Canon officially discontinues a lot more EF lenses

Skux

EOS 90D
Feb 21, 2020
113
147
I actually had this a long time ago and it was nice on aps-c , but is kind of in no man's land for FF IMO. The 24mm f/2.8 IS USM is better if you want a super light FF landscape lens (altho worth the extra weight for IQ and sealing of the 16-35 f/4L IMO anyway) and the 35mm f/2 IS USM is faster with a more popular focal length for general wide usage on FF. I am not sure what I would use the 28mm to shoot on FF.
I shoot film as well and 28mm is a perfect "everyday wide" for me. The Canon FD 28mm f/2.8 is the one I take on walk-around street shoots (paired with a 50mm) and to parties. I find 24mm a little too wide where 28mm looks wide but not unnaturally so.
 

Ruined

EOS R
Aug 22, 2013
926
57
I shoot film as well and 28mm is a perfect "everyday wide" for me. The Canon FD 28mm f/2.8 is the one I take on walk-around street shoots (paired with a 50mm) and to parties. I find 24mm a little too wide where 28mm looks wide but not unnaturally so.
When I do "everyday/street" its either the 35mm f/2 IS or the 50mm f/1.2L depending on the location. I agree the 24mm gives too much perspective distortion for everyday, which makes it more suitable for landscape. I also find though even 35mm gives a little more perspective distortion than I'd like sometimes for everyday/street, so 28mm is out of the question for me in the everyday/street category.
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,620
584
I imagine you might even pay the shipping!

I'll go further. I will pay $1000 for the 1200mm big white--the one that got discontinued years ago, so surely it's utter trash that needs to be disposed of!

Seriously, there seems to be this notion that the lenses instantly become worthless when they are discontinued. Maybe if you are the sort who must have the latest and greatest (perhaps even basing your sense of self-worth on it), but not, objectively speaking.

In fact the lens I am most likely to buy next is an EF lens, and given what I plan to do with it, an RF version would be next to useless, even if it existed, which it doesn't.

Hell, I may be able to do you one better.
I"m currently hunting about for really good deals on old FD lenses that adapted quite readily to mirrorless cameras!!

Right now, looking for a deal on a minty looking FD 85mm f/1.2.....an old L lens that is still quite highly rated.

Even with my bad eyes, the focus assist on mirrorless cameras lets me use them...AND....you aren't stuck with only using the manual lenses on just one body...they work on almost ALL of them.

Just my $0.02,

cayenne
 

Rocky

EOS R
Jul 30, 2010
1,006
87
I shoot film as well and 28mm is a perfect "everyday wide" for me. The Canon FD 28mm f/2.8 is the one I take on walk-around street shoots (paired with a 50mm) and to parties. I find 24mm a little too wide where 28mm looks wide but not unnaturally so.
Can you tell we why you are shooting film ( in 35mm format)? I was doing a lot of scanning ( 35mm Kodachrome slide, 35mm negatives and 4X6 Photos). I found out that nthe Kodachrome gives me the sharpest ( about 20 Meg pixel) and excellent color. The color negatives (Kodak color) give me about 15 Meg resolution, while the 6X4 photos give me about 10 Meg Pixel , both give me less color defintion. May be I do not have a good lab for the film development and enlargement ??
 
Last edited:

Skux

EOS 90D
Feb 21, 2020
113
147
Can you tell we why you are shooting film ( in 35mm format)? I was doing a lot of scanning ( 35mm Kodachrome slide, 35mm negatives and 4X6 Photos). I found out that nthe Kodachrome gives me the sharpest ( about 20 Meg pixel) and excellent color. The color negatives give me about 15 Meg resolution, while the 6X6 give me about 10 Meg Pixel , both give me less color defintion. May be I do not have a good lab??
My lab provides 35mm scans at about 3600x2400 (8mp). I don't know much about scanners but they use a "converted Noritsu V30SM C41 Processor".

