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

[sagittariansrock]

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

The somewhat affordable price of the 16-35 makes me worry...

Ha ha, one can't be suspicious enough...

I think it looks good. Makes me want one even if I am not really in the market for a wide. It will be interesting to see reviews.

+1.
It's making me think of selling my Rokinon 14 (thankfully I talked myself out of it, for now)

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

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

It seems that the recent competition for Sigma has propitiated that Canon launch prices closer to market reality. If the picture is as good as it looks on the MTF chart, these two lenses are sales success.

 

[privatebydesign]

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

A 14mm prime and a 16-35 are very different tools. Even the difference between 14 and 16 is marked, I can't see how a 16-35 would replace that.

 

[ewg963]

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

I am not a good MTF reader :-\


Can someone explain to me the IQ difference between the 16-35 f/2.8II and the 16-35 f/4 IS based on the MTF's?
I put them here (upper images are the 16-35 f/2.8II)

Simple, more contrast (bold lines) and more sharpness in the corners (thin lines), from left to right = center to extreme borders, the higher the lines on the graph, the more transmission of contrast (bold) and sharpness (thin), usually, black lines are for wide open aperture whilst blue lines are for f/8. At least, if Canon did not change its MTF legend

EDIT: after more observation of those MTF from 16-35/4L, damn, that will be bitingly sharp at f/8. Landscapers rejoice

+1

 

[privatebydesign]

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

It seems that the recent competition for Sigma has propitiated that Canon launch prices closer to market reality. If the picture is as good as it looks on the MTF chart, these two lenses are sales success.

Sure the EF-S looks a good price, but the 16-35 is a 17-40 replacement, at 150% the price. Not saying I feel the 16-35 is particularly expensive, and I very much doubt Sigma had anything to do with it at all, just pointing out it is 150% more than the lens it is replacing with less zoom range.

 

[mackguyver]

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

It seems that the recent competition for Sigma has propitiated that Canon launch prices closer to market reality. If the picture is as good as it looks on the MTF chart, these two lenses are sales success.

Sure the EF-S looks a good price, but the 16-35 is a 17-40 replacement, at 150% the price. Not saying I feel the 16-35 is particularly expensive, and I very much doubt Sigma had anything to do with it at all, just pointing out it is 150% more than the lens it is replacing with less zoom range.

I think that's pretty typical of Canon's past history when adding IS to lenses - think the 70-200 f/4 vs. f/4 IS., but given the MTF curves, I think it's worth it. Also, I found this on their Japanese site:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/info/ef16-35/index.html

 

[RLPhoto]

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

I like the new 16-35L IS. It's not outrageously overpriced, it's mtfs look much better, and it has an ace in the hole with IS. I'll definitely be replacing 17-40L.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

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

A few months ago I was anxiously waiting for Samyang 10mm F2.8, and when it was finally announced costing $529 I was disgusted. Now Canon has done me a favor by releasing this 10-18mm cheap it will push down the price of Samyang. Thanks canon.

 

[privatebydesign]

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

It seems that the recent competition for Sigma has propitiated that Canon launch prices closer to market reality. If the picture is as good as it looks on the MTF chart, these two lenses are sales success.

Sure the EF-S looks a good price, but the 16-35 is a 17-40 replacement, at 150% the price. Not saying I feel the 16-35 is particularly expensive, and I very much doubt Sigma had anything to do with it at all, just pointing out it is 150% more than the lens it is replacing with less zoom range.

I think that's pretty typical of Canon's past history when adding IS to lenses - think the 70-200 f/4 vs. f/4 IS., but given the MTF curves, I think it's worth it. Also, I found this on their Japanese site:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/info/ef16-35/index.html

I agree, but suggesting Sigma as a reason for reasonable price even when it is 150% of the older version, seems a stretch.

I very much doubt Sigma feature in the Canon bean counters price calculations at all, but if they do, it will be a very small amount.

The really sad bit about this announcement is I think it pretty much kills the notion of a 16-35 f2.8 with IS, which I would be much more interested in, even at twice the price.

 

[insanitybeard]

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

I'll await some reviews of the 16-35 IS with interest.... if it's a good 'un I'll add that to my list as a replacement for the the 17-40!

Also, it'll be interesting to see how the EF-S 10-18 measures up against the EF-S 10-22.

 

[SwampYankee]

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

Reading and Understanding lens MTF charts is a nice writeup about how to interpret the chart.

Well thanks for that. Now I understand why that 300mm f2.8 L cost so darn much! I guess Iwill have to teach Mrs. SwampYankke to read MTF charts. Once she understands I am sure she will let me buy it!

