Canon Officially Announces the EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM

[ajfotofilmagem]

The description on the site BH, cites front filter 49mm, but looking at the photos, there does not seem to be any thread with diameter 49mm.
Does the outer edge of the lens work as a built-in lens hood?
This lens hood would be pulled forward, and there is a 49mm thread?

 

[Random Orbits]

The $64,000 question: might we ever see an illuminated macro lens like this for EF?

Why we might: If Canon ever put out a stripped down / budget $1000 FF rig, there might be a market for a slightly watered-down illuminated macro offering.

Why we might not: tons of reasons.

• FF macro lenses have larger front elements that wouldn't suit this pancake front element / illuminated idea as well (would get pretty big diametrically, would't it?)
• Canon wants to sell macro speedlites
• Canon wants to sell 100Ls and surely a new 180L someday
• The light is relatively unsophisticated/underpowered and would probably frustrate more serious macro folks
• More 'serious' macro work is at longer FLs and larger working distances, which -- again -- wouldn't get much help from a tiny LED setup

So my money is on 'no' right now.

- A

I think it might... anywhere from 35 to 50mm... It would then be the successor of the 50 macro but with the flexibility of using it for additional purposes.

 

[Nininini]

The $64,000 question: might we ever see an illuminated macro lens like this for EF?

Ring light flashes combined with lenses that can focus short distance are very popular among dentists.

I have 2 dentist friends, 2 brothers, both have a canon full frame system with a ring light.

I'm sure they would love a lens like this for FF.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The 10-18 is a gem -- please don't mistake my point. But it's not all about max aperture performance. That lens has a plastic mount, it's not sealed, it's not USM, it lacks a distance scale, it's not internally zooming despite a very modest 1.8x FL multiplier, etc.

In short, Canon gave UWA users a fine tool optically that has the feature-level charm of a base-level Honda Civic. If all you shoot is landscapes on crop, surely you wish for a little more here.

I still contend a rock-solid EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM II (or perhaps a beefier f/2.8-4 version) that is sealed, USM, has all the trappings of the 16-35 f/4L IS made for crop would sell well at a $699-799 price point.

I'm not sure we'll ever see a weather-sealed EF-S lens. Might see another nano USM lens, but I think it'll be most if not all lead-screw STM going forward. I agree that a 10-22 with sealing and USM would be a nice lens...I just really doubt Canon will ever make one.

 

[FramerMCB]

The other aspect I am questioning about this lens is whether it really was the most urgent priority for Canon to offer 2 macro lenses in EF-S mount, but not a single prime faster than f/2.8

The point of EF-S and Canon's APS-C has always been affordability. Most people know this, Canon doesn't hide this, they mention it during interviews.

If you look at the EF-S lens line-up, all their lenses are affordable. Faster than f/2.8 would mean greatly increased costs.

Canon has one EF-S lens faster than f/2.8 afaik, the 50mm f/1.8, but a 50mm is also the cheapest design you can make in a lens, and the 50mm f/1.8 is still cheap.

If you are expecting canon to introduce 14mm f/2.0 EF-S, you are going to be waiting a long long time.



The APS-C audience is increasingly coming from people wanting to share video, youtube, etc. So you see Canon increasingly add video features.

-STM on all EFS lenses, to make video focusing silent
-IS on all EF-S zoom lenses
-hybrid IS to compensate for up and down movement
-built in video IS in the 77D

They are also adding usability menus on their newest cameras, to make them even easier to use.

Their focus is far less on the speed of the lens, but instead on the usability of the lens and ergonomics of the camera.

Imo, a good thing, the real money is coming from youtube vloggers and casual shooters, the market interested in professional landscape or wedding photography is incredibly small and isn't buying APS-C to begin with.

Fuji is coming out with very fast and expensive APS-C lenses and their marketshare is incredibly small compared to Canon's APS-C marketshare. I don't think Fuji is going in the right direction. ISO performance and IS keeps getting better, the need for very fast expensive lenses without IS is diminishing.

The 50mm f/1.8 is EF, not EF-S.

Canon still has no 50mm equivalent (31mm) fast EF-S prime. This new lens is close in focal length, but only f/2.8. Nothing for those of us who would like a fast normal lens for APS-C.

Well...one option would be the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 Art. A very good lens. Not a prime, but a wide aperture lens and a good to great performer. I've used one - rented it for a trip to Tucson, used it extensively at the PIMA Air & Space museum. Excellent for capturing planes etc...

 

[ahsanford]

I wonder if they use Robots to deburr the molded plastic parts, their are lots of claims about doing it, but I retired before it was possible, so I don't know how well it actually works in practice for high rate production. Robotic assembly should not be a issue, but if labor is cheap and Robots expensive, there may still be lots of hand labor.

I develop products in a different field, but we have both injection and compression molding processes. Deburr, flash cleanup, mold gate removal, parting line cleanup, etc. could certainly be done robotically but it's indeed a question of scale/economics -- how many parts do you need to run, how complicated a mold tool do you have to design, how much trouble is the manual op vs. automating it, how much value of molding it in the first place is lost if you need complicated cleanup afterwards, etc.