The photos are high enough resolution for social media, desktop wallpapers and prints, so I'm pretty satisfied.
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,620
584
Can you tell we why you are shooting film ( in 35mm format)? I was doing a lot of scanning ( 35mm Kodachrome slide, 35mm negatives and 4X6 Photos). I found out that nthe Kodachrome gives me the sharpest ( about 20 Meg pixel) and excellent color. The color negatives give me about 15 Meg resolution, while the 6X6 give me about 10 Meg Pixel , both give me less color defintion. May be I do not have a good lab??
My film shooting is almost exclusively 120 MF film. I shoot 6x6, 6x9, 6x12(pinhole on this one), and 6x17 on a view camera.

I shoot these mostly due to the unique perspectives...especially the 6x17 panoramic camera. There's not a digital camera in the world right now that I know of that can shoot that per shot.

I can throw filters on there and do long exposures that are simply not possible with multi-shooting and stitching with digital.

I"m about to soon venture into 4x5 which, and I may be wrong on this, still has a bit of an edge over most common digital cameras....certainly it seems to me to have a look that isn't really reproducible on digital.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVEs me some digital, but film is fun too.

I'm working now to try to get an old 35mm film camera custom fixed to open up the film gate so that it shoots panoramic that is actually a bit wider than the old Hassy/Fuji Xpan used to shoot on film....I"m pairing it with a Mamiya Press 50mm lens.

And of late, I'm having fun mixing the two worlds....old vintage lenses are amazingly fun (to me) to adapt to digital mirrorless cameras.

New lenses are great, but sometimes can be described as "clinically" sharp....vintage lenses often are not and can give you some artistic looks many find desirable.

Film gives looks too.....

There's plenty of reasons that plenty of people still like film...it seems to be gaining popularity even.

I'm even looking into YouTube videos showing cyanotypes....platinum paladium printing....very artistic and interestingly enough...the PP printing from what I hear is one of the longest lasting archival methods of creating prints there is.

Those need a negative....either film or maybe printed negative from a digital capture.

Ugh...ok, sorry....rant mode off.
;)

Anyway...lots of interesting areas of photography out there.

cayenne
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky

Rocky

EOS R
Jul 30, 2010
1,006
87
Cayenne,

Thanks for the explanation. I can fully understand people shot film with 120MF even now, especially B/W. The 120 MF DO give us a distinct look on picture. I shot 120MF and 135 in the good old film days too ( Pre 70's). VIVA Rollieflex.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cayenne

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,350
2,194
Platinum-Palladium printing can't be cheap! Platinum is on a fire sale right now at a mere $1200-$1300, much lower than gold, but palladium broke through $3000 an ounce today. (All prices USD.)
 

Ruined

EOS R
Aug 22, 2013
926
57
Wow, they can't wait to get rid of the EF lenses.
It's a win - win for Canon

In doing so they can:

1. Try to snooker people into trading in all their EF stuff and buying all new RF stuff, making great profits with the big margins on RF gear and fact people are buying mostly new instead of used

2. For those who don't want RF, create demand for very old EF lenses and charge a premium for what's left on the market in new condition, making more profit than they usually would as people overpay for old tech to get it before it's gone

3. Leave the door open to releasing brand new EF designs sometime in the future to people who refuse to upgrade to RF, which they can sell to people who bought the old stuff in step #2 and get a double high-margin sale
 
Last edited:

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,579
3,979
Irving, Texas
My film shooting is almost exclusively 120 MF film. I shoot 6x6, 6x9, 6x12(pinhole on this one), and 6x17 on a view camera.

I shoot these mostly due to the unique perspectives...especially the 6x17 panoramic camera. There's not a digital camera in the world right now that I know of that can shoot that per shot.

I can throw filters on there and do long exposures that are simply not possible with multi-shooting and stitching with digital.

I"m about to soon venture into 4x5 which, and I may be wrong on this, still has a bit of an edge over most common digital cameras....certainly it seems to me to have a look that isn't really reproducible on digital.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVEs me some digital, but film is fun too.

