16-35mm f/2.8L III (without IS) in a year or so just to tease (and tempt) us? ;D

I don't think Canon will bring out another f/2.8 unless it is something amazing, like the 200-400 1.4x to counter the 200-400 Nikkor.
Now what could that awesomeness be?
1. An amazingly sharp lens wide open. (very likely)
2. A very wide FL, at least 14 but maybe even 12. (quite likely, 12mm possible)
3. IS on a fast lens. (unlikely, IMO)
4. A 12/14mm that takes filters. (very unlikely, IMO)
5. Any other suggestions?

I don't know .. i see the 16-35/2.8 II as the only weak link in what is a pretty nice 2.8 and 4.0 three lens set.

you have the 16-35/4, 24-70/4, and the 70-200/4 - all pretty darn good lenses, modern and should scale up well with higher res senors.

the 2.8's are the same . but what this.. oh yeah the ugly duckling .. the 16-35/2.8 II

I wouldn't be surprised to see this updated if/when the hi rez body comes out.

My thinking is that Canon will make something new like a 14-24 or 12-24 f/2.8 instead of just updating the 16-35 II. If you think about it from a marketing point of view making a version 3 of the same lens is like saying "oh man, it took us three attempts to get it right! Doh, but here you are now!" Or they can be like "hey, look here's something completely new that we cooked up" to help you forget about the version 2.

Also, now with this new 16-35mm f/4 IS anyone needing this particular focal range but not the f/2.8 aperture in a way already have an updated option.

 

[Sabaki]

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

I must say I just love, love the level of knowledge and the eagerness to share.

I'm a little confused about Lee filters though and was wondering if somebody could just educate me please?

1. The vignetting mentioned in earlier posts at longer focal lengths, is it software removable or is it the actual adaptors that enter the frame?

2. Would a current filter system work with a 12-24 or 14-24 or would a new system need to be developed, based on the dimensions of the front element?

3. Can a filter system be 'adapted up'? Say you purchase a 77mm system and your next lens has a 82mm thread, would a step up 82mm adaptor make the 77mm usable?

4. Kinda similar to question 3. So I can buy a 16-35ii now for a good price and I'll then invest in a Lee system. But if Lee had to create an unique system for the 12/14-24, does that mean having to buy a whole new filter system again?