Also, given some symmetry with these elements, I also wouldn't rule out the possibility of other cheaper non-robotic processes to clean up parts -- mass finishing, tumbling, even really simple high speed CNC mill passes may do the job, but then you'd have to mask/fixture these things (which, again, erodes your cost savings for molding them in the first place).

- A

 

[ahsanford]

The description on the site BH, cites front filter 49mm, but looking at the photos, there does not seem to be any thread with diameter 49mm.
Does the outer edge of the lens work as a built-in lens hood?
This lens hood would be pulled forward, and there is a 49mm thread?

Good question. Perhaps the filter threads are only available if you use the hood for this lens?

(How do you CPL an EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM? That may hold the answer.)

- A

 

[FramerMCB]

What i really wanted is a cheap EF-S ultra-wide prime lens. It' doesn't need to be fast. It can be f4. Or f8! It can even be MF only. Do it Canon! . I'm pretty sure there are more people than myself shooting landscape than people shooting small bugs.

Buy the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f2.8 MF only. Not the newly released f2.4, that baby, while looking like a stellar performer is not cheap. The 14mm f2.8 is a reasonably cheap lens. However, it has very strong vignetting, and I'm not sure how well it handles flare.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

The description on the site BH, cites front filter 49mm, but looking at the photos, there does not seem to be any thread with diameter 49mm.
Does the outer edge of the lens work as a built-in lens hood?
This lens hood would be pulled forward, and there is a 49mm thread?

Good question. Perhaps the filter threads are only available if you use the hood for this lens?

(How do you CPL an EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM? That may hold the answer.)

I've already found the answer: An ugly lens hood, sold separately.

 

[privatebydesign]

The $64,000 question: might we ever see an illuminated macro lens like this for EF?

Ring light flashes combined with lenses that can focus short distance are very popular among dentists.

I have 2 dentist friends, 2 brothers, both have a canon full frame system with a ring light.

I'm sure they would love a lens like this for FF.

They'd be better off getting a crop camera. For dental work where large prints are never a priority and almost everything is viewed at screen resolutions a ff camera offers no advantages over an APS (or smaller) sensor. Particularly bearing in mind that ISO can be mitigated by the artificial illumination.

The three overwhelming 'advantages' of ff are 1, ISO performance that for dentists is negated by flash use, 2, narrow dof control, which isn't wanted for dental macro work and 3, the ability to output (print) larger, again not a dental issue.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The description on the site BH, cites front filter 49mm, but looking at the photos, there does not seem to be any thread with diameter 49mm.
Does the outer edge of the lens work as a built-in lens hood?
This lens hood would be pulled forward, and there is a 49mm thread?

Good question. Perhaps the filter threads are only available if you use the hood for this lens?

(How do you CPL an EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM? That may hold the answer.)

- A

Yes, you need the hood on to mount a filter. If you look really close, you'll see there are actually filter threads inside the ring holding the ring light. That's how the hood mounts to the lens, and the hood precludes use of the ring light. The EF-M 28mm macro has the same setup. In theory, you could screw on a filter instead of the hood, but the problem is that the threading is so small, there are not filters (CPL/ND/etc.) available in that size (IIRC, the thread diamater of tme EF-M hood mount is ~22mm).

 

[Talys]

Wow, what a fugly lens hood, hahaha. Coffee mug, meet lens cap.

It would look much nicer if it were cylindrical, instead of conical. The taper makes it look like they're meant to be stacked.

And at the price it will probably cost ($50 piece of plastic?) they could have made the inside lip that covers the macro lites nicer too (why not transparent, so that the macro lites can still work?).

 

[ahsanford]

Wow, what a fugly lens hood, hahaha. Coffee mug, meet lens cap.

It would look much nicer if it were cylindrical, instead of conical. The taper makes it look like they're meant to be stacked.

All the pancake lens hoods are crappy thread-in like this, and though this isn't technically a pancake, it has the front element and shading needs of one.

(35 f/2.8 pic from TDP below)

But I agree, this hood would appear to block the ring lights. The EF-M 28mm lens did the same, apparently.

- A

 

[neuroanatomist]

Wow, what a fugly lens hood, hahaha. Coffee mug, meet lens cap.

It would look much nicer if it were cylindrical, instead of conical. The taper makes it look like they're meant to be stacked.

And at the price it will probably cost ($50 piece of plastic?) they could have made the inside lip that covers the macro lites nicer too (why not transparent, so that the macro lites can still work?).

It will almost certainly be included with the lens, since it's necessary to mount a filter. The hood is included with the EF-M 28mm Macro.

 

[Nininini]

I never put lens hoods on my lenses. I try not to shoot at the sun. If you stay out of that 30 degree angle facing the sun, you don't really need a lens hood.

I've never had a shot where a lens hood was enough to remedy the light veiling you get. With or without a lens hood, it would have been a ruined shot.

I feel lens coatings help....but lens hoods...I don't feel like they help a lot.