I'm working now to try to get an old 35mm film camera custom fixed to open up the film gate so that it shoots panoramic that is actually a bit wider than the old Hassy/Fuji Xpan used to shoot on film....I"m pairing it with a Mamiya Press 50mm lens.

And of late, I'm having fun mixing the two worlds....old vintage lenses are amazingly fun (to me) to adapt to digital mirrorless cameras.

New lenses are great, but sometimes can be described as "clinically" sharp....vintage lenses often are not and can give you some artistic looks many find desirable.

Film gives looks too.....

There's plenty of reasons that plenty of people still like film...it seems to be gaining popularity even.

I'm even looking into YouTube videos showing cyanotypes....platinum paladium printing....very artistic and interestingly enough...the PP printing from what I hear is one of the longest lasting archival methods of creating prints there is.

Those need a negative....either film or maybe printed negative from a digital capture.

Ugh...ok, sorry....rant mode off.
;)

Anyway...lots of interesting areas of photography out there.

cayenne
I always try to catch your film posts as I enjoy reading about it, and your enthusiasm for it. I wish I had the wear with all to set up a darkroom and try some of the medium format stuff you do. :)
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,620
584
Platinum-Palladium printing can't be cheap! Platinum is on a fire sale right now at a mere $1200-$1300, much lower than gold, but palladium broke through $3000 an ounce today. (All prices USD.)
Interesting.

I've not looked into the costs of the chemicals, etc.....and it appears to be a little pricey from the videos, but I didn't get the impression that it was cost prohibitive.

Ok I found a starter kit here for $248:

Bostick-Sullivan: Na2 Platinum/Palladium Kit For Digital Negatives

It really looks interesting as a process....and you can even do it to your digital shots, but using your printer to print out a negative onto what appears to be similar to sheets of plastic used on old overhead projectors back in the day.

C
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,350
2,194
Interesting.

I've not looked into the costs of the chemicals, etc.....and it appears to be a little pricey from the videos, but I didn't get the impression that it was cost prohibitive.

Ok I found a starter kit here for $248:

Bostick-Sullivan: Na2 Platinum/Palladium Kit For Digital Negatives

It really looks interesting as a process....and you can even do it to your digital shots, but using your printer to print out a negative onto what appears to be similar to sheets of plastic used on old overhead projectors back in the day.

C

How many can you do with that starter kit?
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,620
584
I always try to catch your film posts as I enjoy reading about it, and your enthusiasm for it. I wish I had the wear with all to set up a darkroom and try some of the medium format stuff you do. :)
OH thank you!!

But just to be clear, so far, I have not done any developing on my own.

I found a great place near me that does my 120 MF film development for I think about $6 a roll or so. And the turnaround is usually 1-2 days, but I've had occasion where they did it same day.

That being said, I do plan to buy some basic Paterson system tanks and all for developing my own film....it looks fun and while there is a bit of a learning curve, doesn't appear to be rocket surgery to learn.
;)

I know a lot of this is GAS, but also just pure interest in new things to me. I'm looking to maybe pick up an cheap 4x5 large format camera, from Intrepid.
I'm actually a bit excited about this, for multiple reason....believe it or no, the prime reason would be to hook up the coming tomography Instax adapter for LF 4x5 cameras!! I've watched videos on this with beta units and it looks like a blast, to get polaroid type prints with LF depth of field, looks.

I also am looking to experiment with adapters I"ve seen that let you hook your Canon and Fuji cameras to the back of the 4x5 and not only do multiple shots to capture the full frame and for panos...but also to be able to use tilt/shift/rise/fall and of course...the interesting look using LF lenses.

I would also like at some point to actually try 4x5 sheet film too...but I found my place near me doesn't do LF film, so, I would be forced to try to develop myself. I'd start with B&W as that it appears to be a simpler process and that's where I'd cut my teeth.

