Canon EF 28 f/2.8 Disappears From Price List

[neuroanatomist]

I like primes. Small, light and quick focusing primes. So this disqualifies the big, heavy L primes. A Canon 85mm f1.2 L weighs 1,025g and a Canon 85mm f1.8 weighs 425g. For comparison a Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G weighs 660g.

The 35L and 50L are much lighter (not much heavier than the 85/1.8), and 135L is only a little heavier than the Nikon. 85/1.4. All three of those L lenses focus very fast, too. The 85L is an outlier on both counts. For an 85mm lens, an aperture of f/1.2 is 36% larger than an aperture of f/1.4. I put up with the weight and slow AF of the 85L because it delivers great images.

 

[sulla]

weight isn't too much of a concern to me. My 5D plus a bag weighs enough that I won't feel the difference of a 500 vs an 800g lens too much.

But indeed, the 85/1.8 has good build and also optical quality at a good price point. If only all consumer primes would be like this. I would very much greet a series of "85 1.8 quality" primes. ;-)

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

The following lenses should be replaced with faster ones, at least 1.4 would be good

• 24 2.8
• 35 2

There are already f/1.4 primes with excellent IQ at these focal lengths - the 24L II and 35L.

But the 24L II & 35L cost a lot more than ~U.S.$700

 

[neuroanatomist]

There are already f/1.4 primes with excellent IQ at these focal lengths - the 24L II and 35L.

But the 24L II & 35L cost a lot more than ~U.S.$700

Sure they do...and Canon wants more of your money! So, if they can put a red ring on a lens and charge a premium, meaning more profit, that's what they want you to buy.

IMO, their viewpoint is that there are three broad categories of buyers out there:

• Typical consumers
• Enthusiasts / advanced amateurs / 'working' pros
• 'High-profile' pros

The first category will likely buy a Rebel/xxxD or 60D with a kit lens or two, and maybe a nifty fifty. The third category will be shooting 1-series bodies and all L-series lenses. The middle category is a broad one - xxxD, 60D, 7D, 5DII users, with multiple lenses, including zoom and primes. I think Canon would prefer to upmarket these folks - get them shooting on a 7D and/or a 5DII, and buying L-series lenses. The good quality, non-L primes are likely not in Canon's financial interest to update. Allow me to use your statement to illustrate that point:

I would be happy to buy 20mm f/2 USM, 24mm f/2 USM, 35mm f/2 USM, and possibly 28mm f/1.8 USM (all with IQ improved over the current non-L primes) for ~$700 each.

That's four $700 lenses, meaning you're (in theory) willing to spend $2,800. If Canon were to develop those four lenses, that would mean a significant R&D expenditure. From a financial standpoint, they'd realize more profit developing only two lenses in that focal range and charging $1400 for each. Thus, we have a 24L and a 35L, but no 20L or 28L.

I think Canon will attempt to polarize the market a little further, and we're seeing that in recent lens releases. They are concentrating on EF-S lenses and L-series lenses, and not releasing or updating anything in between.

 

[c.d.embrey]

The 35L and 50L are much lighter (not much heavier than the 85/1.8), and 135L is only a little heavier than the Nikon. 85/1.4. All three of those L lenses focus very fast, too. The 85L is an outlier on both counts. For an 85mm lens, an aperture of f/1.2 is 36% larger than an aperture of f/1.4. I put up with the weight and slow AF of the 85L because it delivers great images.

Why would I want to carry the extra weight of the 85mm f1.2L, when I mainly shoot between f5.6 and f11 ??? My advertising clients are more concerned with their customers getting a good look at the product, than they are with creamy bouquet.

The combined weight of a Sony NEX 7 with a Zeiss 24mm f1.8 is less than a 22.9 oz./650g EF 24 f1.4L lens. For comparison the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24mm f/1.4G ED weighs 21.9 oz. (620g).

 

[c.d.embrey]

[
I'm not at all convinced this is true: I like primes—or, rather, I should say that I like the prime I have—but can't justify spending more than $500 on a prime. And I can't be the only person in this position; I'd like an equivalent of Nikon's $200 35mm / f 1.8. Which is what I hope Canon is going to offer.

Nikon's most expensive ($499.95 MSRP) f1.8 prime is the new AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G. The AF-S NIKKOR
50mm f/1.8G is $219.95 MSRP. Nikon is upgrading their D lenses to AF-S G lenses and still keeping the prices reasonable, Canon could/should do the same.

BTW for thous not familiar with Nikon, AF-S = USM and G lenses don't have aperture rings (just like Canon lenses).

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

I would be happy to buy 20mm f/2 USM, 24mm f/2 USM, 35mm f/2 USM, and possibly 28mm f/1.8 USM (all with IQ improved over the current non-L primes) for ~$700 each.

That's four $700 lenses, meaning you're (in theory) willing to spend $2,800. If Canon were to develop those four lenses, that would mean a significant R&D expenditure. From a financial standpoint, they'd realize more profit developing only two lenses in that focal range and charging $1400 for each. Thus, we have a 24L and a 35L, but no 20L or 28L.

