Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II in Development [CR2]

[scyrene]

Surely the assumption is any FF mirrorless camera would use the EF mount, not EF-M?

It has been rumoured that the Canon could launch a mirrorless camera with the EF mount rather than using the EF-M mount, but I don't really see what benefit that would bring over a DSLR. I think it's inevitable that a FF EF-M mount camera will be launched. Maybe not in 2017 but in the future for sure.

The EF-M mount is full-frame capable already.

Well there are benefits to mirrorless, in principle, especially with regard to seeing a preview of the exposure in the EVF, in low light etc, and it can display more things, like focus peaking. Of course many still claim (I have no experience so can't say) that EVFs are still inferior in other ways. Mirrorless autofocus has some advantages, I believe, though again it cuts both ways. Also there are no moving parts. Many in these forums have said that if they switch to mirrorless in the distant future, they want to retain the DSLR form factor for ergonomics, so using a smaller mount wouldn't be such an issue.

The major disadvantage I see with them using the EF-M mount for a FF mirrorless camera is the lack of lenses. And why design and release a load of new more exotic EF-M lenses rather than making use of the excellent stable of EF lenses already available? Especially if there is no significant size/weight saving in those categories, like telephoto. EF-M makes sense for a small size system, but using it to replace EF is unnecessary in my view.

This remains (IMHO) the single most important/impactful decision Canon will need to make for many years: what mount will FF mirrorless use?

This forum -- full of SLR enthusiasts and pros -- generally (about 2/3 of us) say that a full EF mount mirrorless is best for seamlessly useable 2nd body, best for seamless integration of existing glass, etc.... but we are not the entire market by a long shot. They may be gunning for day 1 early adopter spec sheet lunatic enthusiasts or the trust fund photography crowd (think Leica SL), which would imply the product isn't immediately aimed at us. Canon very well may 'go thin' and force EF users to use an adaptor.

Other than the Sigma mirrorless rigs that came our recently (the SD quattro rigs), which had the 'lens tube' like integral projection that maintained effectively a full lens mount without a mirror, no one else to my knowledge has gone the pragmatic route and kept a full mount for mirroless. That's been true in m43, APS-C, and FF so far.

So I would personally prefer a full mounted FF mirrorless setup, but everyone in the market thusfar has 'gone skinny' to chase a rather fleeting illusion of making things smaller and (in fairness) the neat trick of adapting other mounts' lenses.

- A

It does rather depend what this imagined future Canon FF mirrorless camera is meant to do. The skinny route is well trod, as you say. Whether that is profitable is the deciding factor of course, but there is still a hole in all the lineups - if mirrorless is meant to be the future, someone is going to have to release a DSLR-style mirrorless body for improved ergonomics in some circumstances (even handholding with a 100L is unpleasant on the EOS-M, let alone a 70-200 or larger), not to mention battery power and life.

 

[slclick]

Great, now a new 70-200 f/4 is all I can think of and it won't probably be available until 2018. It's the zoom gap in my lineup...funny, it's the one most have and it's the one I haven't since I bought my first L lens (the f/4 non IS) in 2001.

 

[mb66energy]

Great, now a new 70-200 f/4 is all I can think of and it won't probably be available until 2018. It's the zoom gap in my lineup...funny, it's the one most have and it's the one I haven't since I bought my first L lens (the f/4 non IS) in 2001.

Nearly the same here: My first L lens was the f/4 70 200 non-IS too (in 2005 joining the 20D with the EF-S 60mm).

A little difference: After 10 years availability I bought the IS version 4 weeks ago. Seems to have really improved contrast/sharpness and better flare resistancy compared to the older version - improvements seem to be much better than the test shots show and after TDP it is much better with older bodies (5D should profit from this). IS works great. I see ~3 stops @200mm and ~2 stops @70mm - a strong gain in lower iso or smaller aperture without lugging a tripod around.

So I have some improvement for my "standard zoom" range and I will wait (more or less) patiently for the things to come. If the new lens has some 1:2 macro capability with good IQ wide open ... patience would fly away instantanously!

 

[rstoddard11]

It could theoretically get better. Could a shorter/fatter version similar to the 70-300L work? I would imagine updated glass, marginally better IS and some other things may give it a solid "update". I'm still using the original non-L version and was wanting to update this year as I use it for a lot of landscapes, but may wait and see where this goes first.