Some people use them to protect their lenses, I have just never dropped a lens or banged it against stuff, so....hmm.

 

[ahsanford]

Wow, what a fugly lens hood, hahaha. Coffee mug, meet lens cap.

It would look much nicer if it were cylindrical, instead of conical. The taper makes it look like they're meant to be stacked.

And at the price it will probably cost ($50 piece of plastic?) they could have made the inside lip that covers the macro lites nicer too (why not transparent, so that the macro lites can still work?).

It will almost certainly be included with the lens, since it's necessary to mount a filter. The hood is included with the EF-M 28mm Macro.

Confirmed by Carnathan:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-35mm-f-2.8-Macro-IS-STM-Lens.aspx

"To solve the filter attachment issue for this lens, threads were incorporated into the lens hood and with the elevated importance of this hood, Canon included the ES-27 Lens Hood in the box. "

And why wouldn't they? It's dirt cheap to make -- no bayonet fitting, no release button, not felted surface, no white screen printing, etc. It likely just a one-shot molded piece.

- A

 

[LDS]

Canon still has no 50mm equivalent (31mm) fast EF-S prime. This new lens is close in focal length, but only f/2.8. Nothing for those of us who would like a fast normal lens for APS-C.

You don't really need an exact equivalent of the 50mm focal. It became common as a "standard" lens because it was close to the image diagonal (which is actually 43mm) , and cheap to build. Some brands didn't use 50mm but other focals close to it. In the past some used 49mm, others 55mm or even 58mm. There's no magic in the "50" number.

A 28mm is equivalent to a 45mm and it's perfectly fine if you need a "50mm" prime on a crop body. The 28/1.8 is enough fast?

 

[Nininini]

A regular cheaper version of this lens without the macro light and macro ability, but keeping IS, would actually be nice.

Because I agree, it's a rather ugly lens, with the lens hood it's just yuck. Sorry for my vanity lol.

 

[gruhl28]

The other aspect I am questioning about this lens is whether it really was the most urgent priority for Canon to offer 2 macro lenses in EF-S mount, but not a single prime faster than f/2.8

The point of EF-S and Canon's APS-C has always been affordability. Most people know this, Canon doesn't hide this, they mention it during interviews.

If you look at the EF-S lens line-up, all their lenses are affordable. Faster than f/2.8 would mean greatly increased costs.

Canon has one EF-S lens faster than f/2.8 afaik, the 50mm f/1.8, but a 50mm is also the cheapest design you can make in a lens, and the 50mm f/1.8 is still cheap.

If you are expecting canon to introduce 14mm f/2.0 EF-S, you are going to be waiting a long long time.



The APS-C audience is increasingly coming from people wanting to share video, youtube, etc. So you see Canon increasingly add video features.

-STM on all EFS lenses, to make video focusing silent
-IS on all EF-S zoom lenses
-hybrid IS to compensate for up and down movement
-built in video IS in the 77D

They are also adding usability menus on their newest cameras, to make them even easier to use.

Their focus is far less on the speed of the lens, but instead on the usability of the lens and ergonomics of the camera.

Imo, a good thing, the real money is coming from youtube vloggers and casual shooters, the market interested in professional landscape or wedding photography is incredibly small and isn't buying APS-C to begin with.

Fuji is coming out with very fast and expensive APS-C lenses and their marketshare is incredibly small compared to Canon's APS-C marketshare. I don't think Fuji is going in the right direction. ISO performance and IS keeps getting better, the need for very fast expensive lenses without IS is diminishing.

The 50mm f/1.8 is EF, not EF-S.

Canon still has no 50mm equivalent (31mm) fast EF-S prime. This new lens is close in focal length, but only f/2.8. Nothing for those of us who would like a fast normal lens for APS-C.

Well...one option would be the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 Art. A very good lens. Not a prime, but a wide aperture lens and a good to great performer. I've used one - rented it for a trip to Tucson, used it extensively at the PIMA Air & Space museum. Excellent for capturing planes etc...

True, but I've read of autofocus issues with the Sigma 18-35. The 18-35 f/1.8 and 50-100 f/1.8 are interesting lenses, but autofocus issues with the 18-35 and no IS on the 50-100 have put me off them. Did you find the autofocus worked accurately on the 18-35?

 

[ahsanford]

Some people use them to protect their lenses, I have just never dropped a lens or banged it against stuff, so....hmm.

I've warmed up to hoods for non-flare-related reasons:

• It's less about drops for me than it is about incidental contact. If you use a dangling sling-like strap (like a BlackRapid), the rig+lens slightly (and gently) jostles about, and for some lenses, the front of the lens might bump your belt, a dangling backpack strap, or perhaps something you are walking past. A hood fends that off.
  
  
• Children's fingers. Dogs' noses. You get the idea -- it's a buffer.

That said, hoods + CPLs buried inside + frequently shifting from landscape to portrait orientation = drives. me. nuts. I end up quickly yanking the hood and wearing it as the world's tackiest bangle on my arm while I shoot without it and manage the CPL much faster.

- A