In my case Canon wouldn't, as I'll buy neither the 24L nor the 35L.

I think Canon will attempt to polarize the market a little further, and we're seeing that in recent lens releases. They are concentrating on EF-S lenses and L-series lenses, and not releasing or updating anything in between.

Which might end with me either downgrading to APS-C & EF-S (due to lack of money), or switching to another manufacturor.

 

[AJ]

Just how much R&D expense does it take to update a few primes?

CAD lens design should be pretty straightforward.
They already make USM motors, lens mounts, controller chips, diaphragms.
They have machinery to grind lenses. Retooling shouldn't be that big of a deal. Ditto for new coatings.

 

[DJL329]

Nikon's most expensive ($499.95 MSRP) f1.8 prime is the new AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G. The AF-S NIKKOR
50mm f/1.8G is $219.95 MSRP. Nikon is upgrading their D lenses to AF-S G lenses and still keeping the prices reasonable, Canon could/should do the same.

If we, the consumers, buy what Canon decides to sell, then they have no impetus to change. Only if a large number of folks switched to Nikon and bought up their new "AF-S G" lenses, would they then have to rethink their strategy.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The combined weight of a Sony NEX 7 with a Zeiss 24mm f1.8 is less than a 22.9 oz./650g EF 24 f1.4L lens. For comparison the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24mm f/1.4G ED weighs 21.9 oz. (620g).

You're comparing the weight of a mirrorless camera plus small image circle lens with a FF image circle lens? Well, then...the S100 weighs less than 7 oz./200g including the battery and memory card, and has a 24mm-equivalent f/2 lens. That comparison is only slightly less relevant, but if you want to save weight, there you go...

 

[SnapHappy]

Nikon's most expensive ($499.95 MSRP) f1.8 prime is the new AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G. The AF-S NIKKOR
50mm f/1.8G is $219.95 MSRP. Nikon is upgrading their D lenses to AF-S G lenses and still keeping the prices reasonable, Canon could/should do the same.

If we, the consumers, buy what Canon decides to sell, then they have no impetus to change. Only if a large number of folks switched to Nikon and bought up their new "AF-S G" lenses, would they then have to rethink their strategy.

Agreed! Nikon seem to get the fact that there are more APS-C users out there then there are Pro/Serious Enthusiasts and their lens lineup is starting to reflect that. Canon need to get off their high horse and start realising that the other camera manufacturers are catching up in a hurry.

 

[Gothmoth]

i wonder when a lens rumor finally will be true....

can´t remember i read a rumor here about a lens announcement date that has become true.

so guessing from "in or out of stock".. i could not care less.

maybe it´s even just a marketing idea from B&H so people who come here visit the B&H/ adorama etc. website to look if it´s really not listed anymore.

 

[c.d.embrey]

You're comparing the weight of a mirrorless camera plus small image circle lens with a FF image circle lens? Well, then...the S100 weighs less than 7 oz./200g including the battery and memory card, and has a 24mm-equivalent f/2 lens. That comparison is only slightly less relevant, but if you want to save weight, there you go...

I prefer APS-C and DX cameras to FF. I don't sell 40x60 prints, I just shoot ads. If I need a really big print, than I'll use my 4x5 Toyo. My Only FF cameras are Full Frame Film cameras. I like small light weight cameras and I'm getting a Sony NEX 7 with a Zeiss 24mm f1.8 to test. If the NEX 7 works out, most of my Canon gear goes into storage.

BTW if Canon builds a Pro Quality Mirrorless with the requisite small/light lenses, I'll get one to test.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

I would be happy to buy 20mm f/2 USM, 24mm f/2 USM, 35mm f/2 USM, and possibly 28mm f/1.8 USM (all with IQ improved over the current non-L primes) for ~$700 each.

That's four $700 lenses, meaning you're (in theory) willing to spend $2,800. If Canon were to develop those four lenses, that would mean a significant R&D expenditure. From a financial standpoint, they'd realize more profit developing only two lenses in that focal range and charging $1400 for each. Thus, we have a 24L and a 35L, but no 20L or 28L.

I've just read the Samyang is going to release a 24mm prime. Reading reviews about the 35mm f/1.4 prime, which has a price tag similar to the 35mm f/2 and IQ similar to the 35mm f/1.4L sans autofocus and USM, there's another option: I would sell my 35mm f/2 2nd hand, buy Samyang, and Canon realizes no profit.

 

[Daniel Flather]

Where is the ef 18mm /1.4L?

 

[briansquibb]

Agreed! Nikon seem to get the fact that there are more APS-C users out there then there are Pro/Serious Enthusiasts and their lens lineup is starting to reflect that. Canon need to get off their high horse and start realising that the other camera manufacturers are catching up in a hurry.

These are the P&S people moving up - I doubt they buy many lens over and above the 55-250