 

[ahsanford]

It could theoretically get better. Could a shorter/fatter version similar to the 70-300L work? I would imagine updated glass, marginally better IS and some other things may give it a solid "update". I'm still using the original non-L version and was wanting to update this year as I use it for a lot of landscapes, but may wait and see where this goes first.

I don't believe it can be much shorter at 200mm, but at 70mm it certainly could... but that would make it an externally zooming (telescoping inner barrel) sort of lens like all the 24-something zooms are, which would be quite unpopular with the weather sealing crowd. Not sure they would do that.

Canon used to have telescoping (external zooming) something-200 EF lenses back in the day (50-200, 80-200, etc.) but they seem to have coalesced around:

70-200 f/2.8 = internal focusing --> the big beefy sucker

70-200 f/4 = internal focusing --> light, but well built and sealed

70-300 f/variable = external focusing --> built for travel --> compact and extra reach at the cost of not being one contiguous outer body and losing some max aperture

- A

 

[Ozarker]

All my black lenses match my black lenses except there's no red ring on the Tamron... which bugs me too.

LOL You do know that placing a 1/8 inch wide strip of gloss red auto decal pin striping tape over the gold ring on your Tamron lens magically turns it into an L lens right? just kidding pardon my humor

LOL!!! ;D ;D ;D

 

[GP.Masserano]

[size=12pt]But is it really necessary, in this moment, to improve the... best 70-200 F4 on the market ?

Perhaps Canon would do better to think to a 150- 600 5.6 (also not L) to compete with Sigma and Tamron who are selling to dozens !!!!

 

[scyrene]

[size=12pt]But is it really necessary, in this moment, to improve the... best 70-200 F4 on the market ?

Perhaps Canon would do better to think to a 150- 600 5.6 (also not L) to compete with Sigma and Tamron who are selling to dozens !!!!

To repeat what has been said elsewhere: a zoom going to 600mm f/5.6 would be very expensive, large, and heavy. The third party ones are in reality something like 560-580mm f/6.3 (~T/6.5?). An X-600mm f/5.6 lens would have the same size front element as the Canon 300mm f/2.8, and would therefore be similar in many respects to that lens, which is hardly cheap, light, or small. There is little reason to believe such a lens would not be L-quality; there is also little reason to believe Canon would produce a native f/6.3 EF lens instead.

Besides, if those other lenses are only selling 'dozens', is it worth Canon's while developing one themselves? I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Better to buy third party or get the 100-400 II and a 1.4x extender if that is the focal range you need.

 

[GP.Masserano]

[size=12pt]But is it really necessary, in this moment, to improve the... best 70-200 F4 on the market ?

Perhaps Canon would do better to think to a 150- 600 5.6 (also not L) to compete with Sigma and Tamron who are selling to dozens !!!!

To repeat what has been said elsewhere: a zoom going to 600mm f/5.6 would be very expensive, large, and heavy. The third party ones are in reality something like 560-580mm f/6.3 (~T/6.5?). An X-600mm f/5.6 lens would have the same size front element as the Canon 300mm f/2.8, and would therefore be similar in many respects to that lens, which is hardly cheap, light, or small. There is little reason to believe such a lens would not be L-quality; there is also little reason to believe Canon would produce a native f/6.3 EF lens instead.

Besides, if those other lenses are only selling 'dozens', is it worth Canon's while developing one themselves? I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Better to buy third party or get the 100-400 II and a 1.4x extender if that is the focal range you need.

I am sorry but I am not agree.
Produce a good x-600 (0r better x - 500 f5,6 always not L ) for Canon is not too expensive.
A x-500 (also to "f" is not constant, such as for example 4 - 5.6) would have the frontal lens less than 10 cm.

"Sold by the dozen" is a way of saying that means that (at least in Italy) a big number of nature photographers use the Tamron and Sigma with satisfaction, despite the considerable weight.
I attend in many Natural Parks and everywhere you can see 150-600 in a number which is much greater than the expensive "whites" of Canon.
The price of these lenses is convenient, the quality is good.
Does not mean that have sold "only one dozen"... ;D

 

[Loswr]

[size=12pt]But is it really necessary, in this moment, to improve the... best 70-200 F4 on the market ?