OH well....I just need to win the lottery, just so I could ditch the day job and have time to learn all this fun stuff.

Ok...ramble mode off....haha.

Thanks!!

C
 
  • Love
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,620
584
How many can you do with that starter kit?
Per the link I set :

"This kit contains everything you need to make 35 8"x10" images. By using a combination of Palladium and Platinum you save up to 35% versus printing pure Platinum."

So, yes, it is a bit pricey....I think that you can save a bit of money if you buy the dry chemicals and mix things yourself, but just to get started this seems to be the way to go.

The interesting thing I'm hearing is that this is one of the most permanent and best archival methods still of printing for long term preservation.

I guess sometimes they get it right the first time....oh so many years ago.
:)

Fun stuff.

C
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,040
784
Davidson, NC
I decided to check on prices for the TS-E 24mm last night, and discovered that it is apparently backordered. I don't know what if anything that means. It is a good thing, because it was a weak moment for me, and I might have made an impulse purchase.

I can't think of any other lens that would be of any use to me, and I wouldn't use it a lot. The money that I didn't spend on traveling over the last year is just sitting there in my checking account, so I probably wouldn't miss the money for one impulse buy. My iPad is getting long in the tooth and the battery is getting old. It might be the best candidate for an impulse replacement, given the $190 trade-in from my old one, 3% cash back, and extended payments I won't notice. I don't do anything with the iPad that needs an M1 chip, and the battery is not an issue until I start traveling again. Maybe that's an old guy thing, not particularly needing or wanting anything I don't already have.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: privatebydesign

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,620
584
I decided to check on prices for the TS-E 24mm last night, and discovered that it is apparently backordered. I don't know what if anything that means. It is a good thing, because it was a weak moment for me, and I might have made an impulse purchase.

I can't think of any other lens that would be of any use to me, and I wouldn't use it a lot. The money that I didn't spend on traveling over the last year is just sitting there in my checking account, so I probably wouldn't miss the money for one impulse buy. My iPad is getting long in the tooth and the battery is getting old. It might be the best candidate for an impulse replacement, given the $190 trade-in from my old one, 3% cash back, and extended payments I won't notice. I don't do anything with the iPad that needs an M1 chip, and the battery is not an issue until I start traveling again. Maybe that's an old guy thing, not particularly needing or wanting anything I don't already have.
Interesting on the lens. Let us know what turns out with that one.
I've still be eyeballing that one myself.

My 2017 iPad Pro is starting to show a bit of battery age too....I looked on Apple's site and it's only like $90 for a battery replacement by them, I might do that in the near future.

I'd love the new one, but I rarely buy a 1.0 version of anything and I'll wait likely till they have a M2 iPad Pro (they M2 chips are reportedly coming this summer).....I'm also anxious to see what they do with the tablet M1 plus updated iPadOS, and see if Apple will start to more convene the laptop with the tablet.

I have more camera gear to buy anyway this summer so will save my $'s for that.

I just need to hit the powerball.....to help my GAS problem, and so that I can ditch the pesky day job and have more time to play with my toys.
:)

cayenne
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,040
784
Davidson, NC
I don’t think the M1 chip is really a version 1, in spite of the name. It is more of a tweak on the chips they have been using in iPad Pros for a while, and it seems to be doing fine in the new Macs. It is way overkill for the things I do with the iPad. The Air has an older chip, and might be a better choice for either of us. But there would be an unnoticeable difference in the monthly payments, and I tend to future proof my purchases and keep things a long time. I’m still happy with my iMac from 2014 that has no problems or delays with Photoshop or editing 4K in FCP X.

So my decision between a new battery or a new iPad is liable to go like my decision in December of 2019 between new tires for my old car or buying a new Audi A4.

The M2 chip I believe is destined for the high end Macs. I doubt we we see them in tablets or even smaller iMacs any time soon. Maybe the prospect of an M2 larger iMac will keep me from buying something else on impulse.