 

[Lee Jay]

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

Yea! In "the year of the lens", we've started out with two lenses no one asked for.

 

[sagittariansrock]

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

A 14mm prime and a 16-35 are very different tools. Even the difference between 14 and 16 is marked, I can't see how a 16-35 would replace that.

I wasn't aware the difference is that marked, having never owned a 16mm lens on FF (or 14mm equivalent on APS-C). However, I do know the mm differences become a larger as you go wide in general, though.
And you are right, they are very different tools- I hope to use the 14mm for night sky photography, where an absence of coma and f/2.8 are both great assets, and the distortion isn't an issue.
The selling of the 14mm came into play to procure funds for the 16-35mm, so it was a financial decision, not an artistic one.

Let's now hope that the 16-35 f/4L IS is a big improvement on the 17-40 f/4L, especially in the corners.

It's bound to be, but for me the new lens still won't be worth it as it's double the price of the 17-40L and has shorter focal length so it's less usable as a "standard wide-angle". The problem on the other end is that 16mm isn't really "ultra" wide, so people will keep looking for 14mm- alternatives.

Last not least, of course the IS is no good at all when shooting movement (sports, photo journalism) - for this the corner performance usually doesn't matter since you af near the center on ff.

The one thing this lens is bound to be attractive for is dual or only use on crop: If it's sharper in the *center* than 17-40L wide open I'd really love to have the sealed 16-35/4 on my 60d. 7d2 anyone :-> ?

1. As PBD pointed out, it's not double the price of the 17-40, but 1.5 times.
2. It is pretty sharp all the way wide open at 16mm, and extremely sharp at f/8. You think people will not pay good money for a corner-to-corner sharp 16mm that takes filters?
3. With high ISOs available these days, the difference between f/2.8 and f/4 is less than one imagines. Of course, on APS-C every bit helps.
4. I think the IS will be a much bigger factor when taking architectural photos indoors in poor lighting and without a tripod.

I think this lens will command a very large market. And yes, 16-35 IS is a great lens on crop, although I would much rather get an f/2.8 or f/1.8 zoom for that.

 

[insanitybeard]

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

Yea! In "the year of the lens", we've started out with two lenses no one asked for.

Speak for yourself, but not for everybody. I for one certainly welcome a new Canon ultrawide zoom if it offers improved corner resolution and sharpness.

 

[sagittariansrock]

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

Reading and Understanding lens MTF charts is a nice writeup about how to interpret the chart.

Well thanks for that. Now I understand why that 300mm f2.8 L cost so darn much! I guess Iwill have to teach Mrs. SwampYankke to read MTF charts. Once she understands I am sure she will let me buy it!

You better not hope to buy the 50 1.2L then...

 

[RLPhoto]

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

Yea! In "the year of the lens", we've started out with two lenses no one asked for.

Speak for yourself, but not for everybody. I for one certainly welcome a new Canon ultrawide zoom if it offers improved corner resolution and sharpness.

Ditto. Especially if you already own a 17-40L and sell it to fund the new 16-35L IS. As I think about it more, this be nice for IS video too.

 

[privatebydesign]

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

I wasn't aware the difference is that marked, having never owned a 16mm lens on FF (or 14mm equivalent on APS-C). However, I do know the mm differences become a larger as you go wide in general, though.

This has a couple of good fov comparisons. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-14mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

 

[Khalai]

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

Yea! In "the year of the lens", we've started out with two lenses no one asked for.

Speak for yourself, but not for everybody. I for one certainly welcome a new Canon ultrawide zoom if it offers improved corner resolution and sharpness.

Ditto. Especially if you already own a 17-40L and sell it to fund the new 16-35L IS. As I think about it more, this be nice for IS video too.

The price difference in my location is around 750 USD, when I sell my 17-40L on the used market. I am really quite excited by this lens

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

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

We must remember that 17-40mm was a success at the time of the APS-H sensor, when it was the only option for wide-angle standard zoom (22-52mm equivalent). Never was an exciting lens on full frame, it showed its weaknesses in poor corners, and low sharpness. If the new 16-35 F4 has much better quality, that will make many people happy.

 

[Dylan777]

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

This could be a another winner in Canon line up.

1. 4stop IS is a huge sale here. Add ND filter to it, you can have silky smooth water fall photo without tripod.
2. MTF charts look nice & clean compared to 17-40 and 16-35 II
3. Best of all, THE price tag. No need to look for 3rd party with MF

I'm putting my 16-35 II and 50L on Ebay sometimes this week. My crytal ball says 50mm is on the way... :