Perhaps Canon would do better to think to a 150- 600 5.6 (also not L) to compete with Sigma and Tamron who are selling to dozens !!!!

To repeat what has been said elsewhere: a zoom going to 600mm f/5.6 would be very expensive, large, and heavy. The third party ones are in reality something like 560-580mm f/6.3 (~T/6.5?). An X-600mm f/5.6 lens would have the same size front element as the Canon 300mm f/2.8, and would therefore be similar in many respects to that lens, which is hardly cheap, light, or small. There is little reason to believe such a lens would not be L-quality; there is also little reason to believe Canon would produce a native f/6.3 EF lens instead.

Besides, if those other lenses are only selling 'dozens', is it worth Canon's while developing one themselves? I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Better to buy third party or get the 100-400 II and a 1.4x extender if that is the focal range you need.

I am sorry but I am not agree.
Produce a good x-600 (0r better x - 500 f5,6 always not L ) for Canon is not too expensive.
A x-500 (also to "f" is not constant, such as for example 4 - 5.6) would have the frontal lens less than 10 cm.

Sorry, but it sounds like you do agree. The point was that a 600mm f/5.6 (prime or variable aperture zoom with that as the long end) is not going to be an inexpensive lens. A 500mm f/5.6 is a different matter, as Nikon has shown.

 

[Labdoc]

I was going to buy the MK2 f2.8 version but another thread rumored this lens was due for revision sometime in 2017. This thread kind of insinuates that was a mistake and it's the f4 version getting an update. Can't keep my rumors straight anymore. So what's the deal, new f2.8 or not? I need the lens for an event in June, buy or not?

 

[mnclayshooter]

I was going to buy the MK2 f2.8 version but another thread rumored this lens was due for revision sometime in 2017. This thread kind of insinuates that was a mistake and it's the f4 version getting an update. Can't keep my rumors straight anymore. So what's the deal, new f2.8 or not? I need the lens for an event in June, buy or not?

You have 3 real choices:

1) Buy the lens you know you need and want now because it is available and because it is a great lens, and try to time it right price-wise, have ample time to return it if it isn't exactly what you wanted and give yourself some learning-curve time with it.

2) Wait until a rumored lens is available, or not.

3) Wait until the last minute and buy whatever is available at that time, hope that you get a good functioning copy (no need to return/warranty it), hope that you get a good price, hope you haven't waited too long on the upgrade curve and now will have even greater buyer remorse about a new lens that MIGHT come out soon.

 

[ahsanford]

I was going to buy the MK2 f2.8 version but another thread rumored this lens was due for revision sometime in 2017. This thread kind of insinuates that was a mistake and it's the f4 version getting an update. Can't keep my rumors straight anymore. So what's the deal, new f2.8 or not? I need the lens for an event in June, buy or not?

Understatement of the year, I know, but Canon isn't Apple.

With bodies, we have a general read on things based on prior product lifecycles. For instance, a 6D2 seems a certainty for 'sometime this year'. That's about all we can do -- roughly peg a launch window.

With lenses, though, good luck to you. CR's great at hearing what's in development but launches are very very hard to nail down unless we know that they'll be bundled with a body.

But the silver lining with photographers is a less buyers' remorse with Canon lenses than with Apple products as it's a near-certainty any L lens replacement will go up considerably in price, so you tend to get what you pay for, i.e. if you snap up a refurb 70-200 f/4L IS today for $959, would you really be that butthurt if a $1599 Mk II was released?

- A

 

[Labdoc]

I was going to buy the MK2 f2.8 version but another thread rumored this lens was due for revision sometime in 2017. This thread kind of insinuates that was a mistake and it's the f4 version getting an update. Can't keep my rumors straight anymore. So what's the deal, new f2.8 or not? I need the lens for an event in June, buy or not?

Understatement of the year, I know, but Canon isn't Apple.

With bodies, we have a general read on things based on prior product lifecycles. For instance, a 6D2 seems a certainty for 'sometime this year'. That's about all we can do -- roughly peg a launch window.

With lenses, though, good luck to you. CR's great at hearing what's in development but launches are very very hard to nail down unless we know that they'll be bundled with a body.

But the silver lining with photographers is a less buyers' remorse with Canon lenses than with Apple products as it's a near-certainty any L lens replacement will go up considerably in price, so you tend to get what you pay for, i.e. if you snap up a refurb 70-200 f/4L IS today for $959, would you really be that butthurt if a $1599 Mk II was released?

- A

I guess that's why they call it rumors. I figure wait until May and see what is happening. Then buy the MK2 for the event and try to get it refurb from Canon to save some bucks. Then I'll sell it and buy the new version if it appears. Just the way it goes, thanks for the input.

 

[scyrene]

"Sold by the dozen" is a way of saying that means that (at least in Italy) a big number

...

Does not mean that have sold "only one dozen"... ;D

I've learned something!

 

[Zv]

"Sold by the dozen" is a way of saying that means that (at least in Italy) a big number

...

Does not mean that have sold "only one dozen"... ;D

I've learned something!

I guess it means "people buy a dozen at a time" kinda like hot cakes or something. Not that a dozen people bought one.

Though I guess some people might actually buy a dozen of a particular lens just to find the best one and then return the rest!

 

[GP.Masserano]

"Sold by the dozen" is a way of saying that means that (at least in Italy) a big number

...

Does not mean that have sold "only one dozen"... ;D

I've learned something!

I guess it means "people buy a dozen at a time" kinda like hot cakes or something. Not that a dozen people bought one.

Though I guess some people might actually buy a dozen of a particular lens just to find the best one and then return the rest!

No no !!!
"Sold by the dozens" means "in great number"!!! : and here we are not talking about cakes... ;D

Jokes aside, in the huts and photo-hunting, I saw in these last months many Sigma (and less Tamron, in truth).
Maybe because we are in economic crisis and therefore we do not have too much money to spend for our hobby... :'(
Blessed are you who paid in $ and with much less taxs (in Italy over 21% respect to the list price) !!!

 

[Zv]

"Sold by the dozen" is a way of saying that means that (at least in Italy) a big number

...

Does not mean that have sold "only one dozen"... ;D

I've learned something!

I guess it means "people buy a dozen at a time" kinda like hot cakes or something. Not that a dozen people bought one.

Though I guess some people might actually buy a dozen of a particular lens just to find the best one and then return the rest!

No no !!!
"Sold by the dozens" means "in great number"!!! : and here we are not talking about cakes... ;D

Jokes aside, in the huts and photo-hunting, I saw in these last months many Sigma (and less Tamron, in truth).
Maybe because we are in economic crisis and therefore we do not have too much money to spend for our hobby... :'(
Blessed are you who paid in $ and with much less taxs (in Italy over 21% respect to the list price) !!!

Just to clarify -

In the U.S and U.K (and other English speaking countries) we have an expression "selling like hot cakes" which has the same meaning as "sold by the dozen" meaning - sold in large quantities.

Things that commonly sell like hot cakes include - new iPhones, new PlayStation and cheap lenses like the 50 1.8 ;D

 

[GP.Masserano]

"Sold by the dozen" is a way of saying that means that (at least in Italy) a big number

...

Does not mean that have sold "only one dozen"... ;D

I've learned something!

I guess it means "people buy a dozen at a time" kinda like hot cakes or something. Not that a dozen people bought one.

Though I guess some people might actually buy a dozen of a particular lens just to find the best one and then return the rest!

No no !!!
"Sold by the dozens" means "in great number"!!! : and here we are not talking about cakes... ;D

Jokes aside, in the huts and photo-hunting, I saw in these last months many Sigma (and less Tamron, in truth).
Maybe because we are in economic crisis and therefore we do not have too much money to spend for our hobby... :'(
Blessed are you who paid in $ and with much less taxs (in Italy over 21% respect to the list price) !!!

Just to clarify -

In the U.S and U.K (and other English speaking countries) we have an expression "selling like hot cakes" which has the same meaning as "sold by the dozen" meaning - sold in large quantities.

Things that commonly sell like hot cakes include - new iPhones, new PlayStation and cheap lenses like the 50 1.8 ;D

Oh well !!! Now I understand...
But let us "return to bomb" (another Italian expression to say "we return to speak of Main topic").

For Canon, is this the moment to improve the best 70-200 F4 on the market?